Hot answers tagged

20

There is a clear difference in intent and design philosophy. The Canon 50 f/1.2L is a bokeh machine, offering not only shallower depth of field (due to the ultra wide f/1.2 aperture) but also a smoother background blur on account of the decision to leave a certain amount of spherical aberration in the design. It's a lens with character and a distinct look, ...


17

It appears to be a Zeiss Ikon Ikoflex I (850/16). Zeiss Ikon Ikoflex I (850/16), by Alf Sigaro. Creative Commons BY-NC-ND 2.0 The key details that seem to match are: rectangular silver trim around the front flash sync terminal at bottom corner wide silver name plate surrounded by screws shallow miter/beveled focusing screen cover Note that the your photo ...


16

They're both Cine lenses mounted on Canon 1DCs. The 1DC is a variant of Canon's 1DX flagship DSLR, which can shoot 4K video using the central APS-H region of the 35mm sensor. The one on the left is an Angenieux Optimo 12x, a very high end 24-290mm T2.8 cine superzoom lens: (source: gulfcamera.com) The one on the right is a Zeiss master series T1.3 prime ...


10

This is the first, "zebra" version, optically the same design as Pancolar 2.0/50. The aperture control switch ("tumbler") should have 2 positions, "A" is counter-clockwise when looking at the front element, "M" is clockwise when looking at the front element - not 3 positions. The rear part of the lens should have an actuator pin that, when pressed, makes the ...


9

This is a "process" lens used to make copies on high contrast film for reproduction in newspapers, magazines, and books. The lens mounted on a square wood board with hole for the lens. The lens mounted with wood screws. On some, the board was metal, usually aluminum. If an aluminum mount was used it was also called a lens board. The lens mounted to metal ...


8

That combo should be fine as suggested above, however the actual deciding factor for all lenses is not the WEIGHT of the lens, but the TORQUE applied to the mount. Torque is the actual pulling/twisting force, which is (basically) weight X distance. (also the lens's centre of gravity has a large effect on this calculation, it is NOT simply length of lens X ...


7

The vast majority of Zeiss lenses are indeed made in Japan. Of currently listed Zeiss (non-cine) camera lenses, only the ZM Distagon 15mm f2.8 is Made in Germany (also in that line, the ZM Planar 85mm f2 was too made in Germany). Even the super-high end Otus 55mm is Made in Japan (Zeiss confirmed this via their Flickr account in a recent post). The fact ...


7

The cine lenses are different optically in that they are designed to minimise focus breathing, that is small changes in focal length when focussing, however they are very closely related to still photography designs.


7

It was a physical coupling for early built-in exposure meters. It hooked into a coupling pin on the camera body to tell the exposure meter what f-number the lens was set at. It looked something like this: Nikon F2 Photomic, 1971, from mir.com Here's the user's guide, look for "Lens Aperture Coupling". As for why Zeiss still has it on their lenses? I ...


5

The lens still weighs less than the camera. Barely. This is significant because the mount flange is designed to handle at least that much weight so that the camera will not place too much stress on the connection when a much heavier lens is being supported by a tripod or monopod and the camera body is hanging unsupported from the lens.


4

Wikipedia lists Canon's (outer) throat mount diameter as 54mm vs. Nikon's at 44mm. This means, at the mount, there is an extra 31.4mm of circumference on a Canon lens vs the same Nikon lens (assuming the lens is throat-diameter-limited) that has to be made. Depending on how Zeiss chooses to incorporate this extra girth in the packaging of the lens, the ...


4

A small part of the differences can be accounted for by the shorter flange distance for Canon. For the same sensor to rear lens element distance the EF mount version must be 2.5mm longer than the Nikon version at the back of the lens. The Canon mount diameter is also 54mm across, compared to 44mm for Nikon, so the lens may need to be larger in circumference....


3

Those two good lenses will handle the resolution, once stopped down to an optimal aperture. This is around F/5.6 on the Nikkor and F/4 on the Zeiss. Do test it out before going to your shoot. 2 stop down from wide-open is a rule-of-thumb, many quality lenses need less. The most important for your close up shots though is the magnification as you will lose ...


3

Not a comparative answer, but Nikon has their current-generation PC-E lenses on their "recommended" list for the D800 in the Technical Solutions document. According to Nikon, the subset of lenses in this list offer maximum resolution of all the lenses they make. In other words, they are a top-notch choice. (To be honest, though, I also wonder if this list ...


