ZE 21/2.8 announced

gasrocks wrote in post #8723143
http://www.zeiss.com/P​HOTO

Check the example shot at the mirror with the lens mounted on a 5D2.
The reflections on the front element clearly show that it's not a mirror shot, but there's more...

EXIF says: "Camera Model = Hasselblad CF528-39"

WTF !!! (What The Fake )

Does anyone in their right mind really believe that the Distagon, as legendary as it may be, still beats stopped down 24L in a comparison where both lenses are at 2.8 ?

It's a Vuitton thing.
Snobism.

isnt this about 35mm on a crop?

It's 33.6mm-so very close.

Rodinal wrote in post #8750123
Does anyone in their right mind really believe that the Distagon, as legendary as it may be, still beats stopped down 24L in a comparison where both lenses are at 2.8 ?

It's a Vuitton thing.
Snobism.

All I've read and seen of the 24L doesn't point to it as a lens that should go head to head with it. Now the new TSE lens are more appropriate. Honestly, the 24L is a high speed wide where the Distagon 21/2.8 is a straight up Landscape lens.

Also you generally don't use the 21/2.8 @ 2.8. You use it stopped down to get its amazing corner to corner sharpness. If you want a fast-wide Zeiss lens, you get the 28/2 (which has the same characteristics of the 24L, in regards to how corner and center sharpness are handled).

And people who actively choose Zeiss over Canon or Nikon or Pentax which come with Autofocus capabilities generally do so because of other factors beyond absolute resolution and it shouldn't be considered snobbism at all (just a preference). How the lenses render color, how flair resistant they are, the bokeh (some consider bad, others "lively"), micro and macro contrast (generally higher than other brand lenses). Each of these things are not inherent to just Zeiss lenses but its slim pickings outside of Zeiss if you want them all in a single lens.

Ok - its been a week since these "should" be available - has anyone actually seen one of these in stock anywhere? - (preferably in the UK)?

Cheers,
Tone.

FTW !!!!

Lazuka wrote in post #8728279
Karl Johnson has been going on and on about this one on facebook, i'm sure he'll come in here and drool about it

WHY DIDNT YOU TELL ME ABOUT THIS ??

Zeiss mailing list update system = sucks.

Where do we buy ?

This lens was announced like, a YEAR ago. Availability is the big question... We've been waiting ever since.

B&H is accepting advance orders and the price is $1540 (free shipping) for the 21mm ZE. I want one and may sell my 85L. It is purported that the 18 distagon optically is not as good as the 21mm distagon.

jetcode wrote in post #8840595
B&H is accepting advance orders and the price is $1540 (free shipping) for the 21mm ZE. I want one and may sell my 85L. It is purported that the 18 distagon optically is not as good as the 21mm distagon.

Yeah but it's still probably REALLY good compared to anything else. The 21mm is just a freak lens.

I hope the 18mm is great still because it's a more useful focal length for me on FF.

Hmm I wonder how it compares to the 16-35 2.8L II it's about the same price...I wonder what a head to head test would be like..and the 16-35 does have AF. 24 1.4L II, 16-35L II and this lens has me double-thinking :/ I think I'll wait to see some tests.

I hear the ZF version smoked the old version, though. I wonder just how much better this ZE version is.

ddong wrote in post #8728583
God, you have really really nice gallery in your website. All of those pictures shot by Canon gear?

thanks! Yeah, everything Canon, 5D, 5D II and all good glass...
I decided to order the Zeiss 21. In my shooting 24L II wouldn't give me
all the benefits it gives to others. I also have 16-35L II, so will try to compare
when I get it. BTW Zeiss 18 doesn't look to be even close to the quality of 21...

Karl Johnston wrote in post #8842290
Hmm I wonder how it compares to the 16-35 2.8L II it's about the same price...I wonder what a head to head test would be like..and the 16-35 does have AF. 24 1.4L II, 16-35L II and this lens has me double-thinking :/ I think I'll wait to see some tests.

I hear the ZF version smoked the old version, though. I wonder just how much better this ZE version is.

ZE is optically identical to ZF.

Incredible pictures on your site ^

snowboarder wrote in post #8843167
ZE is optically identical to ZF.

In that case I can't wait


I'm getting buyer's anxiety before I even pull the trigger I want to...I want to...I've been waiting and waiting...buuut I wonder.

What did you find that you didn't like about the 24 1.4 II?

Karl Johnston wrote in post #8843175
Incredible pictures on your site ^

In that case I can't wait


I'm getting buyer's anxiety before I even pull the trigger I want to...I want to...I've been waiting and waiting...buuut I wonder.

What did you find that you didn't like about the 24 1.4 II?

Well, my copy had a terrible CA wide open and it didn't improve much
until 2.8-3.2, still visible around f4...
A magic look, but tons of work in post to clean up CA. It was worse than
all my lenses, maybe 85L I used to have was like that.
But 35L, 24-70L, 50L - all better.
So I sent it back and decided to try another one, but I'm seeing many
reports that lens does have a very strong CA.

Plus I shoot landscapes, for the candid shots when I want a very shallow DOF,
I prefer my 35L and 50L...

And Zeiss 21 has been my dream lens for as long as I remember.
Now when I can get a Canon version, I have to get it