Luminous Landscape Forum
Equipment & Techniques => Medium Format / Film / Digital Backs – and Large Sensor Photography => Topic started by: SeanBK on July 29, 2013, 08:51:22 am
-
I have recently acquired D800E & shot in excess of 1400 RAW on my recent trip abroad with one Nikon lens. :( Tho' results r stunning from D800E but the optic was not stellar. So now I'm looking @ Zeiss lenses, any suggestions from 800/E users, mainly landscaping, portraiture & still life.
Thank you.
Sean
-
Check out Lloyd Chamber's web site (diglloyd.com) for comprehensive reviews of the Zeiss lens line.
-
I use the 28 f2,35 f2,and 50 f2 macro on the 5DMk3
All are exceptional on that camera and i wouldn't expect less on the D800/e
The 50 1.4 (at least the copy I tried) was very average to disappointing.
Mark
www.marktomalty.com
-
They are great lenses. I like the 50 1.4 but I don't shoot corner to corner sharp landscapes. Its a great general purpose lens that renders differently than the Nikon 50's, great with people.
The 35 F2 is fantastic, as is the 35 1.4. The 50 F2 Makro is great, BUT the focus throw is limited for non-infinity/non-macro range. If you shoot landscapes this doesn't matter.
The 85 has some focus shift so I passed. I use the Hasselblad/Zeiss 80 2.8 instead.
The new Nikon lenses and the old manual focus Nikon lenses are great. The 28 AI-s is stellar. The 28 AI is good, but on the D800 shows lots of CA. Renderes really well.
-
Thanx guys appreciate your feedback. Yes, I saw CA & purple fringing in the Nikon lens I used.
-
Thanx guys appreciate your feedback. Yes, I saw CA & purple fringing in the Nikon lens I used.
Which Nikkor? The new ones with the nano Coat are phenominal for sharpness etc. I don't have any of these lenses, but have used many of them.
-
Which Nikkor? The new ones with the nano Coat are phenominal for sharpness etc. I don't have any of these lenses, but have used many of them.
I wanted to ask the same question, because there are some great Nikon lenses, too. I do macro still life with Carl Zeiss 100 macro and Nikon's latest 60mm macro. Both are great.
-
You r correct, a lot of Nikkor r great. The reason I didn't mention the lens is I was aware that it may be lower IQ than other Nikkor but I liked the convenience of just one lens hence I opted for 28-300 f3.5/5.6. But on high end it was really soft. I do have other Nikkor & they r super.
Thnx again.
-
Try this: http://www.lensrentals.com/blog/2012/03/d800-lens-selection
-
You r correct, a lot of Nikkor r great. The reason I didn't mention the lens is I was aware that it may be lower IQ than other Nikkor but I liked the convenience of just one lens hence I opted for 28-300 f3.5/5.6. But on high end it was really soft. I do have other Nikkor & they r super.
Thnx again.
Maybe this helps (since I have 50mm and 85mm, both 1.4 for Canon and 100 macro for Nikon) - Carl Zeiss 85mm 1.4 is the best lens I've ever used (when used properly, in portraiture range, it's a portrait lens). I haven't used Canon or Nikon 85mm, so I can't compare.
I'm not so impressed with 50mm lens, it's just a regular normal lens. Not worth giving up AF of Canons and Nikons.
CZ 100 macro is great, but I find almost all macro lenses being great. So, again, if you need AF, stick to Nikons.
-
Thank you Chris L, The info u provided on your blog is quite helpful, appreciate the help.
-
The Zeiss ZF glass with outstanding reputation is the f2.0 series (25, 50, 100 and 135APO) as well as the 15 and 21mm.
I have first hand experience with the 50mm and 100mm and they are very good.
Cheers,
Bernard
-
I don't normally like higher-contrast lenses like Zeiss, BUT have owned the 35/2, 50/2, 100/2 - sold all and now just own the 135/2 APO.
Love the 135 - all the superlatives you read are true.
The 35/2 - - sharp, nice color, etc, no objectionable CA
The 50/2 was very nice, but I was using a Leica 60 Macro w/adapter for a % of the cost and had too many 50-60mm lenses, so sold it. Also not hard to find very nice 50mm glass out there.
The 100/2 is very sharp with nice bokeh, but CA control is not great at all.
