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 10 Aug 2011 (Wednesday) 10:54
Search threadPrev/next
sponsored links
(this ad will go away when you log in as a registered member)

Considering Zeiss 2/50MP with a 2/35 - complement or conflict?

 
jdizzle
Darth Noink
Avatar
69,419 posts
Likes: 57
Joined Aug 2006
Location: Harvesting Nano crystals
     
Aug 11, 2011 22:22 |  #46

^Thanks for your feedback John. I almost bought the 1.4 over the MP.




  
  LOG IN TO REPLY
sponsored links
(this ad will go away when you log in as a registered member)
crazeazn
Senior Member
Avatar
398 posts
Joined May 2010
Location: Houston
     
Aug 11, 2011 22:27 |  #47

Here is a ZE example with busy bokeh

IMAGE: http://farm5.static.flickr.com/4068/4265334984_40c486320e_z.jpg
IMAGE LINK: http://www.flickr.com/​photos/crazeazn/426533​4984/  (external link)
IMG_5869 (external link) by crazeazn (external link), on Flickr

John H.
some bodies, some lenses

  
  LOG IN TO REPLY
crazeazn
Senior Member
Avatar
398 posts
Joined May 2010
Location: Houston
     
Aug 11, 2011 22:29 |  #48

The thing that draws me back to the zeiss is the colors, no matter how hard i try in post, i could never replicate the same colors from my canon glass.


John H.
some bodies, some lenses

  
  LOG IN TO REPLY
bpark42
Senior Member
307 posts
Joined Jul 2009
     
Aug 11, 2011 22:29 |  #49

jdizzle wrote in post #12919226 (external link)
So, what do you think of the 50 f2 MP bokeh? :)

I really enjoy the bokeh from the 50MP. It has character without being overly busy. I have heard it described as "painterly" (much like the 100MP), and I think that fits.

IMAGE: http://farm7.static.flickr.com/6086/6034371094_595b4ae0c5_o.jpg
IMAGE LINK: http://www.flickr.com/​photos/bpark_42/603437​1094/  (external link)
Untitled (external link) by bpark_42 (external link), on Flickr

IMAGE: http://farm6.static.flickr.com/5039/5889794790_52a039bc9b_o.jpg
IMAGE LINK: http://www.flickr.com/​photos/bpark_42/588979​4790/  (external link)
Fly away (external link) by bpark_42 (external link), on Flickr



  
  LOG IN TO REPLY
jdizzle
Darth Noink
Avatar
69,419 posts
Likes: 57
Joined Aug 2006
Location: Harvesting Nano crystals
     
Aug 11, 2011 22:30 |  #50

^That's not bad John.




  
  LOG IN TO REPLY
jdizzle
Darth Noink
Avatar
69,419 posts
Likes: 57
Joined Aug 2006
Location: Harvesting Nano crystals
     
Aug 11, 2011 22:33 |  #51

bpark42 wrote in post #12920338 (external link)
I really enjoy the bokeh from the 50MP. It has character without being overly busy. I have heard it described as "painterly" (much like the 100MP), and I think that fits.

QUOTED IMAGE
IMAGE LINK: http://www.flickr.com/​photos/bpark_42/603437​1094/  (external link)
Untitled (external link) by bpark_42 (external link), on Flickr

QUOTED IMAGE
IMAGE LINK: http://www.flickr.com/​photos/bpark_42/588979​4790/  (external link)
Fly away (external link) by bpark_42 (external link), on Flickr

These are nice Bpark. I love the colors too and the painterly look. I'm sold! :)




  
  LOG IN TO REPLY
crazeazn
Senior Member
Avatar
398 posts
Joined May 2010
Location: Houston
     
Aug 11, 2011 22:34 |  #52

The makro planar is deadly at all distance and has very consistent bokeh. If you don't need the f/1.4 I would recommend the makro. I just purchased a rokkor 58 f/1.2 so I now have my bokeh master while the zeiss will be relegated to f/4 + duty for uber-sharpness


John H.
some bodies, some lenses

  
  LOG IN TO REPLY
jdizzle
Darth Noink
Avatar
69,419 posts
Likes: 57
Joined Aug 2006
Location: Harvesting Nano crystals
     
Aug 11, 2011 22:49 |  #53

crazeazn wrote in post #12920371 (external link)
The makro planar is deadly at all distance and has very consistent bokeh. If you don't need the f/1.4 I would recommend the makro. I just purchased a rokkor 58 f/1.2 so I now have my bokeh master while the zeiss will be relegated to f/4 + duty for uber-sharpness

Nice! Where did you pick up the 58 1.2? :)




  
  LOG IN TO REPLY
crazeazn
Senior Member
Avatar
398 posts
Joined May 2010
Location: Houston
     
Aug 11, 2011 22:56 |  #54

jdizzle wrote in post #12920466 (external link)
Nice! Where did you pick up the 58 1.2? :)

Local shop had it sitting in the corner for a couple years. Got it for nothing but needed massive massive repairs.


