Should I buy nikon or canon Zeiss lenses

P

Perry Wilson

Well-known member
Zeiss is now making glass for canon labeled ZE and I am gonna buy some for sure. But I am looking to invest in glass I can use for ever and the new Canon based ZE lenses don't have a manual Iris ring... so should I purchase nikon based ZF lenses for the manual Iris? I am getting an S35 scarlet when they come out... I know Jannard just said that the S35 can control almost all manufactures electronic lenses does this include the Canon based Zeiss ZE lenses? I am also gonna be keeping my 7D forever and I use it daily don't know if that plays into your helping me seeing as how it would be convenient to have electronic control over my lenses on the 7D...
 
Get the Nikon mount. With Canon, you'll be stuck with their cameras or mount forever. With Nikon, you'll have the freedom to use cameras from Nikon, Sony, Panasonic, and Canon, as well as RED.
 
No, you can adapt Nikon-mount lenses to Sony, Panasonic, Canon, and possibly others, because they all have shorter flange focal distances than Nikon. Canon EF-mount lenses almost cannot adapt to any other system, except (Micro) Four Thirds, because of its short flange focal distance and electronic iris.

BTW, there's no such thing as a "NIKKOR mount." The Nikon mount is properly called the F-mount.
 
That's the reason I went with the Nikon mount as well, even though I have no Nikon equipment and don't foresee doing so... the Nikon mount is easily adaptable to just about everything, the Canon mount not so much.
 
It's not an easy choice, actually. The reason I would vote for ZE (Canon) is strictly because LENS ADAPTERS SUCK. To purchase an adapter that will give you PERFECT flange distance measurements and minimal-to-no-play is either going to be non-existant or EXTREMELY expensive when purchasing in bulk.

Haven't begun the Zeiss thread yet, I have ZE's and ZF's right now (using both on a job) and the ZE's are hands down much more easier and practical for this application. The Iris ring REALLY hasn't made any difference what-so-ever since you can do electronic half-stops etc. It takes a simple twist of the back dial to go from 1.4 to 1.8 to 2.0.

However, what HAS been a pain in the butt's fiddling with CANON to NIKON Adapters. The play is grotesque and I'm quite certain that the infinity is pretty damned off.

Now, wanting to future proof is awesome, and I agree with it. But, what will you do when you need to adapt to another camera that's not Canon? Spend MORE money on grabbing those expensive hyper-accurate adapters ANYWAY. It begins to add up.

I'm all for Manual Iris, manual EVERYTHING but actually using the same copies of really great lenses in two different mounts-- one Nikon and one Canon-- attaching the Canon Zeiss lens makes this whole DSLR thing seem much more legit. Feels like it's supposed to be there, versus the wiggling attachment of a Zeiss to Canon adaptation.
 
First off, I use both ZF's (28/2.0 and 100/2.0) and C/Y (35-70/3.4) Zeisses on both my 5DMkII and 7D, along with a Nikon 80-200/2.8. On all the lenses I use Cameraquest adapters, and while not cheap, they fit perfectly and infinity is spot-on. No issues whatsoever, even with the heavy Nikon zoom. The reason I chose the Nikon F mount is that I also shoot with a Nikon D700, so all of my lenses see double or actually triple duty! Nothing wrong with the ZE lenses, and if all you ever will shoot is an EOS camera, then I am sure that you will not be disappointed going that route. However, I am not about to give up my Nikon, and this way I get more bang for my lens buck.
 
Kholi said:
Yeah, Cameraquest is great... at 175.00 a piece.
Click to expand...

Yup ... you're right. Actually, with shipping/handling/tax it is closer to $200.00 But, somehow I just couldn't bring myself to slap a $25.00 e-bay special on my gear that just set me back ... Oh, let's see ... $2,699.00 for the 5DMkII body and what was it ... another $1,000.00 or so for 28/2.0 and what was it ... another $1,400.00 or so for the 100/2?

Peace of mind ... priceless! (especially in front of clients during a paid gig)
 
Barry_Green said:
But surely you need one per body, not one per lens, right? Doesn't seem that bad...
Click to expand...

The way the Cameraquest adapters attach to the lens, you have to push in a small pin to remove the adapter from the lens, and it is virtually impossible to do it with the adapter attached to the body of the camera. So, to answer your question Barry, basically you do need one per lens, (if you want the ability to quickly pop lenses on and off), or just be prepared to mount your one adapter first to the lens and then to the body. It only takes 20 or 30 seconds to remove the adapter from the body, and then the lens, and then to mount it on a new lens. Not rocket science.
 
Kholi said:
It's not an easy choice, actually. The reason I would vote for ZE (Canon) is strictly because LENS ADAPTERS SUCK. To purchase an adapter that will give you PERFECT flange distance measurements and minimal-to-no-play is either going to be non-existant or EXTREMELY expensive when purchasing in bulk.