Voigtlander 90/3.5 and 180/4 APOs also exceptional, but not great at handling veiling flare (SLII better than SLI). Also run some Mamiya 645 glass with adapters for personal work that I love and will never sell. Unreal bang/buck and great look. Also - another vote for the 28/2.8 AiS. Never should have sold that lens.
For what/how I shoot, of the ZEISS glass I used to own, only one I would consider re-acquiring would be the 35. In future, maybe the 21 and 15m
Edit 1: Forgot - cameras in question are D800e and D3S.
Edit 2 : on Nikkor side, lenses I use primarily and love are the 50/1.8G and 85/1.4G - with 24/1.4G on way. The 105/2 DC is very nice once dialed-in but with some CA at wider apps. The 200/2 VR lives up to it's rep, but a beast in terms of handling (Nikkor designers should look at Leica 180/2 APO for how to make a chubby easy handling). The 14-24 I never took to - focus shft and too much flare due to front element. The 70-200/2.8 II G - also not a fave and sold - not really a big zoom fan, so biased that way, and I'd prefer to shoot the 85G or 135 Zeiss anyway.
The 800e is tough on glass, so it is very much a experimentation process until you find the right mix you like that can match or exceed what the camera can deliver - depending of course what end goal is. Sharpness isn't everything all the time.
-
I have posted this some time before - here are 2 full raw NEF´s from the Nikon D800E with our Hartblei 4/40mm IF Superrotator which is actually a Zeiss Distagon 4/40 IF CFE/i
f11,5 - 14 bit, no compression, heavy Tripod, shutter delay 3 sec, best qualitysettings possible, both well over 70 MB as raws
http://www.hartblei.de/downloads/_DSC5245.NEF
http://www.hartblei.de/downloads/_DSC5250.NEF
I think I don´t need to comment, you will see yourself.
Greetings from Germany
Stefan
-
Why is this thread in Medium Format / Film / Digital Backs – and Large Sensor Photography ?
"This forum is intended exclusively for the discussion of medium format digital backs, large sensor photography (excluding 35mm) and related topics, including the use of film. Users of all brands and models are welcome, as are all photographers interested in learning more about this equipment."
Did Nikon up the sensor size when I wasn't looking ?
Any chance a mod could move it to a more appropriate place (hmm, let me think ... Equipment and Techniques > Cameras, Lenses and Shooting Gear ... sounds about right)?
-
It's a good conversation without charts and graphs. There is significant cross talk between high end 35mm and larger than 35mm on this forum. It's been that way for years. I have no issue with any good conversation, even if its "misfiled".
Why is this thread in Medium Format / Film / Digital Backs – and Large Sensor Photography ?
"This forum is intended exclusively for the discussion of medium format digital backs, large sensor photography (excluding 35mm) and related topics, including the use of film. Users of all brands and models are welcome, as are all photographers interested in learning more about this equipment."
Did Nikon up the sensor size when I wasn't looking ?
Any chance a mod could move it to a more appropriate place (hmm, let me think ... Equipment and Techniques > Cameras, Lenses and Shooting Gear ... sounds about right)?
-
I think this is fine to have cross talk on formats as long as someone doesn't beat someone else up for their personal choices.
That stuff gets old quick.
The thing is, at least to me, medium format and 35mm have nothing to do with each other in regards to pixel size.
I know others don't see it that way, I know the makers of cameras have sold huge pixels for so long that I guess it looks like they are all equal if the pixel size is equal but I don't have that view.
Heck, I'd rather pick up my p21+ and old contax than any camera I own and that's even over the other ancient back I have the p30+.
I just like the way the p21 looks I like the way it shoots which is almost the same as film fps on a contax and honestly I don't ever think of the pixel count. I think it's 18 or something but in post processing I always uprezz anyway to about a 90mb file, so I honestly don't think about it.
IMO
BC
-
The reason I posted in M.F is simply I noticed a few of the members whose work I admired use D800/e with M.F & Lg format lenses. Here I thought I'll get recommendation @ which ones, while in 'Equipment ..' I might get more suggestions of Nikkor or other very fine DSLR lenses. Also I appreciate thoughts this thread has gotten so far, Thank you all.
-
Cross-talk is fine (though more often than not it usually degenerates into 'this is better than that'), but looking through the posts here there isn't any (at least not between 35mm and MF), and looking at the OP and the title of this thread ('D800E and Zeiss Lenses') I'm not sure how it would emerge (though maybe a post such as, 'The Zeiss 50/1.4 doesn't fit my Pentax 6x7 - help!' might kick it off).
