LENS TEST: Zeiss Super Speed (MK3) VS Zeiss ZF SLR's (Shot on RED)

Nice, Ryan. Very nice. I think this belongs in the 35mm Adapter Forum.

So, you feel that the Zeiss ZF Nikon mount lenses are a tad bit sharper AND breathe less than MK3's? That's crazy!
 
Impressive testing Ryan and yes, surprising results. I can tell you that the Nikons wouldn't have performed nearly as well. In my Nikon set, love the longer lenses but the wide lenses are a disappointment so far.

Dan
 
Kholi said:
Nice, Ryan. Very nice. I think this belongs in the 35mm Adapter Forum.

So, you feel that the Zeiss ZF Nikon mount lenses are a tad bit sharper AND breathe less than MK3's? That's crazy!
Click to expand...

Yeah, I wasn't entirely sure which forum to put this in, as the test does not use a 35mm adapter, but it does focus on the differences between lenses ...

I was very surprised by the results as well- as I had thought that the MK3's would have blown the SLR out of the water. Seems like the people over at Zeiss have done a great job on their SLR lenses!
 
puredrifting said:
Impressive testing Ryan and yes, surprising results. I can tell you that the Nikons wouldn't have performed nearly as well. In my Nikon set, love the longer lenses but the wide lenses are a disappointment so far.

Dan
Click to expand...

Yeah, the Nikon glass that I have used in the past has varied a lot. Sometimes I have come across good stuff, and other time, not so much. But Zeiss sure has made a solid product. Now if the lenses would just rotate the correct way ...... or if there would be a follow focus that could turn them backwards .....
 
I used to be all for Nikons, I'm starting to feel the inadequacy when concerning constantly moving images. I've been thinking of going C/Y Zeiss lenses, do you have any experience with those and if so, how would you say they compare to the ZFs?

I was CERTAIN that the MK3's would've knocked it out of the park, but this is really good news. Sigh. Looks like thousands are about to be dropped into some ZF glass.
 
Ted Spencer said:
In terms of focus pulling and a too-short throw? Or breathing?
Click to expand...

In terms of sharpness. Even the sharpest Nikons aren't comparing with Standard Speed PLs, not sure about the infamous zooms but I know the primes just aren't cutting it anymore. Even Zeiss C/Y glass seems to stomp on Nikon quality.

Ryan helped make up my mind on getting myself a set of Zeiss C/Ys at this moment.
 
Kholi said:
In terms of sharpness. Even the sharpest Nikons aren't comparing with Standard Speed PLs, not sure about the infamous zooms but I know the primes just aren't cutting it anymore. Even Zeiss C/Y glass seems to stomp on Nikon quality.

Ryan helped make up my mind on getting myself a set of Zeiss C/Ys at this moment.
Click to expand...

I've got three lenses right now. A new Zeiss 50mm 1.4 ZF, a new Nikon 80-200 ED and a used Nikon 17-35 ED. Those Nikons are easily a match for the Zeiss's sharpness, at least in the informal tests I've run so far. As many others have attested, those ED Nikon Zooms are crazy sharp. Beautiful color rendition too. Not knocking the Zeiss though - it's great, and should be the go-to lens in my little collection for low light.

My Redrock FF arrives Friday, so I'll have a chance to see what I'm geting myself into short-throw wise with the Nikons. Hopefully they won't be too unmanageable.
 
Hence me saying with the exception of the infamous ED zooms. I know first hand that the zooms are incredibly sharp. Although another user said that the Zeiss C/Y 35/1.4 was sharper than his 28-70 ED zoom at the same focal length.
 
I am thinking of the Nikon zooms possibly, simply because they are more useful than the Zeiss primes for my still photography. The 80-200 ED is steal for what it is, it's essentially a stripped down 70-200 VR for 70& of the price.

Dan
 
The 80-200 is so popular that it doesn't go for that much less used than new, so I bought a new one. $992 at B&H including NYC tax. Used ones on eBay in top condition are usually somewhere north of $800.
 
That's the only catch for me. I have a Nikon D70S that I use and these lenses won't attach to it. =\ At least the Yashica won't anyway. No adapter.

But I think I do more work with my HVX than the Still so.
 
Kholi said:
That's the only catch for me. I have a Nikon D70S that I use and these lenses won't attach to it. =\ At least the Yashica won't anyway. No adapter.

But I think I do more work with my HVX than the Still so.
Click to expand...

Kholi:

All of the lenses we are discussing are usable on the D70S, no problem. Not all of them will autofocus (the Zeiss) but all are Nikon F mount, which is the mount your D70S has.

Dan
 
puredrifting said:
Kholi:

All of the lenses we are discussing are usable on the D70S, no problem. Not all of them will autofocus (the Zeiss) but all are Nikon F mount, which is the mount your D70S has.

Dan
Click to expand...

Have you seen a Yashica adapter for Nikon? I haven't yet, at least not one that gives you infinity I believe.

Iknow the ZF's and Nikon Zooms are fine, was speaking abotu Contax Zeiss lenses.
 
Tests like these make me think that a lot of the extra money one pays for for zeiss lenses (as opposed to nikons/canons) must go into quality control.

davide
 
That's actually probably true, Davide. Doesn't seem like bad samples float around often. Paying for Peace Of Mind.
 
Kholi said:
I used to be all for Nikons, I'm starting to feel the inadequacy when concerning constantly moving images. I've been thinking of going C/Y Zeiss lenses, do you have any experience with those and if so, how would you say they compare to the ZFs?

I was CERTAIN that the MK3's would've knocked it out of the park, but this is really good news. Sigh. Looks like thousands are about to be dropped into some ZF glass.
Click to expand...

I wish I did have some experience with the C/Y lenses, but I do not. I have heard good things about them- and they supposedly rotate the "correct" direction too- so no need to figure out how to get the ZF lenses to rotate correctly. :)
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top