85mm 1.4 Nikkor vs. Zeiss

D

DELTA_Rotary

Active member
I can find the manual focus Nikkor for around $500-550 used on ebay but the zeiss still hold their value and are closer to a $1000. Is the zeiss glass worth almost double?
 
It depends on who you ask. Some will say yes, some will say no. It comes down to what you can afford. If at all possible I would suggest testing both yourself.

I personally would outright say yes the Zeiss glass is worth the price. This is only an opinion though as I haven't seen too many comprehensive comparisons when it comes to this application. By this application I mean 35mm Adapters versus still imagery.
 
The thing about optics pricing is that the cost isn't linear. The Zeiss may be twice as expensive as the Nikon but that doesn't mean it'll be twice as good, maybe 10% better. I guess the question is is that 10% vital to what you're doing. Again, I'm making this assumption based on generalities about lenses not a specific knowledge of either the Nikon 85 1.4 or Zeiss 85 1.4.

Obviously, like Kholi said, the only way to figure it out is to test. Luckily there are places that rent lenses for cheap so testing shouldn't be too hard.

davide
 
I seem to remember that the only tests I saw somewhere on the web concluded that it was a wash. I think they preferred the Nikons but if so it wasn't by much and maybe it was the other way around.

Lenny Levy
 
I was looking for some Zeiss lenses at a camera shop today and I talked with one of the guys that worked there. But he told me that the Nikon lenses are good enought so it's not worth to get the Zeiss. But he said the Zeiss are really worth it when it comes to the Zeiss Hasselblad lenses. that's where you start to see the diffrence...
Well he was more of a Leica fan so it's only his opinion on that but that's one feedback.
Hope that helps.

btw, does anyone know about Leica lens?
 
I assume you are comparing the Nikon Zeiss lenses, not the Zeiss PL mount lenses- those are in a different league altogether.
 
Actually, Ryan Walters did a test between Zeiss SLR and PL mount lenses and the leagues weren't that different at all. In fact, he found out that the Zeiss SLR lenses were a bit sharper than SuperSpeed Zeiss PL mount Primes, more-so wide open.

http://www.reduser.net/forum/showthread.php?t=13760

Enjoy

Made me a lot happier with purchasing Contax Zeiss lenses.
 
I can't say about the optical performance compared to the nikon, which is probably great as well. But from handling both, the build on the zeiss and smooth, long focus pull is a step above the nikon... as it should be with the higher price tag.

Dennis, I look forward to what your tests on the DSC lab charts show regarding the ZF's performance. We've been shooting with them for awhile and Aram claims a noticeable difference between the Nikon set he used to shoot with and the Zeiss set we currently use.
 
I'm with you, Arrik. The first time I really saw the difference was on a friends short. He had used Nikons for part of it then another shooter stepped in with some Contax Zeiss and I immediately saw the difference.

The added benefits of C/Y (price included) makes em winners dude.
 
ZF>Nikon when it comes to flare, sharpness, CA, Smoother Barrel, and overall build quality. That is of course referring to the ZF's ability to perform all of those traits very well rather than just good at some aspects and not as well at others. Nikons are a bargain and still deliver great results, but ZF lenses can sometimes help with other aspects of client work, like ability to impress (aka make your equipment look more profession, rather than the same AI lens that they've got on their still camera at home)
 
Kholi,
Thanks for the link to Ryan's tests. a real eye opener.

Hey pardon my lack of knowledge, but what is a C/TY mount

Lenny Levy
 
Last edited:
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top