| View previous topic :: View next topic |
| Author |
Message |
Nikos
Joined: 17 May 2010
Posts: 1077
Location: Greece
Expire: 2015-01-02
|
 Posted: Tue Aug 24, 2010 8:19 am Post subject: Contax Vario-Sonnar: 28-85 or 35-135 |
 |
|
Nikos wrote:
I am considering to get a Contax zoom.
I have seen some on eBay, in very good condition.
Both the 28-85 and the 35-135 are an attractive focal length for me.
In terms of optical quality, which one would you prefer?
Are they comparable with the Contax primes at, say, f/5.6 ?
_________________
Νίκος • www.diafragma.gr
Cameras: Canon EOS 5D Mark II, Sony α7R, Sony NEX-5N
MF lenses:
SLR:
Canon TS-E 17mm f/4, Zeiss 2.8/21 ZE, Zeiss 2/28 Contax, Zeiss 2/35 ZE, Zeiss 1.4/50 Contax, Zeiss 1.4/85 Contax, Zeiss Makro 2/100 ZE,
Zeiss 2/135 Contax, Zeiss 2.8/135 Contax, Zeiss Vario-Sonnar 35-70 Contax, Zeiss Vario-Sonnar 100-300 Contax, Zeiss F-Distagon Rollei, Canon FD 24mm f2, Minolta MD Rokkor 35mm f2.8
Rangefinder:
Zeiss 4.5/21 C Biogon ZM, Zeiss 2/35 Biogon ZM, Voigtländer 15mm f/4.5 Heliar L39, Leica Tele-Elmarit 2.8/90mm, Zeiss 2/45 Contax G, Zeiss 2.8/90 Contax G, Canon 50mm 1.8 LTM
AF lenses: Canon 15mm f/2.8 Fisheye, Canon 24-70 f/2.8 L, Canon 70-200 f/2.8 L IS II, Canon 70-200 f/4 L, Canon 300 f/4 L IS, Canon 100 f/2.8 macro
|
|
| Back to top |
|
 |
AhamB
Joined: 22 Jun 2008
Posts: 733
Location: Germany
|
| Posted: Tue Aug 24, 2010 9:37 am Post subject: |
|
|
AhamB wrote:
Here's a useful review on the 35-135: http://www.pebbleplace.com/Personal/Contax_35-135_Vario_Sonnar.html
From different reviews I get the impression that the 28-85 is sharper, but the Vario-Sonnar 35-70/3.4 is the only one that really has the reputation to be as sharp or even sharper as equivalent primes.
Some good info on the 28-85 here: http://www.fredmiranda.com/forum/topic/863800/
http://www.fredmiranda.com/forum/topic/920342/ |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
Orio
Joined: 24 Feb 2007
Posts: 29545
Location: West Emilia
Expire: 2012-12-04
|
| Posted: Tue Aug 24, 2010 11:19 am Post subject: |
|
|
Orio wrote:
Actually, the 28-85 too is as sharp, or more, than some equivalent Contax primes, and it is considered to be very close to the 35-70, image-quality wise.
The drawback of the 28-85 is the weight, and the distortion on the wide end - but both drawbacks are also true for the 35-135.
So which one to choose depends on your shooting habits.
Some use more tele, some use more wide.
Since I assume you are going to use it for landscape mostly, then I would say the 28-85 mm is more useful, because the difference in focal lenghts 28mm and 35mm is big (in many landscapes 35mm will not cover wide enough), while the difference in focal lenghts 85mm and 135mm is less important (if you take a good shot with 85mm focal, you can crop it to 135mm equivalent with no meaningful image quality loss).
-
_________________
Orio, Administrator
T*
NE CEDE MALIS AUDENTIOR ITO
Ferrania film is reborn! http://www.filmferrania.it/
Support the Ornano film chemicals company and help them survive!
http://forum.mflenses.com/ornano-chemical-products-t55525.html |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
AhamB
Joined: 22 Jun 2008
Posts: 733
Location: Germany
|
| Posted: Tue Aug 24, 2010 12:28 pm Post subject: |
|
|
AhamB wrote:
Be aware of the 82mm filter on both these lenses -- if you want to use any reasonable quality CPL on them you'll pay dearly for it. |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
Nikos
Joined: 17 May 2010
Posts: 1077
Location: Greece
Expire: 2015-01-02
|
| Posted: Tue Aug 24, 2010 1:03 pm Post subject: |
|
|
Nikos wrote:
Thank you guys 
Now, I am between the 28-85 and the 35-70.
I am leaning towards the 35-70.
The 35-70 is just 475 g. and does macro at 1:2.5, which I find very interesting.