3

I have the ZE (Canon mount) version of this exact lens, and my friend has the Nikon ZF.2 version, so am in a good position to advise. It has both pro's and con's, and they must be considered carefully as this is no small outlay of change to purchase! Firstly, this lens is amazingly sharp when you get it right ... I say this because I've used it to create ...


3

With a digital SLR there are several advantages your film rangefinder doesn't share. Combining Live View with the depth of field preview button (or any other setting that stops the lens down while viewing the scene via Live View) allows for precise manual focusing, usually with the subject magnified 5x or 10x on the camera's rear LCD. Another advantage is ...


3

If it's a simple ring adapter, it will either have a glass element in it to act as a short teleconverter, so you can focus to infinity, or you won't be able to focus to infinity (ok for macro and some portrait work)—that's why the eBay listing you found is for a macro adapter, and the description mentions you can't focus to infinity with it. You can probably ...


3

I want to expand my lens collection with something more suited for portraiture. A portrait is essentially any photo with a person as the primary subject. There is no particular lens suitable for portraits. However I get the impression your problem is not going to be solved by lens purchases. Why ? Currently, my longest lens is SEL55F18Z, which is just ...


3

As a rule-of-thumb, the sweet spot for maximum sharpness is about 2 f-stops stopped down from the lens's maximum. At wide-open, a lens is usually slightly degraded because the peripheral figure (shape of the curve) is quite steep -- thus image-forming rays originating there are more likely to go astray. As you stop down, the figure is more gentle. However, ...


3

I do not have the same lens you do, but I have a different 35/2.8 lens that appears to exhibit similar behavior when light is shining into the lens. If you can get the arcs to come and go depending on the position of a lamp shining into the lens, then the problem is likely flare. Here is a sample photo taken with a lamp shining toward the camera from the ...


2

My understanding is that micro-contrast is the ability of the lens to differentiate between areas that are very slightly different in color or luminosity. Sharpness is how well resolved the boundaries between color areas are. The two are closely related, however micro-contrast is a particular optical property while sharpness is the result of a combination ...


2

Some of the Zeiss lenses are that much better than the comparable offerings from Canon, Nikon, or other third party manufacturers such as Sigma. This is not one of those lenses. It is not as sharp, has about the same amount of CA, distortion, and vignettes about the same as the Sigma and a tad less than the Canon when mounted on a full frame body. The only ...


2

It works the same way the sigma and canon works on a crop camera. From the looks of it in different reviews, it is the name you'll be paying for. Look at this comparison: http://phoblographer.wpengine.com/2011/11/14/quick-comparison-canon-50mm-f1-8-sigma-50mm-f1-4-and-zeiss-50mm-f1-4/ I'd get the Sigma.


2

This isn't a definative answer, but a speculation and something for you to check that's too long for a comment. I'd be surprised if the lever had a visible effect. Try turning the focus and f-stop rings at the different positions and see if there is a difference in feel or motion range. I have a pre-war Carl Zeiss Jena 50mm lens that has a separate ring ...


2

Here is an example of the Sony Zeiss 35mm f/2.8 on the A7ʀ at f/5.6: And here's a crop of the extreme bottom left corner (right click -> "view image to see it at 100%"): Sharpness in the corners is very impressive for a 36 megapixel sensor. Chromatic aberration is well handled by lightroom, I've not had any problems with it I don't have the ...


2

By now, you've likely discovered that both lenses are capable of providing adequate image resolution on the D810. Only technique and execution are going to hold one back in this area. One thing not mentioned by any other answer is how to test lens vs camera resolution without resorting to specialized tests or equipment (such as imatest). Zeiss has an ...


2

No, it is pretty much the other way around... can the camera sensor resolve the lens detail? Digital cameras have always had anti-aliasing filters because they simply cannot resolve the finest detail from the lens. They suffer moire if the sampling is not AT LEAST double the detail level (Nyquist), which it has not been... so the cameras have required AA ...


2

My Short Answer Despite the merits of Zeiss lenses, you should probably get the Sony 28mm f/2 FE. The cost is better ($449 2017 MSRP versus $1599 2017 MSRP), the weight is lighter (7.1oz / 200g versus 1.39lbs / 630g), and the adjacent Sony lens lineup is broader (Sony E-Mount G Series vs Zeiss for Sony E-Mount / Zeiss E-Mount Lenses). Note that the Zeiss ...


Only top voted, non community-wiki answers of a minimum length are eligible