Luminous Landscape Forum
Equipment & Techniques => Cameras, Lenses and Shooting gear => Topic started by: Jost von Allmen on September 14, 2008, 07:45:13 pm
-
Exciting times and good news for Canon shooters:
The new EF versions, announced by Zeiss actually are for Canon!
More info on http://www.digitalkamera.de (http://www.digitalkamera.de) (in german, scroll down page)
All lenses are manual focus but chipped, meaning that lens data will be transferred and auto exposure is possible, as well as electronic focus confirmation.
First available (end of 2008) shall be 1,4/50mm and 1,4/85mm, soon to be followed by the remarkable 2,8/21mm (in 2009).
I guess all the other lenses from the ZF-line will be available sooner or later: http://www.zeiss.com/photo (http://www.zeiss.com/photo)
-
English site:
http://www.zeiss.com/cln (http://www.zeiss.com/cln)
-
It appears that the new 21mm is a different design than the legendary 21mm. It will be interesting to see how they compare.
-
wew... this is extremely good news. No autofocus should result in a sturdier, stronger lens and smoother manual focus. Almost exactly what I wanted! Cant wait to see more results.
Looks like people are starting to realise we've been autofocusing for the last 5 years because the dslr viewfinders were impossibly dark. Now with a 5d (or better) viewfinder and a precision focussing screen, who needs AF? (apart from sports people etc)
edit:
For now, the 'bokeh' in the 50/1.4 picture in this
zeiss article (http://www.zeiss.com/c12567a8003b58b9/Contents-Frame/01e4dfb8c6534d01c12574c2003568ee)
doesnt look too convincing. Bummer.
-
Ignoring the majority of the photographers (PJ, sports, events/weddings), AF isn't needed.
-
Ignoring the majority of the photographers (PJ, sports, events/weddings), AF isn't needed.
[a href=\"index.php?act=findpost&pid=221640\"][{POST_SNAPBACK}][/a]
I happily ignore them! ;D
seriously, I got better shots using my fingers instead of a 'dumb' computer to change the focal plane, AND (and this is crucial, obviously) when I can take the time to do so. But I've found I can _make_ that time, more often than not, and this in itself has already improved my success rate. In the worst case scenario I have to explain to people that my camera is old fashioned, it needs a bit of time. It compels me to try to make ONE killer frame instead of blasting away filling up a CF card. Seriously, I've been having a ball with MF. Plus, less time selecting images in post!
And when the perfect frame is not in focus, I know who to blame... (the subject of course ;-) ) I mean, AF has always given me stress of not being completely sure that it does what I want. Fiddling with the "joystick" (what a eufemism btw!) to select another focus point, etc etc... Sometimes low-tech is better.
But, admittedly, in dark settings especially with the 24-70/2.8, I do need AF to help me out. And then, of course, it lets me down if I want to use one of the outer focus points.
-
I happily ignore them! ;D
seriously, I got better shots using my fingers instead of a 'dumb' computer to change the focal plane, AND (and this is crucial, obviously) when I can take the time to do so. But I've found I can _make_ that time, more often than not, and this in itself has already improved my success rate. In the worst case scenario I have to explain to people that my camera is old fashioned, it needs a bit of time. It compels me to try to make ONE killer frame instead of blasting away filling up a CF card. Seriously, I've been having a ball with MF. Plus, less time selecting images in post!
And when the perfect frame is not in focus, I know who to blame... (the subject of course ;-) ) I mean, AF has always given me stress of not being completely sure that it does what I want. Fiddling with the "joystick" (what a eufemism btw!) to select another focus point, etc etc... Sometimes low-tech is better.
But, admittedly, in dark settings especially with the 24-70/2.8, I do need AF to help me out. And then, of course, it lets me down if I want to use one of the outer focus points.
[a href=\"index.php?act=findpost&pid=221643\"][{POST_SNAPBACK}][/a]
As somebody whose closest connection to PJ or Sports photography was shooting girls, I, too, managed a career without a/f and ignored it when it became available, well before I found myself on the wrong side of retired!
Motor drives had been available for years, too, and the most I made of them on the Nikons was to save the bother of winding on - I was putting all the attention into the pic on the screen which was bloody good, I might say, no problem seeing what I was getting. I did use it once or twice in an attempt to see if it could beat my eye, but all I did was waste a helluva lot of Kodachrome - well, the films I tried it on - and it never seemed to do anything for my personal "decisive moments", which were always caught via the eye and right index finger, not a dumb machine.
As I have said before to ridicule, the camera industry is always selling us answers to problems that do not exist; perhaps as the threads on MF wish-lists here show, they should offer something else...
Rob C
-
we can continue to manually focus our old Hasselblads and F3 etc but with the kind of focusing screens that come with DSLRs, I find manual focusing to be less consistent. Since owning a 1DS MKIII and having Live View, I found manual focusing to be good again. I have been shooting with the Zeiss Distagon 25mm and also my Nikon 28mm f/1.4 on Live View and the focus has been spot on, even better than AF most times.
-
I wonder how will the 85mm Zeiss compare with Canon 85 1.2 L, considering it is going to be a cheaper option but with f1.4
-
"the camera industry is always selling us answers to problems that do not exist"
LOL - so true... a separate iso wheel on your camera body, a truly old-fashioned big, bright viewfinder? not going to happen, but video capture is!
In the meantime, examples of the 50/1.4 ZF's bokeh have considerably cooled my enthusiasm. Nasty specular highlights with hard edges. The 85/1.4 also shows some weird, weird blurring. I assume the ZE version is only different in mount?
-
"the camera industry is always selling us answers to problems that do not exist"
LOL - so true... a separate iso wheel on your camera body, a truly old-fashioned big, bright viewfinder? not going to happen, but video capture is!
In the meantime, examples of the 50/1.4 ZF's bokeh have considerably cooled my enthusiasm. Nasty specular highlights with hard edges. The 85/1.4 also shows some weird, weird blurring. I assume the ZE version is only different in mount?
[a href=\"index.php?act=findpost&pid=221739\"][{POST_SNAPBACK}][/a]
Nothing's going to be better then the 1.2. It's the only reason I'm still shootin Canon.
-
Nothing's going to be better then the 1.2. It's the only reason I'm still shootin Canon.
[a href=\"index.php?act=findpost&pid=221786\"][{POST_SNAPBACK}][/a]
I bl**dy hope there'll be something better than the 85 1.2!! I dont like the weird out of focus shapes this lens makes - at all. Instantly recognisable. But if you're happy with it, then great.