_________________
Νίκος • www.diafragma.gr
Cameras: Canon EOS 5D Mark II, Sony α7R, Sony NEX-5N
MF lenses:
SLR:
Canon TS-E 17mm f/4, Zeiss 2.8/21 ZE, Zeiss 2/28 Contax, Zeiss 2/35 ZE, Zeiss 1.4/50 Contax, Zeiss 1.4/85 Contax, Zeiss Makro 2/100 ZE,
Zeiss 2/135 Contax, Zeiss 2.8/135 Contax, Zeiss Vario-Sonnar 35-70 Contax, Zeiss Vario-Sonnar 100-300 Contax, Zeiss F-Distagon Rollei, Canon FD 24mm f2, Minolta MD Rokkor 35mm f2.8
Rangefinder:
Zeiss 4.5/21 C Biogon ZM, Zeiss 2/35 Biogon ZM, Voigtländer 15mm f/4.5 Heliar L39, Leica Tele-Elmarit 2.8/90mm, Zeiss 2/45 Contax G, Zeiss 2.8/90 Contax G, Canon 50mm 1.8 LTM
AF lenses: Canon 15mm f/2.8 Fisheye, Canon 24-70 f/2.8 L, Canon 70-200 f/2.8 L IS II, Canon 70-200 f/4 L, Canon 300 f/4 L IS, Canon 100 f/2.8 macro
|
|
| Back to top |
|
|
martyn_bannister
Joined: 23 May 2010
Posts: 1151
|
| Posted: Tue Aug 24, 2010 1:35 pm Post subject: |
|
|
martyn_bannister wrote:
Excuse my ignorance, but for the 28-85mm, are we talking the contax T*
as seen on ebay HERE, or the yashica that predates it as seen on ebay HERE??? |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
Nikos
Joined: 17 May 2010
Posts: 1077
Location: Greece
Expire: 2015-01-02
|
| Posted: Tue Aug 24, 2010 2:02 pm Post subject: |
|
|
Nikos wrote:
| martyn_bannister wrote: |
Excuse my ignorance, but for the 28-85mm, are we talking the contax T*
as seen on ebay HERE, or the yashica that predates it as seen on ebay HERE??? |
It is the first one
_________________
Νίκος • www.diafragma.gr
Cameras: Canon EOS 5D Mark II, Sony α7R, Sony NEX-5N
MF lenses:
SLR:
Canon TS-E 17mm f/4, Zeiss 2.8/21 ZE, Zeiss 2/28 Contax, Zeiss 2/35 ZE, Zeiss 1.4/50 Contax, Zeiss 1.4/85 Contax, Zeiss Makro 2/100 ZE,
Zeiss 2/135 Contax, Zeiss 2.8/135 Contax, Zeiss Vario-Sonnar 35-70 Contax, Zeiss Vario-Sonnar 100-300 Contax, Zeiss F-Distagon Rollei, Canon FD 24mm f2, Minolta MD Rokkor 35mm f2.8
Rangefinder:
Zeiss 4.5/21 C Biogon ZM, Zeiss 2/35 Biogon ZM, Voigtländer 15mm f/4.5 Heliar L39, Leica Tele-Elmarit 2.8/90mm, Zeiss 2/45 Contax G, Zeiss 2.8/90 Contax G, Canon 50mm 1.8 LTM
AF lenses: Canon 15mm f/2.8 Fisheye, Canon 24-70 f/2.8 L, Canon 70-200 f/2.8 L IS II, Canon 70-200 f/4 L, Canon 300 f/4 L IS, Canon 100 f/2.8 macro
|
|
| Back to top |
|
|
martyn_bannister
Joined: 23 May 2010
Posts: 1151
|
| Posted: Tue Aug 24, 2010 2:07 pm Post subject: |
|
|
martyn_bannister wrote:
| nkanellopoulos wrote: |
| martyn_bannister wrote: |
Excuse my ignorance, but for the 28-85mm, are we talking the contax T*
as seen on ebay HERE, or the yashica that predates it as seen on ebay HERE??? |
It is the first one |
Ah. Many thanks for clearing up my confusion  |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
AhamB
Joined: 22 Jun 2008
Posts: 733
Location: Germany
|
| Posted: Tue Aug 24, 2010 2:54 pm Post subject: |
|
|
AhamB wrote:
| nkanellopoulos wrote: |
Thank you guys
Now, I am between the 28-85 and the 35-70.
I am leaning towards the 35-70.
The 35-70 is just 475 g. and does macro at 1:2.5, which I find very interesting. |
Yes it's 475g, but you'll have to carry a 28mm prime or something like it if you want to go wider, which will add weight.
