[Wind Chaser]

Money?  What good is money unless you spend it?

Nice lens BTW. 

[Wind Chaser]

LOL.  One buy begets another!

Money?  What good is money unless you spend it?   Seriously, once you try manual focusing with a Katzeye, there's no turning back.

Nice lens BTW. 

[DaveC113]

I just got a Sony Nex-5 APS-C camera, it came with a 16mm 2.8 prime (and 18-55), but I have my eye on the Zeiss ZM 28mm 2.8 Biogon for an everyday lens...   only issue is that samples I've seen are so far superior to entry level dslr zoom lenses you might not want to use your other lenses anymore. 

[Jon L]

I just got a Sony Nex-5 APS-C camera, it came with a 16mm 2.8 prime (and 18-55), but I have my eye on the Zeiss ZM 28mm 2.8 Biogon for an everyday lens...   only issue is that samples I've seen are so far superior to entry level dslr zoom lenses you might not want to use your other lenses anymore. 

16mm 2.8.  What a strange kit lens to ship the camera with; I would prefer a 35mm lens to ship the camera with. 

Speaking of Zeiss, here's some test shots of Zeiss 35mm F/2 ZE Distagon.







[/QUOTE]
 

[Jon L]

Now shot with Canon 50mm F/1.8 II.







[/QUOTE]
 

[denjo]

Nice shots! The Zeiss' photos seem to have better color saturation and contrast compared with the Canon lens.

[Jon L]

Nice shots! The Zeiss' photos seem to have better color saturation and contrast compared with the Canon lens.

Yes, but the photo's end up just a bit too rich and colorful compared to what I see with my own naked eye IMO.  I guess that's the "Zeiss Color" thing.  I had to return the Zeiss due to the fact I received a used one instead of "brand new" one advertised, so I'm still looking for a contrasty ~35mm lens with color temperature somewhere between the Zeiss and Canon 50mm F1.8. 

I have this sinking and begrudging feeling Canon 35mm F2 will end up with me, but I really would rather prefer a better AF mechanism and F stop 1.8 to 1.4 (non L prices) 

[woodsyi]

I can sell you an almost new 28mm 1.8.  I get better picture with it than what I get with my zoom, especially at that distance.  However, I just don't use it.  I played with it for a while when I got it but I haven't pulled it out of the bag in a while.  I am still stuck in event photographer mode (family you know) and the convenience of a zoom beats a little better picture quality with a prime.

Plus, I got a full frame and don't really need this distance.

[Jon L]

I've considered the Canon 28mm F/1.8, but people tell me it's really soft at wide apertures with bad CA and that 35 F/2 has more "vivid" colors...  35 is also $100 cheaper. 

Anyone got a 35mm F2 to sell? 

http://www.photozone.de/canon-eos/155-canon-ef-28mm-f18-usm-test-report--review?start=1

http://www.slrgear.com/reviews/showproduct.php/product/83/cat/10

[DaveC113]

Now shot with Canon 50mm F/1.8 II.

The Canon does really well. I like the color, contrast and 3D look of Zeiss more but the Canon lenses are good value for what you get...  I have a 28 2.8 (paid $17), 50 1.4 SSC ($130 for a like-new lens), and 50 3.5 Macro ($50) Canon FD lenses I use with my Nex, but they are big and heavy, which is why 1 or 2 small rangefinder primes along with the Sony 16mm would be ideal for me.

[Jon L]

The Canon does really well. I like the color, contrast and 3D look of Zeiss more but the Canon lenses are good value for what you get...  I have a 28 2.8 (paid $17), 50 1.4 SSC ($130 for a like-new lens), and 50 3.5 Macro ($50) Canon FD lenses I use with my Nex

I assume all those FD lenses have no communication with camera body, i.e. no AF, aperture control, focus confirmation, etc?

At any rate...

It's ski season here in SoCal

Canon t2i Canon 50mm F/1.8


With my new toy Canon S95 wide angle. 

[SET Man]

The Canon does really well. I like the color, contrast and 3D look of Zeiss more but the Canon lenses are good value for what you get...  I have a 28 2.8 (paid $17), 50 1.4 SSC ($130 for a like-new lens), and 50 3.5 Macro ($50) Canon FD lenses I use with my Nex, but they are big and heavy, which is why 1 or 2 small rangefinder primes along with the Sony 16mm would be ideal for me.

Hey!

     Personally I have to say that Zeiss T* lenses are worth the money spent. There is something very special about German lenses in general. Yes, even with those Zeiss T* that are made in Japan. But unfortunately and sadly I can't afford them right now for my DLSR. 

    Talking about Sony NEX. If I ever get the Sony Zeiss 16-35mm f2.8 zoom, I will be very tempted to get the NEX to pair with this zoom and make it a "not so compact" go-to cam. The down side is that I won't have image stabilizer with this combo and of course the zoom is pretty big. Oh! Well, this is just a dream for now. 

Take care,
Buddy

[Jon L]

     Personally I have to say that Zeiss T* lenses are worth the money spent. There is something very special about German lenses in general.

Yeah, I've read all the raves from Zeiss "converts," but the Zeiss 35mm F/2 didn't really convince me of its worth over the cheap Canon primes.  In addition, it really was too heavy for me to use the manual focus comfortably hand-held.

I'm looking at the cheaper and lighter Zeiss 50mm F/1.4, but people seem to say Zeiss 35mm F/2 or 50mm Makro Planar are better. 

