Pages: [1]   Go Down

Author Topic: Comparing Carl Zeiss ZE 28/2 and 35/2  (Read 1461 times)

NigelC

  • Sr. Member
  • ****
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 580
Comparing Carl Zeiss ZE 28/2 and 35/2
« on: May 14, 2013, 06:42:13 pm »

I need to sell one of the above to aid cashflow. Probably selling the 28 would be more rationale in terms of what I would have left and the general view seems to be that the 35 is the better lens. However I thought I would look at this again, not a rigorous test but looking at idential subjects shot in not dissimiliar conditions. I thought it was quite noticeable, something I have long suspected, that the 28 is sharper, pretty well at the same level as the 21 althogh I think the 35 is more even across the frame wide open. Of course the the 28 has quite significant purple fringing whereas the 35 does not, but LR seems to alleviate that quite a bit.
I think the 28 is absolutely underrated and I think it's the one I would prefer to keep.

Anyone else have both these lenses?
Logged

DaveCurtis

  • Sr. Member
  • ****
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 508
    • http://www.magiclight.co.nz
Re: Comparing Carl Zeiss ZE 28/2 and 35/2
« Reply #1 on: May 15, 2013, 05:15:31 am »

I had the 35/2 and went with the 35/1.4 in the end.

The 28/2 is draws very nice and is very sharp, yes it has more fringing than the newer zeiss lenses. I  would select by focal length. Which focal length suits your shooting style.

Logged

NigelC

  • Sr. Member
  • ****
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 580
Re: Comparing Carl Zeiss ZE 28/2 and 35/2
« Reply #2 on: May 15, 2013, 07:11:23 am »

I had the 35/2 and went with the 35/1.4 in the end.

The 28/2 is draws very nice and is very sharp, yes it has more fringing than the newer zeiss lenses. I  would select by focal length. Which focal length suits your shooting style.



Both but I'm more relaxed at losing 35mm as I have other decent options at wide standard e.g. GH2/20/1.7, DP2m whereas only other 28mm I have is short end of Panny 14-140 - not in same league really!
Logged

BernardLanguillier

  • Sr. Member
  • ****
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 12227
    • http://www.flickr.com/photos/bernardlanguillier/sets/
Re: Comparing Carl Zeiss ZE 28/2 and 35/2
« Reply #3 on: May 15, 2013, 07:40:02 am »

I would advise anyone looking into a 35mm lens to consider the Sigma 35mm f1.4.

Not only is it cheaper, but it is also optically superior.

Cheers,
Bernard

SangRaal

  • Full Member
  • ***
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 114
Re: Comparing Carl Zeiss ZE 28/2 and 35/2
« Reply #4 on: May 15, 2013, 01:04:27 pm »

Yup, BL has stated the obvious problem you can't get a decent price for the Zeiss 35/2 everyone who wants a Zeiss 35 wants the 1.4 and the Sigma 35/1.4 is "...optically superior..." and less expensive new than either Zeiss used as well as used Canon, Nikon, Sony 35 /1.4's. My pick out of the mid-range wide angle Zeiss's is the 25 /2. If I had to lose a lens for cash flow issues I would first try to sell the 35/2. 
Logged

DaveCurtis

  • Sr. Member
  • ****
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 508
    • http://www.magiclight.co.nz
Re: Comparing Carl Zeiss ZE 28/2 and 35/2
« Reply #5 on: May 17, 2013, 05:31:32 pm »

Yes, the Sigma is optically superior and of course has AF however after shooting both side by side I still prefer the the bokeh and rendering of the Zeiss f1.4.

Personally I will keep both lenses.

Logged
Pages: [1]   Go Up