I think there's certainly a lot to like about the 28-85 and it doesn't have the restricted focal range of the 35-70. I read the Contax N 24-85 is even better, but becomes a bit expensive with the extra cost of Conurus conversion (which does buy you AF and auto aperture though), not to mention the few months of waiting time. |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
alex
Joined: 18 Apr 2009
Posts: 561
Location: UK
|
| Posted: Tue Aug 24, 2010 3:03 pm Post subject: |
|
|
alex wrote:
I have the 35-70 VS, and it's everything that is said about it. Simply outstanding. I chose it because 35-70 fits in well with my photo interests, rather than because it was lighter, but if I want to cover the 28mm base too, I simply pop a Yashica 28 ML in the bag. It's light enough to be hardly noticeable, and it's a spiffing little lens that can trade punches with its CZ cousin.
Incidentally, I have the YML 28-85 alluded to earlier, and it's my other favourite zoom.
_________________
Alex |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
ersatz
Joined: 29 May 2010
Posts: 45
|
| Posted: Tue Aug 24, 2010 4:20 pm Post subject: |
|
|
ersatz wrote:
35-70/3.4 is an outstanding lens. The macro function while not 1:1 is still quite useful and I really like it as a walk around lens. |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
Nikos
Joined: 17 May 2010
Posts: 1077
Location: Greece
Expire: 2015-01-02
|
| Posted: Tue Aug 24, 2010 7:33 pm Post subject: |
|
|
Nikos wrote:
An eBay seller says this about the 35-70:
| Quote: |
| there have been numerous reports on mirror clearance issues with this lens on Canon EOS 5D and 5D MkII due to a larger mirror box |
Has anyone used this lens on a 5D ?
Are there mirror issues ? |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
Orio
Joined: 24 Feb 2007
Posts: 29545
Location: West Emilia
Expire: 2012-12-04
|
| Posted: Tue Aug 24, 2010 10:44 pm Post subject: |
|
|
Orio wrote:
| nkanellopoulos wrote: |
An eBay seller says this about the 35-70:
| Quote: |
| there have been numerous reports on mirror clearance issues with this lens on Canon EOS 5D and 5D MkII due to a larger mirror box |
Has anyone used this lens on a 5D ? |
Yes, here
| nkanellopoulos wrote: |
| Are there mirror issues ? |
No issue for me. At least not with my copies of cameras and lens.
_________________
Orio, Administrator
T*
NE CEDE MALIS AUDENTIOR ITO
Ferrania film is reborn! http://www.filmferrania.it/
Support the Ornano film chemicals company and help them survive!
http://forum.mflenses.com/ornano-chemical-products-t55525.html |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
Bruce
Joined: 15 Jan 2008
Posts: 842
Location: Boston, Ma USA
Expire: 2014-11-22
|
| Posted: Wed Aug 25, 2010 2:31 am Post subject: |
|
|
Bruce wrote:
I have the 28-85 and I am shocked how good this lens is, its one of my top five primes 
I dont carry any of the other c/yzeiss zooms to compare, I dont feel the need to purchase the others any longer.
Going to the 85mm sounded better to me than just 70mm for a long end on these zooms?
_________________
Digital: Canon 40d & 5DmkII, Film: Hasselblad 203fe/Zeiss 80/2.8 cfe
Adapters for EOS: Cy; M42; Zenit39; Exakta; LeicaR; OlympusOM; PK; Nikon; Rollei35; Retina; Adaptal; P-6 |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
aoleg
Joined: 22 Feb 2008
Posts: 1387
Location: Berlin, DE
|
| Posted: Wed Aug 25, 2010 4:34 am Post subject: |
|
|
aoleg wrote:
I picked the 28-85 because it was available for a bit less than the 35-70 (due to all the forum chat I suppose, as originally the 28-85 was the more expensive one).
_________________
List of lenses |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
AhamB
Joined: 22 Jun 2008
Posts: 733
Location: Germany
|
| Posted: Wed Aug 25, 2010 10:08 am Post subject: |
|
|
AhamB wrote:
| nkanellopoulos wrote: |
Has anyone used this lens on a 5D ?
Are there mirror issues ? |
I had one copy with no mirror issues at all, but my last copy locks up the mirror (doesn't come down) every single shot on my 5Dmk1. The aperture lever also gets stuck on 60-70mm focal lengths. There is some obvious deviations between different copies here. My first copy focused way beyond infinity and the 2nd one didn't comfortably make it to inifinity.
I'm returning my current copy, will probably try one a third time if I find one at a reasonable right price.  |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
ManualFocus-G
Joined: 29 Dec 2008
Posts: 6622
Location: United Kingdom
Expire: 2014-11-24
|
| Posted: Wed Aug 25, 2010 11:45 am Post subject: |
|
|
ManualFocus-G wrote:
Make sure you get a decent adapter for the 5D. If it's even just a little too thin, the mirror will hit the glass / mount / levers etc.
