Approve the Cookies
This website uses cookies to improve your user experience. By using this site, you agree to our use of cookies and our Privacy Policy.
OK
Index  •   • New posts  •   • RTAT  •   • 'Best of'  •   • Gallery  •   • Gear  •   • Reviews
Guest
New posts  •   • RTAT  •   • 'Best of'  •   • Gallery  •   • Gear  •   • Reviews
Register to forums    Log in

 
FORUMS Canon Cameras, Lenses & Accessories Canon EF and EF-S Lenses 
Thread started 24 Jun 2011 (Friday) 12:25
Search threadPrev/next
sponsored links
(this ad will go away when you log in as a registered member)

Poor Man's Zeiss 21mm?

 
CJSmith
THREAD ­ STARTER
Senior Member
Avatar
390 posts
Joined Jul 2009
Location: Chicago Suburbs
     
Jun 24, 2011 13:34 as a reply to  @ post 12651527 |  #16

But that Olympus sure does look sweet. :)


6D, Σ15 FE, 17mm TS-E, 24-105, 70-300L, 40mm 2.8, 85mm 1.8, 100L, 600EX-RT, Kenko 2X MC4, Kenko Tubes
www.OutofChicago.com:external link The Chicago Photography Experience
Flickrexternal link

  
  LOG IN TO REPLY
sponsored links
(this ad will go away when you log in as a registered member)
CJSmith
THREAD ­ STARTER
Senior Member
Avatar
390 posts
Joined Jul 2009
Location: Chicago Suburbs
     
Jun 24, 2011 13:34 |  #17

crazeazn wrote in post #12651531 (external link)
vs:
17-40L
Dimensions (DxL) Approx. 3.3 x 3.8" (8.38 x 9.65cm)
Weight 1.05 lb (476g)

3.1 cm to 9.65cm... 3x the length!

But is the IQ any better?


6D, Σ15 FE, 17mm TS-E, 24-105, 70-300L, 40mm 2.8, 85mm 1.8, 100L, 600EX-RT, Kenko 2X MC4, Kenko Tubes
www.OutofChicago.com:external link The Chicago Photography Experience
Flickrexternal link

  
  LOG IN TO REPLY
nureality
Goldmember
3,611 posts
Likes: 1
Joined Jan 2008
     
Jun 24, 2011 14:05 |  #18

start hunting for some older Zeiss Flektogons and Distagons.

Flektogon 20mm f/2.8 can be had for $500 (usually fetch closer to $600 tho)
Distagon 25mm f/2.8 can be had for less than $300
Distagon 18mm f/4 can be had for $500 (usually fetch closer to $600 tho)

MIR-20 20mm f/3.5 can be had for less than $200

Vivitar 20mm f/3.8 can be had for less than $100


Alan "NuReality" Fronshtein
Gear List | PBase |  (external link)flickr (external link)
Lots of Fun, Lots of Laughs, Happy Trigger Finger!

  
  LOG IN TO REPLY
bpark42
Senior Member
307 posts
Joined Jul 2009
     
Jun 24, 2011 14:11 |  #19

Smthrz wrote in post #12651527 (external link)
Oh no. I didn't want to be "that guy" :)

Looking back over my shots, I think you're right. The 17-40mm is doing a fine job. I really try not to pixel peep, but I do see a difference without zooming in. But, who else would notice? Good point. My goal this summer is to concentrate on my photography and stop worrying so much about gear. I must have forgotten that when I started this thread. One day, I'll try some of these other manual focus lenses.

Again, the 17-40's performance varies by focal length. At around 21mm it is excellent when stopped down.

I found an old test shot I did for somebody with similar concerns a few years ago.

5D + 17-40L, 100% crop at extreme corner, f/11, 22mm

EDIT: ugh, I forgot that flickr mangles details. Oh well, just trust me that the actual shot shows much better fine detail.

IMAGE: http://farm4.static.flickr.com/3287/3094155043_503985ec68_o.jpg
IMAGE LINK: http://www.flickr.com/​photos/bpark_42/309415​5043/  (external link)
1740ExtremeCorner (external link) by bpark_42 (external link), on Flickr



  
  LOG IN TO REPLY
plasticmotif
Goldmember
Avatar
3,174 posts
Likes: 2
Joined Sep 2008
Location: Tennessee
     
Jun 24, 2011 16:21 |  #20

The Olympus 21/3.5 is your best bet. The MC version of the 24, is better if you can live with 24.

The 21 OM isn't a slouch though. It's better than pretty much everything out there until you get to lenses twice it's price.