I'm no bean-counter, but the site has categories for a reason, and unless someone is going to bring MF into the discussion (other than me discussing that it hasn't been discussed - confusing, eh), this thread would be more appropriate in the (more general) 'Cameras, Lenses and Shooting Gear'.
Just my 2c.
-
Hi,
Look here. Lot of good guy wrote constructive contributions to this thread. Your posting is not a bit constructive.
Best regards
Erik
Why is this thread in Medium Format / Film / Digital Backs – and Large Sensor Photography ?
"This forum is intended exclusively for the discussion of medium format digital backs, large sensor photography (excluding 35mm) and related topics, including the use of film. Users of all brands and models are welcome, as are all photographers interested in learning more about this equipment."
Did Nikon up the sensor size when I wasn't looking ?
Any chance a mod could move it to a more appropriate place (hmm, let me think ... Equipment and Techniques > Cameras, Lenses and Shooting Gear ... sounds about right)?
-
I see your point, but there are more people who use high-end gear in this section than any other. Strictly silo-ing the posts doesn't contribute as much to the expansion of knowledge as a cross post like this, which is very reasoned.
Cross-talk is fine (though more often than not it usually degenerates into 'this is better than that'), but looking through the posts here there isn't any (at least not between 35mm and MF), and looking at the OP and the title of this thread ('D800E and Zeiss Lenses') I'm not sure how it would emerge (though maybe a post such as, 'The Zeiss 50/1.4 doesn't fit my Pentax 6x7 - help!' might kick it off).
I'm no bean-counter, but the site has categories for a reason, and unless someone is going to bring MF into the discussion (other than me discussing that it hasn't been discussed - confusing, eh), this thread would be more appropriate in the (more general) 'Cameras, Lenses and Shooting Gear'.
Just my 2c.
-
Just want to thank everybody for their input. I saw @ my local store quite a few Zeiss everybody mentioned. But I just loved what I saw thru' my viewfinder & result on LCD, so I DID go ahead with Zeiss 100mm f2. micro. Love that long throw in focus and such nice tight focusing ring. Thanks guys for your guidance, Grazia, Merci, Arigato, Shukria, Dhanyawaad, Danke Schon, :)
Peace.
-
The Zeiss glass is exceptional - I use a standard D800 with the 21, 28 and 100. Not quite the same as a Mamiya with a Credo but pretty damn good.
-
Not quite the same as a Mamiya with a Credo but pretty damn good.
Hooray - at last - a reference to MF ;)
-
moved to nikon from olympus e-1...
using d800e
zeiss 15, 35f2 100 f2 and new 135 - looking for nice used 28 and waiting for new 55...
happy with all of them
-
The very knowledgeable salesman said he saw the prototype of 100mm (or was 135mm he mentioned?). That lens will be released in 2014 has amazing resolving power, nothing like anything on the market. Also it prob'ly will be very expensive.
-
... Also it prob'ly will be very expensive.
What, unlike all those other really expensive Zeiss lenses? That'll make a change then. Really, at the price they charge, you could be forgiven for thinking that maybe, just maybe, they could do autofocus too
-
Currently using 21 & 50 Makro on D800. Quite satisfied.
-
Hooray - at last - a reference to MF ;)
I was looking for it too.
;D
-
What, unlike all those other really expensive Zeiss lenses? That'll make a change then. Really, at the price they charge, you could be forgiven for thinking that maybe, just maybe, they could do autofocus too
Zeiss do Auto focus, but for for Sony cameras only. Read some where that they are restricted by some license agreement to make MF only for other cameras.
http://towardsperfectfutures.wordpress.com/2012/09/10/why-zeiss-lenses-for-nikon-or-canon-have-no-af/
-
Ajoy, thanks for that. Sounds like a restraint on trade to me, and given that a good number of Canon & Nikon lenses are made outside of Japan anyway ...
-
I wonder whether Zeiss thought of this way back when they parted ways with Hasselblad.
-
Zeiss do Auto focus, but for for Sony cameras only. Read some where that they are restricted by some license agreement to make MF only for other cameras.
http://towardsperfectfutures.wordpress.com/2012/09/10/why-zeiss-lenses-for-nikon-or-canon-have-no-af/
Zeiss did restrict themselves to the Sony A mount for AF lenses and some people speculated that there was some license agreement until Zeiss proved them wrong in issuing AF lenses for the Fuji X-mount in their "touit" series.