_________________
Graham - Moderator 
Shooter of choice: Fujifilm X-T20 with M42, PB and C/Y lenses
See my Flickr photos at http://www.flickr.com/photos/manualfocus-g |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
AhamB
Joined: 22 Jun 2008
Posts: 733
Location: Germany
|
| Posted: Wed Aug 25, 2010 11:57 am Post subject: |
|
|
AhamB wrote:
I have two different adapters and my first copy of the 35-70 worked fine on the thinnest one, whereas my second copy didn't work on the this adapter nor on a thicker adapter. There are significant deviations in the lens, not the adapter (in my case anyway). |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
ManualFocus-G
Joined: 29 Dec 2008
Posts: 6622
Location: United Kingdom
Expire: 2014-11-24
|
| Posted: Wed Aug 25, 2010 12:14 pm Post subject: |
|
|
ManualFocus-G wrote:
That's interesting to know, there must have been two versions then...
_________________
Graham - Moderator
Shooter of choice: Fujifilm X-T20 with M42, PB and C/Y lenses
See my Flickr photos at http://www.flickr.com/photos/manualfocus-g |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
alex
Joined: 18 Apr 2009
Posts: 561
Location: UK
|
| Posted: Wed Aug 25, 2010 12:29 pm Post subject: |
|
|
alex wrote:
| AhamB wrote: |
| There are significant deviations in the lens, not the adapter (in my case anyway). |
I've had a similar experience. When I got my 10D several years ago, there seemed to be only two EOS-CY adaptors widely available, the Cameraquest adaptor, and that made by Bob Shell. I bought the Shell adaptor, which he said was made to highest tolerances in conjunction with advice from Zeiss. I think I paid about $150. It works on all my CZ lenses except the 180mm Sonnar, where I simply can't get enough torque to mount it without risking (i) blood spillage and (ii) being unable to get it off. I later bought one of the cheaper far eastern imports, which works with the Sonnar and other lenses.
_________________
Alex |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
AhamB
Joined: 22 Jun 2008
Posts: 733
Location: Germany
|
| Posted: Wed Aug 25, 2010 1:47 pm Post subject: |
|
|
AhamB wrote:
| alex wrote: |
| except the 180mm Sonnar, where I simply can't get enough torque to mount it without risking (i) blood spillage and (ii) being unable to get it off. |
LoL, that doesn't sound good.
I have cheap Canon-Nikon adapter that doesn't have any texture/ridges on the outside, just a sharp edge. Not pleasant for my hands to mount/unmount it (replaced now of course).
| ManualFocus-G wrote: |
| That's interesting to know, there must have been two versions then... |
It looks like it's just a difference in how the lenses are assembled. With my 2nd copy the aperture lever was simply sticking out quite a lot farther than on my first copy. The shroud/tube in which the rear element moves was also positioned a bit farther to the back on the 2nd copy, which is why my 5D's mirror was hitting it. |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
Mark
Joined: 01 Dec 2012
Posts: 251
Location: Budapest, Hungary
|
| Posted: Fri Aug 22, 2014 1:49 pm Post subject: |
|
|
Mark wrote:
Hello,
I didn't want to open a new thread, my only question is that are there any mirror clearance problems with Canon 5D mkI and CZ 28-85mm?
_________________
Latest post on my blog (no new posts):
http://lightbeam-photography.blogspot.hu/2013/10/sword-lilies.html |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
paulhofseth
Joined: 05 Mar 2011
Posts: 577
Location: Norway
Expire: 2018-06-28
|
| Posted: Fri Aug 22, 2014 6:02 pm Post subject: mirror clearance |
|
|
paulhofseth wrote:
Perhaps not useful to you, but I am using this vario sonnar on my 5ii without problems.
I believe the 5i is reputed to be even more tolerant of close fitting rear elements.
p. |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
Mark
Joined: 01 Dec 2012
Posts: 251
Location: Budapest, Hungary
|
| Posted: Sat Aug 23, 2014 5:05 am Post subject: |
|
|
Mark wrote:
Thanks for the response! One more question: is the distortion at the wide that bad? It seems to be on par with kit zooms.
_________________
Latest post on my blog (no new posts):
http://lightbeam-photography.blogspot.hu/2013/10/sword-lilies.html |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
paulhofseth
Joined: 05 Mar 2011
Posts: 577
Location: Norway
Expire: 2018-06-28
|
| Posted: Sat Aug 23, 2014 8:52 am Post subject: distortion |
|
|
paulhofseth wrote:
I do not measure such matters, but according to the Zeiss datasheet, distortion is at is maximum of -3,5% at between 15 and 20mm. from the center at the 28mm setting. Presumably measured as they usually do, with a real specimen, not calculated.
p. |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
|
|
Search
Memberlist
Register
Profile
Log in to check your private messages
Log in
