Zeiss Distagon 1.4/35mm T*/HFT

zincozinco wrote in post #11273138
mine was made in 1976... im sure you guys will have it by now as well....

http://www.zeiss.com …779000246827?Op​enDocument

The Zeiss Distagon T* 1.4/35 wide-angle lens will be available in the first quarter of 2011 for $1,843, writes PhotographyReview.com.

Are we talking about the same lens?

gawd...

You can tell if a shot was done with a zeiss lens even if no one told you lol

These lenses seem to have a..cooler look to them.. almost as if every day was 4050 degrees.. with a light chilly breeze...

A older look.. more isolated.... I cant wait to expand my line up after this Christmas season

that sample image is pretty awesome. the bokeh looks painting like

I want this lens! This or the 35 L. Still can't decide. I tried the 35 f/2 and I wasn't feeling it at all. For a little bit more, I could have 1.4.

jdizzle wrote in post #11274238
I want this lens! This or the 35 L. Still can't decide. I tried the 35 f/2 and I wasn't feeling it at all. For a little bit more, I could have 1.4.

ya know, to me it wouldn't be "a little bit more". for the same price you can have the 100mm mp. maybe you can wait and see how samyang does on their 35mm f1.4.

i would love to have f1.4 on my 35mm zeiss, but the f2 version is excellent already and is my favorite and most used lens.

banpreso wrote in post #11274293
ya know, to me it wouldn't be "a little bit more". for the same price you can have the 100mm mp. maybe you can wait and see how samyang does on their 35mm f1.4.

i would love to have f1.4 on my 35mm zeiss, but the f2 version is excellent already and is my favorite and most used lens.

I agree with your opinon but, I like to have 1.4 when I need it. The Zeiss 100 f/2 is nice but, it really isn't a FL I would ever use.

I'm pretty much set on not getting the new 35/1.4. The main reason is that it's too big. I use 35mm as a walkaround focal length and having a massive 35mm lens does not make much sense to me. I'm also very happy with the old version that I have. Finally, I'm considering another 35mm f/1.4 lens - the new version Leica 35/1.4 Summilux ASPH for my M9. The rendering while not Zeiss-like is really gorgeous. It's size, well:

denoir wrote in post #11274451
I'm pretty much set on not getting the new 35/1.4. The main reason is that it's too big. I use 35mm as a walkaround focal length and having a massive 35mm lens does not make much sense to me. I'm also very happy with the old version that I have. Finally, I'm considering another 35mm f/1.4 lens - the new version Leica 35/1.4 Summilux ASPH for my M9. The rendering while not Zeiss-like is really gorgeous. It's size, well:

(Leica 35/1.4 on the left and new Zeiss 35/1.4 on the right)

In terms of raw optical performance the Leica will probably run circles around the Zeiss. The only real disadvantage of the Leica is the price. Around €4,000 ($5,000), ouch.

My dreams are shattered to get a Leica M9. With a baby on the way, it's not going to happen any time soon. Weight has never been a problem with me. I'd rather invest that 5k for a 200 f/2.

Congrats and best of luck with baby Julian!

As for the M9, if size isn't an issue then an M9 isn't a good choice anyway. The only real advantage the M9 has over a high end DSLR is the size - especially the size of the lenses. It's sensor is slightly better than the one on a 5DII, but not by much when you use top quality glass on the Canon. It can resolve a bit more detail but it's really not relevant for all practical purposes.

At the same time it's a primitive mechanical design from the 1940's that is subject to mechanical tolerances and error margins. Bump it into something and the range finder gets misaligned. Accurate focusing is only possible with wide angle and normal lenses. There are no tele lenses longer than 135 mm and anything beyond 90mm is completely unusable. Wider than 28 mm and you have to use an external viewfinder (focus through the regular and frame through the external). The framelines are wildly inaccurate for framing. The LCD is a joke as is the image review function (you only see a low resolution image and can't see if you have nailed focus or not) and you have no live view. The metering is exceptionally primitive etc etc

In short if you are not looking for a compact system then the M9 is a waste of money. As a compact system on the other hand it makes sense and one can forgive all the shortcomings. My standard kit of the M9 + five lenses weighs less than say a 70-200/2.8 lens and takes up less space. Excellent walkaround and light travel kit.

Thanks Luka. I appreciate your feedback on the Leica M9. I woulnd't mind the compact/weight of a rangefinder but, sadly I have to put it on the back burner. I'm stuck in Canon land for now. Hehe!

After careful consideration, I've decided that I'm going to reconfigure my gear list to be (almost) all Zeiss. Not so much because I want the "Zeiss" look, which is certainly amazing in its own right, but because of how well they perform overall. Also, I generally enjoy using manual focus. It's more of a challenge, yet it's much more involving (and fun).

The 35/1.4 (rollei, not the ZE version) is on my list right after I get the 100/2.0 lens. I'll have to sell a few things first before I get either, which may take a while. Apparently nobody's buying these days...I wonder why~

By the way, how's the vignetting on these lens? I'd think it'd be a bit of a problem with a full frame at f1.4...

I went all Zeiss and I love them. I found that I rarely used my telephotos or macros, teleconverter - sold it all after collecting it over the past five years. I now have the 21, 35, and 50MP and I think they are fantastic - you can tell a Zeiss picture: the bokeh, the color depth and the the crazygood micro-contrast.

I could care less about manual focus, quite enjoy it. These lenses make me think.

Oh, and they are built like a brick outhouse.

DS

This will be my next lens.

Canons feel inferior now that I am getting comfortable using Zeiss and their MF. Absolute joy to use, they all are.

is there a meaningful difference between the rollei mount and the contax mount zeiss glass? is there a difference between the HFT coating and the T coating? is the rollei 50mm f1.4 HFT planar same as contax zeiss f1.4 planar?

You are all canon, zeiss and leica ... Ive gone for a d700.. so my 35 is up for grabs... Im not sure if im switching yet but ....