John H.
some bodies, some lenses

  
  LOG IN TO REPLY
rusty.jg
THREAD ­ STARTER
Senior Member
855 posts
Joined Mar 2009
Location: Cornwall, UK
     
Aug 12, 2011 05:50 as a reply to  @ crazeazn's post |  #55

Finally found the reference to the differences in various serial numbers of the Contax f/1.7 (last post on page):

http://forum.mflenses.​com/viewtopic.php?t=28​682 (external link)


This was from this POTN thread (post #21 onwards):

https://photography-on-the.net …/showthread.php​?t=1022953


Is this worth taking consideration of or is the difference so miniscule, its just not worth thinking about (there are several 6****** serial C/Y 50mm on ebay right now)?


to be OR NOT to be = 1 (which is "to be" so that one's cleared up at last ;-)a)
www.VividCornwall.co.u​k (external link) (external link)
Sony Nex-5n (x2) / Metabones EF-NEX Smart Adapter / Canon 10-22mm / Canon 100mm Macro / Sigma 18-50mm

  
  LOG IN TO REPLY
crazeazn
Senior Member
Avatar
398 posts
Joined May 2010
Location: Houston
     
Aug 12, 2011 11:39 |  #56

rusty.jg wrote in post #12921575 (external link)
Finally found the reference to the differences in various serial numbers of the Contax f/1.7 (last post on page):

http://forum.mflenses.​com/viewtopic.php?t=28​682 (external link)


This was from this POTN thread (post #21 onwards):

https://photography-on-the.net …/showthread.php​?t=1022953


Is this worth taking consideration of or is the difference so miniscule, its just not worth thinking about (there are several 6****** serial C/Y 50mm on ebay right now)?

There were probably subtle changes over the years in the coating without question. However, the biggest difference between the AE/MM (i think) is the aperture direction, they face different directions, hence the ninja-star designation. Given how expensive the 1.7s are now I would just spring for the 1.4s.


John H.
some bodies, some lenses

  
  LOG IN TO REPLY
jetcode
Cream of the Crop
6,239 posts
Likes: 21
Joined Jul 2009
Location: West Marin
     
Aug 12, 2011 12:32 |  #57

Rusty I would recommend finding a copy with T* coating as this represents the latest. I picked up my first copy for $120 as a bargain grade and another copy for $300 in mint condition (sold the BG the lettering on the DOF chart was worn lens worked great). This is becoming a popular lens due to the IQ and cost.




  
  LOG IN TO REPLY
spacetime
Goldmember
Avatar
1,276 posts
Joined Oct 2009
     
Aug 12, 2011 13:22 |  #58

rusty.jg wrote in post #12921575 (external link)
Finally found the reference to the differences in various serial numbers of the Contax f/1.7 (last post on page):

http://forum.mflenses.​com/viewtopic.php?t=28​682 (external link)


This was from this POTN thread (post #21 onwards):

https://photography-on-the.net …/showthread.php​?t=1022953


Is this worth taking consideration of or is the difference so miniscule, its just not worth thinking about (there are several 6****** serial C/Y 50mm on ebay right now)?

The difference is fairly negligible. Sharpness and contrast are practically indistinguishable. There's a slight difference in color cast with the MM rendering a bit cooler which could be attributed to the revised T* coating. I think the MM versions were red in color and the AE version was a blue/purple.

crazeazn wrote in post #12923040 (external link)
There were probably subtle changes over the years in the coating without question. However, the biggest difference between the AE/MM (i think) is the aperture direction, they face different directions, hence the ninja-star designation. Given how expensive the 1.7s are now I would just spring for the 1.4s.

Aperture direction is the same. The 50/1.7 AE does not have the "ninja star bokeh" either. The 50/1.4 AE does but only and f2-2.8.

jetcode wrote in post #12923343 (external link)
Rusty I would recommend finding a copy with T* coating as this represents the latest. I picked up my first copy for $120 as a bargain grade and another copy for $300 in mint condition (sold the BG the lettering on the DOF chart was worn lens worked great). This is becoming a popular lens due to the IQ and cost.

They all have a T* coating. There have been revisions to the T* coating which is most evident in the color of the coating but the tangible differences are still quite minute IMO.




  
  LOG IN TO REPLY
rusty.jg
THREAD ­ STARTER
Senior Member
855 posts
Joined Mar 2009
Location: Cornwall, UK
     
Aug 17, 2011 05:23 as a reply to  @ spacetime's post |  #59

After much to-ing and fro-ing and a fair bit of research (including searching through a lot of my shots to see what I like), I have now ordered the 50MP.
I did have the 100MP and loved the look but the FL just didnt sit right with me. I've nearly killed my nifty fifty with use so I know the FL is good....

Cant wait for Royal Mail tomorrow.......


to be OR NOT to be = 1 (which is "to be" so that one's cleared up at last ;-)a)
www.VividCornwall.co.u​k (external link) (external link)
Sony Nex-5n (x2) / Metabones EF-NEX Smart Adapter / Canon 10-22mm / Canon 100mm Macro / Sigma 18-50mm

  
  LOG IN TO REPLY
Mike ­ K
Goldmember
Avatar
1,637 posts
Joined Apr 2001
Location: San Francisco area
     
Aug 17, 2011 15:14 |  #60

I have owned the Zeiss 50/2 MP and Distagon 35/2 for a few years. I carry both around and choice is basically done by focal length and/or macro application. As an optic, the 50/2 MP is generally a bit better: sharpness, detail definition and micro contrast, but the 35/2 is quite good, no complaints.

The 50/2 MP has a floating element design, and thus maintains excellent optical performance at close focal distances, a comparative weakness in the 50/1.4 design. If I could only own one of the two it would be the 50/2 MP based purely upon IQ,
Mike K


Canon 6D, 1DmkII, IR modified 5DII with lots of Canon L, TSE and Zeiss ZE lenses

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

6,284 views & 0 likes for this thread
Considering Zeiss 2/50MP with a 2/35 - complement or conflict?
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
855 guests, 210 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.