Out of desperation, I have ordered the lowly Canon 35mm F/2, and I sure hope it at least matches Canon 50mm F/1.8 for sharpness and contrast 

[DaveC113]

Hey!

     Personally I have to say that Zeiss T* lenses are worth the money spent. There is something very special about German lenses in general. Yes, even with those Zeiss T* that are made in Japan. But unfortunately and sadly I can't afford them right now for my DLSR. 

    Talking about Sony NEX. If I ever get the Sony Zeiss 16-35mm f2.8 zoom, I will be very tempted to get the NEX to pair with this zoom and make it a "not so compact" go-to cam. The down side is that I won't have image stabilizer with this combo and of course the zoom is pretty big. Oh! Well, this is just a dream for now. 

Take care,
Buddy

I'm all but sold on the Zeiss 25mm f2.8 ZM lens for the Nex, which I would use a large majority of the time. I'd also carry the Sony 16 and a 50mm, probably the Canon 1.4 for the time being, but the Zeiss 50 f2 is probably fast enough with the Nex's high ISO ability. That would give me a 24-37.5-75mm equivalent kit that fits in a very small camera bag and won't draw much attention.



Jon, as far as worth it... I guess it's like stereo stuff, for me I don't have $15k for a Leica M9 outfit but the Nex with a Zeiss lens will get me 90% there for 1/10 the price. The old Canon prime lenses are better than most modern kit zooms but IMO not even close to the quality of Zeiss and we are only talking hundreds of dollars difference instead of thousands so I can justify it.      I also have a form in mind, and slr lenses + adapters are larger and heavier than what I want.

[Jon L]

The old Canon prime lenses are better than most modern kit zooms but IMO not even close to the quality of Zeiss and we are only talking hundreds of dollars difference instead of thousands so I can justify it. 

I agree about Zeiss build quality being way ahead of Canon primes, but the actual photo quality difference isn't nearly as much IMO.  Having said that, if Zeiss made a Canon-mount 35 or 50 mm fast lens with autofocus, I would buy it right away.

Anyway, here are some jpegs from newly-arrived Canon 35mm F2, with in-camera sharpness and contrast up one tick. 









Uploaded with ImageShack.us







 

[Levi]

Yes, but the photo's end up just a bit too rich and colorful compared to what I see with my own naked eye IMO.  I guess that's the "Zeiss Color" thing.  I had to return the Zeiss due to the fact I received a used one instead of "brand new" one advertised, so I'm still looking for a contrasty ~35mm lens with color temperature somewhere between the Zeiss and Canon 50mm F1.8. 

I have this sinking and begrudging feeling Canon 35mm F2 will end up with me, but I really would rather prefer a better AF mechanism and F stop 1.8 to 1.4 (non L prices) 

+1

It is too rich makes it look processed or un-natural.  That's just me.

I have a 60mm Nikon lens that also does Macro.  White balance is not bad with a Nikon D2x camera.

 

Talking about white balance and color saturation.  I love the picture below with a Nikon D2xs camera.  In an almost full-framed Nikon D3 proves to have even greater dynamic range.


Click on the picture to see more of the pollen.

Yes, but the photo's end up just a bit too rich and colorful compared to what I see with my own naked eye IMO.  I guess that's the "Zeiss Color" thing.  I had to return the Zeiss due to the fact I received a used one instead of "brand new" one advertised, so I'm still looking for a contrasty ~35mm lens with color temperature somewhere between the Zeiss and Canon 50mm F1.8. 

I have this sinking and begrudging feeling Canon 35mm F2 will end up with me, but I really would rather prefer a better AF mechanism and F stop 1.8 to 1.4 (non L prices) 

[DaveC113]

I agree about Zeiss build quality being way ahead of Canon primes, but the actual photo quality difference isn't nearly as much IMO.

I guess just like stereo stuff we all have different perceptions about what is worthwhile. Some of my Canon fd lenses are good (50 1.4 SSC and 85 1.8 SSC) but others are not so good (28 2.. Comparing my Canon 28mm with a Zeiss ZM 28mm, the Canon looks washed out and flat with little contrast and lower resolution, to me it is an absolutely HUGE difference. SLR lenses are all very large and heavy compared to rangefinder lenses and this is a major consideration. With a good rf lens my Nex is p&s size and, IMO, only a very expensive FF camera is going to be able to compete with it's IQ.

[Jon L]

Got to try the old guard Canon 28-70mm F2.8L (bottom) and compare to Canon 50mm F1.4 (Top).  Tried to pick photos of similar subjects at similar end-exposure...

[PeteG]

I was able to get a nice prime lens for Christmas.  A little long for most but I am very happy with it so far, a Canon 100mm f/2.8L IS Macro. The 1:1 magnification is awesome but my surprise is how good a portrait lens it is. I’ll be busy with this lens for awhile.

[Jon L]

I was able to get a nice prime lens for Christmas.  A little long for most but I am very happy with it so far, a Canon 100mm f/2.8L IS Macro. The 1:1 magnification is awesome but my surprise is how good a portrait lens it is. I’ll be busy with this lens for awhile.

That's a nice lens, relatively inexpensive for an L lens even.  Are you able to do low-light portrait well despite the F/2.8 since it has IS?

I just picked up the venerable Canon 85mm F/1.8 for my portrait needs.