07-25-2010, 09:05 AM
[quote name='Klaus' date='25 July 2010 - 06:45 PM' timestamp='1280047502' post='1285']
[url="http://www.opticallimits.com/canon_eos_ff/536-zeiss85f14eosff"]http://www.opticallimits.com/canon_eos_ff/536-zeiss85f14eosff[/url]
A bit sharper than the C85L but I'd rate the Canon somewhat better from a field perspective (bokeh, higher contrast @ large apertures).
[/quote]
Thanks <img src='http://forum.photozone.de/public/style_emoticons/<#EMO_DIR#>/smile.gif' class='bbc_emoticon' alt='
' /> Must have been very difficult to account for the field curvatures and any focus shifts while taking measurements for different parts of the frame. I imagine it must have been a nightmare.
While the MTF figures show the ZF being around 21xx in the corners at f/1.4 and the 85LII being 20xx at f/1.2, the 85LII has far less CA. In my experience, low CA increases apparent resolution by a great amount but MTF figures don't seem to capture this. What are your thoughts on that?
Thanks again for the review...
GTW
[url="http://www.opticallimits.com/canon_eos_ff/536-zeiss85f14eosff"]http://www.opticallimits.com/canon_eos_ff/536-zeiss85f14eosff[/url]
A bit sharper than the C85L but I'd rate the Canon somewhat better from a field perspective (bokeh, higher contrast @ large apertures).
[/quote]
Thanks <img src='http://forum.photozone.de/public/style_emoticons/<#EMO_DIR#>/smile.gif' class='bbc_emoticon' alt='
' /> Must have been very difficult to account for the field curvatures and any focus shifts while taking measurements for different parts of the frame. I imagine it must have been a nightmare.While the MTF figures show the ZF being around 21xx in the corners at f/1.4 and the 85LII being 20xx at f/1.2, the 85LII has far less CA. In my experience, low CA increases apparent resolution by a great amount but MTF figures don't seem to capture this. What are your thoughts on that?
Thanks again for the review...
GTW