Thread Rating:
  • 0 Vote(s) - 0 Average
  • 1
  • 2
  • 3
  • 4
  • 5
Zeiss zf vs ze
#1
Hi,



I'm currently making a little research on zeiss lenses for my 5DMK2.



According to reviews on Photozone Zeiss ZF lenses are much better than ZE. In particular I'm referring to 35,50 and 85mm. Now, I know that zeiss ZF been tested on Nikon's aps-c camera and it could hide some of the issues like vignetting and everything that is not very pretty near the borders of the photo.While ZE lenses been tested on 5DMARK2 and the result were poor compared to Nikon's APS-C?! And were that the real ZE lenses tested with 5DMark2? On the pics you can see that these are actually ZF's with an adapter.



If so, does that mean that I can expect the same results from ZE lenses on canon's full frame?



Hope i didn't brought a lot of confusion (English is not my mothertoung)
#2
[quote name='DenisLV' timestamp='1291041350' post='4565']

Hi,



I'm currently making a little research on zeiss lenses for my 5DMK2.



According to reviews on Photozone Zeiss ZF lenses are much better than ZE. In particular I'm referring to 35,50 and 85mm. Now, I know that zeiss ZF been tested on Nikon's aps-c camera and it could hide some of the issues like vignetting and everything that is not very pretty near the borders of the photo.While ZE lenses been tested on 5DMARK2 and the result were poor compared to Nikon's APS-C?! And were that the real ZE lenses tested with 5DMark2? On the pics you can see that these are actually ZF's with an adapter.



If so, does that mean that I can expect the same results from ZE lenses on canon's full frame?



Hope i didn't brought a lot of confusion (English is not my mothertoung)

[/quote]



We used ZF lenses via adapter - this is also mentioned in the reviews.

However, optically there's no difference compared to the ZEs whatsoever - this is just a different mount.
#3
[quote name='Klaus' timestamp='1291043755' post='4568']

We used ZF lenses via adapter - this is also mentioned in the reviews.

However, optically there's no difference compared to the ZEs whatsoever - this is just a different mount.

[/quote]



Can adapters reduce the performance of the lens?
#4
[quote name='DenisLV' timestamp='1291113496' post='4596']

Can adapters reduce the performance of the lens?

[/quote]



No.Glassless adapters cannot reduce nor improve the performance.
#5
[quote name='Klaus' timestamp='1291115070' post='4598']

No.Glassless adapters cannot reduce nor improve the performance.

[/quote]



Klaus, so almost all of Zeiss ZE/ZF lenses are highly recommended for APS-C cameras only? Is my conclusion right?
#6
[quote name='DenisLV' timestamp='1291122165' post='4599']

Klaus, so almost all of Zeiss ZE/ZF lenses are highly recommended for APS-C cameras only? Is my conclusion right?

[/quote]



Well, the 50/2 and 100/2 are "officially" highly recommended.

The 85/1.4 and 21/2.8 are the best lenses available in their respective classes.

The 18/3.5 and 35/2. are darn good.



The 25, 28 and 50 are nothing special on full format.
#7
What a pity the sony 85f1.4 (ZA) and 24F2 cannot be adopted to eos mount <img src='http://forum.photozone.de/public/style_emoticons/<#EMO_DIR#>/sad.gif' class='bbc_emoticon' alt='Big Grin' />



[quote name='Klaus' timestamp='1291122755' post='4600']

Well, the 50/2 and 100/2 are "officially" highly recommended.

The 85/1.4 and 21/2.8 are the best lenses available in their respective classes.

The 18/3.5 and 35/2. are darn good.



The 25, 28 and 50 are nothing special on full format.

[/quote]
#8
[quote name='Klaus' timestamp='1291122755' post='4600']

The 85/1.4 and 21/2.8 are the best lenses available in their respective classes.

[/quote]

Unless by "their respective classes" you mean metal-bodied, manual focus, over-priced lenses made in Japan with a German label... I can't see how your comment holds true, sorry...



ZE/ZF 85 1.4: http://www.the-digital-picture.com/Revie...eview.aspx



ZE/ZE 21 2.8: http://www.the-digital-picture.com/Revie...eview.aspx



<img src='http://forum.photozone.de/public/style_emoticons/<#EMO_DIR#>/smile.gif' class='bbc_emoticon' alt='Big Grin' />



GTW
#9
[quote name='you2' timestamp='1291162348' post='4619']

What a pity the sony 85f1.4 (ZA) and 24F2 cannot be adopted to eos mount <img src='http://forum.photozone.de/public/style_emoticons/<#EMO_DIR#>/sad.gif' class='bbc_emoticon' alt='Big Grin' />

[/quote]

Yeah, it would've been fun but at least you have the best 85 1.2 that produces a better image any day than any of the 85 1.4s out there. When you're shooting at f/1.2-1.4, the measured MTF figures (whatever they may be) mean very little in the final image because the DOF is too shallow for much of the subject to be in focus anyway. And the coming-in and going-out of focus is so abrupt, you're not going to perceive absolute (MTF) amounts of sharpness.



As for the 24 f/2... it has a nice overall size for walking around perhaps but the f/2 aperture is confusing on a 24mm. For example, even with a 24 1.4, it takes a bit of effort to get good subject isolation with anything that's more than a few feet away, so with a f/2 it's even harder and a 24LII would do just as well. And if it's landscapes you're after then the 24LII will be just as good again, and the TS-E 24L II would do even better. So the 24 f/2 is only really unique because of its overall compact size.



GTW
  


Forum Jump:


Users browsing this thread:
1 Guest(s)