Haven't begun the Zeiss thread yet, I have ZE's and ZF's right now (using both on a job) and the ZE's are hands down much more easier and practical for this application. The Iris ring REALLY hasn't made any difference what-so-ever since you can do electronic half-stops etc. It takes a simple twist of the back dial to go from 1.4 to 1.8 to 2.0.

However, what HAS been a pain in the butt's fiddling with CANON to NIKON Adapters. The play is grotesque and I'm quite certain that the infinity is pretty damned off.

Now, wanting to future proof is awesome, and I agree with it. But, what will you do when you need to adapt to another camera that's not Canon? Spend MORE money on grabbing those expensive hyper-accurate adapters ANYWAY. It begins to add up.

I'm all for Manual Iris, manual EVERYTHING but actually using the same copies of really great lenses in two different mounts-- one Nikon and one Canon-- attaching the Canon Zeiss lens makes this whole DSLR thing seem much more legit. Feels like it's supposed to be there, versus the wiggling attachment of a Zeiss to Canon adaptation.
Click to expand...

What I am wondering though is will my next cam be able to control the ZE lenses... I am getting either the 2/3 or S35 prob S35 and Jannard just said that the camera CAN control canon electronic glass... but does that mean that that it can controll the Iris on the Zeiss based Canon ZE.... Kholi I am a bit confused is there a manual Iris control on the ZE glass or not. I am not a fan of adapters I used to use a Redrock micro and hated adapting lenses to it... so I would like to stay away from them if at all possible. All I want to know is will my Red be able to control the Zeiss ZE glass since jannard said that it could control electronic canon glass. Not a fan of nikon so yes I will always be a nikon guy. Unless some day I buy a Hasselblad then I am sticking with canon and RED...
 
Perry Wilson said:
I am getting either the 2/3 or S35 prob S35 and Jannard just said that the camera CAN control canon electronic glass...
Click to expand...
The 2/3" Scarlet has its own special, smaller mount and would require much smaller, shorter (in focal length) lenses. RED will be offering a series of mini-RED Primes just for 2/3". I wouldn't even think about migrating still photo lenses to a 2/3" camera, not to mention that you won't be able to do it.

but does that mean that that it can controll the Iris on the Zeiss based Canon ZE....
Click to expand...
I don't know what else it would mean. Iris control is much more useful and easier to implement than auto-focus support. Without it, there would be no reason for RED to claim to offer compatible electronic mounts.

Kholi I am a bit confused is there a manual Iris control on the ZE glass or not.
Click to expand...
There isn't.

I am not a fan of adapters I used to use a Redrock micro and hated adapting lenses to it... so I would like to stay away from them if at all possible. All I want to know is will my Red be able to control the Zeiss ZE glass since jannard said that it could control electronic canon glass. Not a fan of nikon so yes I will always be a nikon guy. Unless some day I buy a Hasselblad then I am sticking with canon and RED...
Click to expand...
Then the choice is really clear, IMO. ZE for you, instead of ZF.
 
ydgmdlu said:
No, peace of mind always has a price. In your case, it was nearly $200 per lens. :)
Click to expand...

Cheap ... at double the price! And, when you consider the camera, lenses and adapters were all paid for after the second gig (and then some) ... I sleep very well indeed ... as me and my gear, " ... just keep on a truckin ..."
 
ydgmdlu said:
The 2/3" Scarlet has its own special, smaller mount and would require much smaller, shorter (in focal length) lenses. RED will be offering a series of mini-RED Primes just for 2/3". I wouldn't even think about migrating still photo lenses to a 2/3" camera, not to mention that you won't be able to do it.
Click to expand...


Actually Jim / Jarred have said red's canon and nikon electronic control mounts will also work on the 2/3 interchangeable so you can use nikon G DX, Canon EF if you want to and have full electronic control.
(Point 4 of this LINK)

But every lens will be tele ...
 
Last edited:
J Davis said:
Actually Jim / Jarred have said red's canon and nikon electronic control mounts will also work on the 2/3 interchangeable so you can use nikon G DX, Canon EF if you want to and have full electronic control.
(Point 4 of this LINK)
Click to expand...
Thanks for the correction.

But every lens will be tele ...
Click to expand...

Yes, very telephoto, in most cases.
 
ftbt said:
The way the Cameraquest adapters attach to the lens, you have to push in a small pin to remove the adapter from the lens, and it is virtually impossible to do it with the adapter attached to the body of the camera. So, to answer your question Barry, basically you do need one per lens, (if you want the ability to quickly pop lenses on and off), or just be prepared to mount your one adapter first to the lens and then to the body. It only takes 20 or 30 seconds to remove the adapter from the body, and then the lens, and then to mount it on a new lens. Not rocket science.
Click to expand...



What he said.

One per lens is pretty much a must. That means one for my 21, 28, 35, 50, 85 and soon the 100. Not to mention when any others come to market.

I'd say that it's alright to just get three and bounce them around but yesterday alone between two cameras we used every single focal length, including my cy 180.

Cameraquest has the right idea, at 200 a pop though.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top