••Zeiss versus Zeiss••

Barry_Green said:
Here's one comparison review:
http://photocinenews.com/2010/10/22/nat-geo-shooter-ben-horton-compares-canon-glass-to-zeiss-glass/
Click to expand...

Ben Horton might be a Nat Geo shooter, but his comparison between Canon and Zeiss glass totally sucks. He shouldn't be comparing a zoom with a prime lens, and the 85mm test seems kind of sloppy to me. To my eye it looks like the Canon lenses have intentionally softer contrast than the Zeiss lenses do, but this has nothing to do with the actual sharpness of the lens.

A much better and interactive test of three Zeiss lenses ( 21, 50, 85 ) that you can compare to a range of Canon lenses can be found at Bryan Carnathan's "The Digital Picture" website.

Digital SLR and Lens Image Quality Comparison - ISO 12233 Chart 100% Crops

...Comparing lenses with Bryan Carnathan's test, the Canon lenses appear to be quite comparable to the Zeiss with sharpness ( sometimes better, sometimes worse ), though I'm not crazy about the Chromatic Abberation that some of the lenses display at wide aperatures.
 
Just got to shoot with a set of CP.2s the past 3 weeks. As an AC, they were great to work with. Never got stiff even in temperatures well below freezing (it was a cold shoot). The lenses still tended to breathe a good bit, and sharpness varried lens to lens (from sharp to really sharp), but the contrast was great, there was no CA that I could see, and they were very smooth for pulling focus and iris. I'd definitely use them again--as long as I didn't have to pay for them.
 
RyanDeFranco said:
B) You shoot nothing but out of focus trees in winter and you absolutely have to have "pleasing" bokeh--as you can see above, the 7-blade ZF are just fine for most situations.
Click to expand...

Zeiss ZF lenses have 9 blades. I believe the Nikons are 7 and you can see a huge difference in the bokeh between the Nikon and the Zeiss ZF in that video.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top