now dreaming of a zeiss 100/2

there's not much discussion here about this lens

i'm looking into getting a manual focus lens,
1) i figure that i like this focal length (more than 85)
2) a longer focal length might be easier for my weak eyes to focus

tried MF'ing my 85 1.8 and most were out of focus even with an EG-S screen

comments / opinions?

i have the 100L but it's not as fast and of course not really MF

(still saving some dough though)

I'm assuming the longer lenses are more critical on focus. With just playing around with my zeiss 21 and 35, I'm finding it actually pretty easy on focus and don't find the mf to be a big deal. It's kinda enjoyable to use. Although at a wedding, probably not so much as a main photographer.

I really like the sigma 85 1.4. It's a great lens. It's another one you should consider.

jantzer wrote in post #11269989
I'm assuming the longer lenses are more critical on focus. With just playing around with my zeiss 21 and 35, I'm finding it actually pretty easy on focus and don't find the mf to be a big deal. It's kinda enjoyable to use. Although at a wedding, probably not so much as a main photographer.

I really like the sigma 85 1.4. It's a great lens. It's another one you should consider.

you mean it's harder to get it right on the longer focal length?

all play for me, not getting paid to do anything

for AF 85mm, it's 85L II over 85 sigma for me since it's a long term "investment" and our 3rd party brand warranties aren't as long as over there.
(though that's not gonna happen anytime soon, i'd sooner get either a 50L or MF lens since i have the 85 1.8 )

the 100mm is a great lens.. it OOF sometimes comes across like a fine painting. I use live view and love everything about then lens. Unfortunatly mine fell in the ocean last week.. good thing I had insurance on it.

here a shot i love.. not because the shot is even any good, heck most of the flower is not sharp (really windy day).. but because of the background...

Doc Fluty wrote in post #11270003
the 100mm is a great lens.. it OOF sometimes comes across like a fine painting. I use live view and love everything about then lens. Unfortunatly mine fell in the ocean last week.. good thing I had insurance on it.

here a shot i love.. not because the shot is even any good, heck most of the flower is not sharp (really windy day).. but because of the background...

yeah, heard about your swimming 100/2 ... those were great shots though

i'm kinda leaning towards NOT using live view, can't i do with just the EG-S screen? one of the reasons i'm getting an MF lens is to feel retro, using live view kinda kills that
i want the film days MF 50mm feeling back when i was a kid.

p.s. and i also got that 200/2 i asked you about in pm sometime back ... 'no regrets' (but also 'no money')

oohhh.. yes.. that 200 2.0 is/was a monster.

somedays i regret selling it... but i got a new 27" imac and many other kewl toys for it..

I lugged it to the beach for memorial day weekend and everyone thought i was the paparazzi lol

thats not a walk around lens lol...

I tried using those eg-s screens.. didnt do much for me other than making the viewfinder darker. Some people love em.. not me.. i like my live view. I wish on the 5d iii that it includes a flip screen for shots when the lens is too low or on that 8 foot tripod

Doc Fluty wrote in post #11270032
oohhh.. yes.. that 200 2.0 is/was a moster.

somedays i regret selling it... but i got a new 27" imac and many other kewl toys for it..

I lugged it to the beach for memorial day weekend and everyone thought i was the paparazzi lol

thats not a walk around lens lol...

I tried using those eg-s screens.. didnt do much for me other than making the viewfinder darker. Some people love em.. not me.. i like my live view. I wish on the 5d iii that it includes a flip screen for shots when the lens is too low or on that 8 foot tripod

when you told me that, i was scared about getting the same reaction. now i realize, it's a totally different society here. almost nobody asks me about it, of course they talk among themselves with the occasional "that's huge!"

i usually skip bringing a second cam/lens so i'd push myself to step back to fit what i want in the freame.

so you frame the shot the way you like it, then you zoom to check focus right? but that shows you the center only right? no rule of 3rds?

using live view... I have my grid on the screen.. so i can see the rule of 3rds.. then i put the subject where i want it using the grid as a guide.. then i move the curser to that spot and zoom it so i know that spot is sharp where i want it to be. then zoom out to get one last look at everything.. then press the shutter with the 2 second lag time... .. that process is great for flowers and portraits.. moving bugs tend to be a pain lol

A lot of times i go down to the corners with the 21mm and make sure they are good... because if they are.. then the center has to be good because its so wide. it makes taking shots fun

https://photography-on-the.net/forum/showthre​ad.php?t=957801

^The 100/2 Planar is definitely a lens that should be considered

There are loads of fast 100s that are nice.

I've been eying Nikons 105/1.8 AIS or 105/2 D.

Both are incredibly sharp at 2.8 and extremely usable wide open.

I have the 100/2 ZE and really like it. I also had the 100L and liked it to. The 100L AF and IS was a plus when taking close up shots of moving subjects, e.g. butterflies. The CZ is simply different, according to tests also has higher IQ, but based on my experience both lenses are very good, but just different in the way they render and handle. I also enjoy the retro feel of handling a solid metal lens with smooth manual focus. The only thing that I have to watch out for is when taking portrait shots it can make the subjects skin look very harsh, especially adults and elderly. You either have to shoot at F/2 or have a good light, otherwise everybody will gain 20 years because of the sharpness and contrast

Regarding manual focusing, for me MF at 100mm is much easier than 50mm or 24mm.

Never say never, but for me the CZ 100/2ZE is one of those lenses that I will probably keep my whole life.

I sold my copies of Nikon 105/2 DC, Olympus 100/2 and Olympus 90/2 to get the ZE 100/2. I'm happy. No comparison to Canon 100L.

mike cabilangan wrote in post #11269914
there's not much discussion here about this lens

i'm looking into getting a manual focus lens,
1) i figure that i like this focal length (more than 85)
2) a longer focal length might be easier for my weak eyes to focus

tried MF'ing my 85 1.8 and most were out of focus even with an EG-S screen

comments / opinions?

i have the 100L but it's not as fast and of course not really MF

(still saving some dough though)

I think the Manual Focus tends to turn people off. That said, I think under the hands the Makro-Planar T* 2/50 and Makro-Planar T* 2/100 are better than anything Canon has in that focal range. The Colors, Sharpness, Bokeh all trump anything I've seen from Canon in my opinion. The MF of course makes it a bit of a learning curve.

If you have doubts about your MF skills, you may want to rent one before you buy. I've only ever had the pleasure of using the 21mm, but I can say their build quality is better than anyone else out there.

Correct. I'd say rent it to try it out. You can also get the c/y version on ebay for half the price. I'm the odd guy out as I use a loupe to nail focus with the LCD. As for the old day nostalgia, I think you would have to look elsewhere to get a proper viewfinder for use with manual lenses.