Mac P.
My Zenfolio (external link) My Photo Blog (external link) My Equipment
https://photography-on-the.net …p?p=14172975#po​st14172975

  
  LOG IN TO REPLY
crazeazn
Senior Member
Avatar
398 posts
Joined May 2010
Location: Houston
     
Jun 24, 2011 19:22 |  #21

the 21 f/3.5 is awesome...the f/2 is great too


John H.
some bodies, some lenses

  
  LOG IN TO REPLY
Oscroft
Member
93 posts
Joined Oct 2009
Location: UK/Thailand
     
Jun 24, 2011 19:38 |  #22

I've shot with my Olympus 21/3.5 on my 5DII, and it works pretty well


Alan
5DII, 17-40L, 24-105L, 24-85 USM, 28/1.8 USM, 50/1.4 USM

  
  LOG IN TO REPLY
Hogloff
Cream of the Crop
7,606 posts
Likes: 415
Joined Apr 2003
Location: British Columbia
     
Jun 24, 2011 19:48 |  #23
bannedPermanent ban

Smthrz wrote in post #12651527 (external link)
Oh no. I didn't want to be "that guy" :)

Looking back over my shots, I think you're right. The 17-40mm is doing a fine job. I really try not to pixel peep, but I do see a difference without zooming in. But, who else would notice? Good point. My goal this summer is to concentrate on my photography and stop worrying so much about gear. I must have forgotten that when I started this thread. One day, I'll try some of these other manual focus lenses.

My photography first and foremost needs to satisfy ME. I don't give a rat's ass if no one else sees the soft branches in the corner. If I make a large print...it needs to be sharp, even in the corners.

That said, I get good results with the 17-40 when stopped down to f8 on my 5d2.




  
  LOG IN TO REPLY
TooManyShots
Cream of the Crop
10,203 posts
Likes: 527
Joined Jan 2008
Location: NYC
     
Jun 24, 2011 19:51 |  #24
bannedPermanent ban

But can you reproduce the Carl Zeiss look....:)


One Imaging Photography (external link) and my Flickr (external link)
Facebook (external link)

  
  LOG IN TO REPLY
bohdank
Cream of the Crop
Avatar
14,060 posts
Likes: 6
Joined Jan 2008
Location: Montreal, Canada
     
Jun 24, 2011 21:43 |  #25

Here's a Tamron 28-75 compared to the CZ 28/2.8 on a 5DII , f8

Can YOU spot the Zeiss "look" ?

They are full sized JPG's for the pixels peepers.

https://photography-on-the.net …p?p=10099502&po​stcount=45


Bohdan - I may be, and probably am, completely wrong.
Gear List

Montreal Concert, Event and Portrait Photographer (external link)
Flickr (external link)

  
  LOG IN TO REPLY
CJSmith
THREAD ­ STARTER
Senior Member
Avatar
390 posts
Joined Jul 2009
Location: Chicago Suburbs
     
Jun 24, 2011 21:54 as a reply to  @ bohdank's post |  #26

Thanks Bohdank. Not sure how I missed that thread, but I read the whole thing. I think that takeaway is that I should be happy with the 17-40mm. Although, I am planning to pick up the Tamron 28-75mm in a few weeks. Partly on the fact that you have stuck with it for so long. :) So that was a perfect post for me. Thanks.


6D, Σ15 FE, 17mm TS-E, 24-105, 70-300L, 40mm 2.8, 85mm 1.8, 100L, 600EX-RT, Kenko 2X MC4, Kenko Tubes
www.OutofChicago.com:external link The Chicago Photography Experience
Flickrexternal link

  
  LOG IN TO REPLY
TooManyShots
Cream of the Crop
10,203 posts
Likes: 527
Joined Jan 2008
Location: NYC
     
Jun 24, 2011 22:28 |  #27
bannedPermanent ban

bohdank wrote in post #12653474 (external link)
Here's a Tamron 28-75 compared to the CZ 28/2.8 on a 5DII , f8

Can YOU spot the Zeiss "look" ?

They are full sized JPG's for the pixels peepers.

https://photography-on-the.net …p?p=10099502&po​stcount=45


But I can see it in this shot...:)

IMAGE: http://farm5.static.flickr.com/4013/5132161526_efab938782_b.jpg

IMAGE: http://farm3.static.flickr.com/2741/4491331070_0c75eaf6f0_o.jpg

Don't forget this thread too:
https://photography-on-the.net/forum/showthre​ad.php?t=768623

With a Carl Zeiss lens, it is very difficult to get fruity looking color. Micro-contrast is often enhanced in between the transition from mid-gray tone to the highlight.

