Photozone.de ZE 21/2.8 FF test

jetcode wrote in post #9058569
I used this lens for 10 days and loved it. It is bright and sharp and built like a tank. I am slightly worried about mustache distortion which apparently is not all that easy to correct making it not the best choice for architecture. There is some barrel distortion too but that is manageable.

Try DxO Optics Pro to get rid of it. It should be easy. There are other tools as well, but DxO is my current preferred tool for general processing.

Kind regards, Wim

Technically it isn't exactly the ZE...they tested the ZF. Misleading :/

Karl Johnston wrote in post #9059956
Technically it isn't exactly the ZE...they tested the ZF. Misleading :/

It was stated in the text, as gasrocks said. What is misleading about that?

And, BTW, I don't really understand what the fuss is about. It is a test of the optics, and the optics are the same, just like they are with any third party lens manufacturer making lenses for different mounts.

Since most lenses they test are either bought for own use, or are made available to them by actual users, they sometimes have to make do. Personally, I think that this is a great opportunity, because it certainly makes it possible to cross-compare lenses on different systems. The same lens will (is being) used for a test on the Nikon D3X. I think this is something more test sites should do.

Kind regards, Wim

I did a quick comparison of the photozone test results for the of the Zeiss 21 and the Canon 16-35 (at 20mm). (The two lenses are pretty much equivalent in price.) Three things impressed me:

1. Distortion is about the same for the two lenses. They measured 1.7% on the Zeiss, and 1.6% on the Canon (at 20mm).

2. Wide open, the Zeiss hold its sharpness very well, even to the extreme corners, and the Canon is relatively weak in this regard. But, this comes at the expense of some very severe vignetting: 2.5EV for the Zeiss vs 1.6EV for the Canon.

3. At the 'sweet spot' of f5.6, the resolution numbers for both the Zeiss and the Canon zoom (at 20mm) are impressive. They both have very good numbers from the image center to the extreme corners. By f5.6, vignetting is reasonably well-controlled for both lenses - 0.92EV for the Zeiss, and 0.82EV for the Canon (at 20mm).

With the Canon, you get AF, and the versatility of being able to go wider or longer than 21mm. At moderate apertures, it doesn't seem that the Zeiss has any advantage over the Canon zoom (when you set the zoom to 20mm). The only advantage to the Zeiss seems to me to be the superior edge-to-edge sharpness at f2.8 (which is counterbalanced somewhat by its significant vignetting).

Al

alpotn wrote in post #9060623
I did a quick comparison of the photozone test results for the of the Zeiss 21 and the Canon 16-35 (at 20mm). (The two lenses are pretty much equivalent in price.) Three things impressed me:

1. Distortion is about the same for the two lenses. They measured 1.7% on the Zeiss, and 1.6% on the Canon (at 20mm).

2. Wide open, the Zeiss hold its sharpness very well, even to the extreme corners, and the Canon is relatively weak in this regard. But, this comes at the expense of some very severe vignetting: 2.5EV for the Zeiss vs 1.6EV for the Canon.

3. At the 'sweet spot' of f5.6, the resolution numbers for both the Zeiss and the Canon zoom (at 20mm) are impressive. They both have very good numbers from the image center to the extreme corners. By f5.6, vignetting is reasonably well-controlled for both lenses - 0.92EV for the Zeiss, and 0.82EV for the Canon (at 20mm).

With the Canon, you get AF, and the versatility of being able to go wider or longer than 21mm. At moderate apertures, it doesn't seem that the Zeiss has any advantage over the Canon zoom (when you set the zoom to 20mm). The only advantage to the Zeiss seems to me to be the superior edge-to-edge sharpness at f2.8 (which is counterbalanced somewhat by its significant vignetting).

Al

Have a look at 16-9.net, do a search on FM in the Canon gear talk forum, and let's discuss again.

If you want to bring other lenses into this discussion , I'd like to suggest the Nikkor 14-24 F/2.8, the EF 14L II, the TS-E 17L, the TS-E 24L Mk II, and the 24L Mk II.

Kind regards, Wim

Typically on a wide lens a center filter is used to compensate for vignetting. These are pricey items often running $500 for whatever ungodly reason. I used PP to manage the vignetting with no visible problems and I really like this lens. It's a magnificent offering all to it's own.