|
|
10-02-2013, 06:02 PM
Quite interesting paper but it looks like a medium-format wide-angle lens with a speed booster to me.
http://blogs.zeiss.com/photo/en/?p=4260
http://flickr.com/ephankim
10-03-2013, 07:45 AM
What makes it look like a MF wide angle lens, with a speed booster, to you?
10-07-2013, 08:23 PM
I don't know what is the right definition about its design, but at $4,000 it has to be flawless.
10-07-2013, 08:46 PM
I doubt anything will ever be perfect, but this will be a lot closer than anything else before it. Now if they'll do a 135mm (or longer) of this quality, I'm in. But 55mm doesn't do it for me.
<a class="bbc_url" href="http://snowporing.deviantart.com/">dA</a> Canon 7D2, 7D, 5D2, 600D, 450D, 300D IR modified, 1D, EF-S 10-18, 15-85, EF 35/2, 85/1.8, 135/2, 70-300L, 100-400L, MP-E65, Zeiss 2/50, Sigma 150 macro, 120-300/2.8, Samyang 8mm fisheye, Olympus E-P1, Panasonic 20/1.7, Sony HX9V, Fuji X100.
10-07-2013, 09:04 PM
Well, no matter how one wants to describe its design, it certainly is not a wide angle MF lens with speed booster. Speed boosters make lenses wider....
It is expensive because of 3 factors.
10-08-2013, 01:56 AM
Quote:I doubt anything will ever be perfect, but this will be a lot closer than anything else before it. Now if they'll do a 135mm (or longer) of this quality, I'm in. But 55mm doesn't do it for me.Popo, they released a $2,000 version of 135mm,f2 not too long ago. Are you saying that you need $4,000 version of the same focal length? 
10-08-2013, 06:59 AM
I'm not convinced the recent 135mm is of the quality I'm after compared to the Canon 135L I already have. It would primarily be used for astrophotography, which is like an ultimate stress test for any optical system. Colour correction in particular needs to be good, which the 135L isn't that great at.
<a class="bbc_url" href="http://snowporing.deviantart.com/">dA</a> Canon 7D2, 7D, 5D2, 600D, 450D, 300D IR modified, 1D, EF-S 10-18, 15-85, EF 35/2, 85/1.8, 135/2, 70-300L, 100-400L, MP-E65, Zeiss 2/50, Sigma 150 macro, 120-300/2.8, Samyang 8mm fisheye, Olympus E-P1, Panasonic 20/1.7, Sony HX9V, Fuji X100.
10-08-2013, 08:19 AM
From what I have seen, the LoCA of the Zeiss 135mm, while not absent, is quite a bit lower than that of the 135mm L. Does that mean anything for astro stuff?
10-08-2013, 04:15 PM
It certainly does help a lot when you want pinpricks of the full spectrum of light at the same time. On the 135L the reds are quite off focus if green/blue are, limiting it more towards narrowband filter applications. It is also good for detecting the sensor isn't sufficiently perpendicular to the optical plane.
<a class="bbc_url" href="http://snowporing.deviantart.com/">dA</a> Canon 7D2, 7D, 5D2, 600D, 450D, 300D IR modified, 1D, EF-S 10-18, 15-85, EF 35/2, 85/1.8, 135/2, 70-300L, 100-400L, MP-E65, Zeiss 2/50, Sigma 150 macro, 120-300/2.8, Samyang 8mm fisheye, Olympus E-P1, Panasonic 20/1.7, Sony HX9V, Fuji X100.
10-09-2013, 05:44 AM
Quote:I'm not convinced the recent 135mm is of the quality I'm after compared to the Canon 135L I already have. It would primarily be used for astrophotography, which is like an ultimate stress test for any optical system. Colour correction in particular needs to be good, which the 135L isn't that great at.Popo, I didn't mean to offend you, I just wanted to point out the prices of these lenses. I am sure for critical applications every improvement matters. |
