Canon 35L vs Zeiss 35 f/2 ZE

dlintz wrote in post #11631318
It can be a subtle thing but here's a couple of mine. I pulled the first one from facebook (don't have the original on my flickr) so the resolution isn't as great.

d.

WOW!! Now I get it! Thanks, Dlintz! Those are AWESOME!

In my opinion the ze 35/2 IQ is way superior than the 35L. Actually, I tried the 35L twice, but I just didn't find anything special in it to justify its price. SInce my main subject is my 14 months old daughter, I needed AF, so I had to sell my ze 35/2. I guess, eventually, I'll get the ze 35/1.4

Alex_Venom wrote in post #11631328
WOW!! Now I get it! Thanks, Dlintz! Those are AWESOME!

Thanks. BTW my Zeiss is for sale (funding other things).

d.

Thanks for all the great feed back! I realize the Zeiss is Manual focus. When I asked about focus issues with the Zeiss, I was referring to any potential situation where it might confirm focus but actually be out of focus. Like I constantly hear about with the Sigma 30 (AF of course though). I hope that makes since.

I also don't know if I need AF because I have never had a lens without it.

Can someone explain the experience of manual focus. Does a generous turn of the ring result in drastic changes in focus or is it more of a micro focus experience? In other words, would it be hard to track moving kids? It seems like you could just point at your subject, quickly twist focus until you get confirmation and then snap the picture.

How does AF on 35L compare to Canon 50 f/1.4 or the 85L. Sometimes with those two lenses I feel like I might as well have manual focus. Okay, maybe the 50 is not that bad.

Nice images btw dlintz!

I was in the same boat as you a little while back. I loved how the Zeiss looked and felt in use, but I couldn't get used to the manual focus - in retrospect, I should have probably fitted in a new focusing screen first before trying it out.

There is no focus "issue" with the manual focus lenses even if you use the confirmation beeps because in an AF lens, the AF mechanism is told by the camera how much to move the focusing elements from present position (that's where the out of focus issues come into play... if the elements aren't where they're supposed to be, then moving them a specific distance isn't going to get you there) whereas the manual focus just beeps/blinks at you when it detects sharp contrast.

The manual focus ring on the Zeiss is amazingly smooth. Very easy to get from one end to another.

The issue I have is that I'll still be trying to focus while everyone starts getting impatient with me, so the AF was a necessity.

The AF on the 35L is fast. It works a lot better than my 50mm f1.4 in lower light.

dlintz wrote in post #11631318

d.

I see he just saw something that triggered his lightbulb.

wunhang wrote in post #11632270
I was in the same boat as you a little while back. I loved how the Zeiss looked and felt in use, but I couldn't get used to the manual focus - in retrospect, I should have probably fitted in a new focusing screen first before trying it out.

I bought an ee-s screen for my 5d when I bought my Zeiss 35, and I haven't looked back. Occasionally, for whatever reason, the focus confirmation won't light up(I guess it's just too dark?)but the focus screen saves me.

Wide open at infinity with natural light only. One of my favorite things about this lens is the focus ring's feel and hard stop infinity.

IMAGE LINK: http://www.flickr.com …/39648228@N02/5​346871773/

IMAGE LINK: http://www.flickr.com …/39648228@N02/5​098942882/

JHutch wrote in post #11632432
I bought an ee-s screen for my 5d when I bought my Zeiss 35, and I haven't looked back. Occasionally, for whatever reason, the focus confirmation won't light up(I guess it's just too dark?)but the focus screen saves me.

I've heard similar from others - the focusing screen really works a lot better than the focus confirmation. If it didn't light up, then it must have been really dark.

The Zeiss is becoming quite attractive to me...

Jason C

Another one....

HTTP response: NOT FOUND | MIME changed to 'image/gif' | Redirected to error image by FLICKR

Another one from mine

IMAGE LINK: http://www.flickr.com …s/npthaiduong/5​260112340/

on your 40D i'd go with the sigma. only on ff i would consider the 35L and zeiss, and neither is cheap

Honestly, I wouldn't recommend the Zeiss 35mm to anyone is "new" to photography. You have to have exp and time to master how using the lens. That's a fun game but not ideal for consumer level.

JHutch wrote in post #11632432
3D effect

IMAGE LINK: http://www.flickr.com …/39648228@N02/5​098942882/

Love this one. So many of the photos around here seem to be solely for the purpose of showing what the lens CAN do from a technical standpoint. As a result, they lack compositional interest or emotion.

Not in this case, great shot!

rusty.jg wrote in post #11633458
Another one....

HTTP response: NOT FOUND | MIME changed to 'image/gif' | Redirected to error image by FLICKR

Another one... with which lens? 35L or Zeiss?