-
What, unlike all those other really expensive Zeiss lenses? That'll make a change then. Really, at the price they charge, you could be forgiven for thinking that maybe, just maybe, they could do autofocus too
I have a feeling that when aiming for the best possible optical and mechanical quality autofocus is out of question. Decent autofocus needs light and nimble construction to work fast, which means severe design restrictions and prevents using heavy but precise brass parts. Inbuilt electronics also will not last as long as a simple mechanical only lens. There are thousands of working lenses over 100 years old, just needing occasional re-greasing. Average life expectancy of modern lenses is only 10 years or so, due to electrical failures. If I pay something like $4000 for a normal prime lens, I expect it to last longer than me. I have binoculars (4 lenses total) with 30 year warranty (Zeiss), they still work fine after 28 years, they cost $750 back then, about $1600 in today's dollars. Best lenses should be the same.
-
Hi,
The Zeiss lenses for Sony are designed and built by Sony under QA by Zeiss. They may also be based on Zeiss designs.
Best regards
Erik
Zeiss did restrict themselves to the Sony A mount for AF lenses and some people speculated that there was some license agreement until Zeiss proved them wrong in issuing AF lenses for the Fuji X-mount in their "touit" series.
-
Hi,
I have a few Minolta AF lenses from the mid eighties, they have neven been to service, except one of them having a loose tripod mount repaired, so I may not share your views.
I also bought six Hasselblad V-lenses of similar age. They work just fine.
I had a single camera failing on me in 40 years of use. That was a Minolta XD-7. Had around 20 cameras all except the XD-7 are still working, as far as I know.
Best regards
Erik
I have a feeling that when aiming for the best possible optical and mechanical quality autofocus is out of question. Decent autofocus needs light and nimble construction to work fast, which means severe design restrictions and prevents using heavy but precise brass parts. Inbuilt electronics also will not last as long as a simple mechanical only lens. There are thousands of working lenses over 100 years old, just needing occasional re-greasing. Average life expectancy of modern lenses is only 10 years or so, due to electrical failures. If I pay something like $4000 for a normal prime lens, I expect it to last longer than me. I have binoculars (4 lenses total) with 30 year warranty (Zeiss), they still work fine after 28 years, they cost $750 back then, about $1600 in today's dollars. Best lenses should be the same.
-
I don't have a D800E, just a Canon 6D, but the Zeiss Distagon 21mm f/2.8 is a lovely lens for landscape.
-
Hi,
I have a few Minolta AF lenses from the mid eighties, they have neven been to service, except one of them having a loose tripod mount repaired, so I may not share your views.
Do you mean my pessimistic view about the longevity of "electronic" lenses (they certainly do not all die when 10 years old), of the general view that a no compromise manual lens like Zeiss can be designed without as much mechanical and optical compromise, is likely to be better and will last longer than an AF lens with electronics?
-
Well,
Electronic lenses lasting 10 years is what I don't agree on, as I have at least half a dozen 20+ years old electronic lenses that work fine.
My experience is low failure rate, but that may change with modern construction, of course.
Best regards
Erik
Do you mean my pessimistic view about the longevity of "electronic" lenses (they certainly do not all die when 10 years old), of the general view that a no compromise manual lens like Zeiss can be designed without as much mechanical and optical compromise, is likely to be better and will last longer than an AF lens with electronics?
-
Well,
Electronic lenses lasting 10 years is what I don't agree on, as I have at least half a dozen 20+ years old electronic lenses that work fine.
My experience is low failure rate, but that may change with modern construction, of course.
Best regards
Erik
I think it's too soon to say whether the adoption of electronics per se will influence longevity. It's more likely the quailty of design & manufacture is a bigger influence whether electronic or mechanical. I've had no issues with well-made 50-year-old auto-diaphragm lenses but we don't have any comparable data yet for electronic.
A more likely problem with electronics is technological obsolescence in that the aperture and/or focus mechanisms require specific signaling to function at all. I can focus and change the aperture of a Leica-R or mechanical Nikkor lens no matter what camera I use it on, not so with a lens requiring electronic aperture control.
-
I have D800E with Zeiss 21, 35 f2, 50 M, 100 M; I am very pleased. I have just one Nikon 50 f1.2 Nikor old one that Michael reviewed last year. you can see my pictures in my Facebook if you like. All pictures are taken by Zeiss except those in Notre Dome. Those Notre Dome taken with Nikkor 50 f1.2. Good Luck.