One Imaging Photography (external link) and my Flickr (external link)
Facebook (external link)

  
  LOG IN TO REPLY
bohdank
Cream of the Crop
Avatar
14,060 posts
Likes: 6
Joined Jan 2008
Location: Montreal, Canada
     
Jun 24, 2011 22:33 |  #28

And I am still sticking with the Tamron, except now I don't hesitate to shoot still life with it.

The test was was an eye opener. I was fully expecting the CZ 28/2.8 and the Oly 24/2.8 to be better than the 17-40 and/or the Tamron. The former 2 have been gathering dust, since. I should put them up for sale.

I was especially surprised that the Tamron had better microcontrast than the CZ. Something that all the fans keep mentioning as the distinguishing advantage to the CZ. I'm sure there are Zeiss lenses that have the magic but the 28/2.8 is not one of them. The Oly is a waste of time unless you are on a strict budget, imo.


Bohdan - I may be, and probably am, completely wrong.
Gear List

Montreal Concert, Event and Portrait Photographer (external link)
Flickr (external link)

  
  LOG IN TO REPLY
bohdank
Cream of the Crop
Avatar
14,060 posts
Likes: 6
Joined Jan 2008
Location: Montreal, Canada
     
Jun 24, 2011 22:38 |  #29

TooManyShots wrote in post #12653633 (external link)
But I can see it in this shot...:)

Don't forget this thread too:
https://photography-on-the.net/forum/showthre​ad.php?t=768623

With a Carl Zeiss lens, it is very difficult to get fruity looking color. Micro-contrast is often enhanced in between the transition from mid-gray tone to the highlight.

I put the lenses against each other shooting the same scene. I really don't care to look at individual images expounding on qualities that could be better in other lenses but we won't know since they are stand alone images with nothing to compare to.

I really don't want to get into a Zeiss vs other discussion here but until I, personally, see an advantage, there is no family Zeiss look, imo. Certain lenses may have it but not the one I tested. And, no, no one start that I had a defective lens or the test was invalid because the air pressure changed between changing lenses ;-)a


Bohdan - I may be, and probably am, completely wrong.
Gear List

Montreal Concert, Event and Portrait Photographer (external link)
Flickr (external link)

  
  LOG IN TO REPLY
TooManyShots
Cream of the Crop
10,203 posts
Likes: 527
Joined Jan 2008
Location: NYC
     
Jun 24, 2011 22:46 |  #30
bannedPermanent ban

bohdank wrote in post #12653679 (external link)
I put the lenses against each other shooting the same scene. I really don't care to look at individual images expounding on qualities that could be better in other lenses but we won't know since they are stand alone images with nothing to compare to.

I really don't want to get into a Zeiss vs other discussion here but until I, personally, see an advantage, there is no family Zeiss look, imo. Certain lenses may have it but not the one I tested. And, no, no one start that I had a defective lens or the test was invalid because the air pressure changed between changing lenses ;-)a


Well, the OP was talking about the legendary Carl Zeiss 21mm... Even the old Contax mount can run you up $1300. Your shot has a problem. Too bright on a mid day, high noon sun.


One Imaging Photography (external link) and my Flickr (external link)
Facebook (external link)

  
  LOG IN TO REPLY
sponsored links
(this ad will go away when you log in as a registered member)

6,956 views & 0 likes for this thread
Poor Man's Zeiss 21mm?
FORUMS Canon Cameras, Lenses & Accessories Canon EF and EF-S Lenses 
AAA
x 1600
y 1600

Jump to forum...   •  Rules   •  Index   •  New posts   •  RTAT   •  'Best of'   •  Gallery   •  Gear   •  Reviews   •  Member list   •  Polls   •  Image rules   •  Search   •  Password reset

Not a member yet?
Register to forums
Registered members may log in to forums and access all the features: full search, image upload, follow forums, own gear list and ratings, likes, more forums, private messaging, thread follow, notifications, own gallery, all settings, view hosted photos, own reviews, see more and do more... and all is free. Don't be a stranger - register now and start posting!


COOKIES DISCLAIMER: This website uses cookies to improve your user experience. By using this site, you agree to our use of cookies and to our privacy policy.
Privacy policy and cookie usage info.


POWERED BY AMASS forum software 2.1forum software
version 2.1 /
code and design
by Pekka Saarinen ©
for photography-on-the.net

Latest registered member is MarcusBullen
825 guests, 182 members online
Simultaneous users record so far is 15144, that happened on Nov 22, 2018

Photography-on-the.net Digital Photography Forums is the website for photographers and all who love great photos, camera and post processing techniques, gear talk, discussion and sharing. Professionals, hobbyists, newbies and those who don't even own a camera -- all are welcome regardless of skill, favourite brand, gear, gender or age. Registering and usage is free.