alejandrokeller Posted March 9, 2006 Share Posted March 9, 2006 Any comments about the claim of Zeiss saying that this lens has reached the theoretical limit for sharpness? </p><p> The link: <a href="http://www.zeiss.de/c12567a8003b58b9/Contents-Frame/30536193ed0c97a7c125711c006fc2c2" >Zeiss News 24</a>. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
runkel Posted March 9, 2006 Share Posted March 9, 2006 <i><blockquote>"Let's just say that this test is relevant to everyday photography the same way the top speed of a Formula 1 race car relates to everyday personal transportation."</i></blockquote> Observations like this reinforce my impression of Zeiss as an honest broker. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
stuart_richardson Posted March 9, 2006 Share Posted March 9, 2006 Well there is no way around it, the 25/2.8 is a superb lens...nobody needs a better lens at this focal length. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Bill Blackwell Images Posted March 9, 2006 Share Posted March 9, 2006 I would agree with Stuart. I tested mine just recently against my 21mm asph and 28mm Summicron. It holds up very well against both (the 28mm 'cron was only marginally better at 2.8). “When you come to a fork in the road, take it ...” – Yogi Berra Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Alex_Es Posted March 9, 2006 Share Posted March 9, 2006 I have it. I love it. Go for it. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
alejandrokeller Posted March 10, 2006 Author Share Posted March 10, 2006 I will Alex, very soon Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Alex_Es Posted March 10, 2006 Share Posted March 10, 2006 Good. You'll be happy. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
harvey_edelstein1 Posted March 10, 2006 Share Posted March 10, 2006 Please post some pictures. I am interested in this lens but I am waiting to see if Zeiss makes an SLR version for Nikon ZF mount. In theory the RF should be sharper but I am sure in practical terms the lines/mm should be so high that it won't matter. I am thinking that the slr version as a package may be less expensive and easier to get accurate to focus then guessing the distance and composing with an external finder. Also, I use an Leica MR meter so swapping out the meter to free up the hot shoe to mount the VF would be a negative. What would you suggest is the better way to go, Rf VF + uncoupled lens or coupled slr lens viewed ttl? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
fred_c1 Posted March 10, 2006 Share Posted March 10, 2006 No Biogon can clear the mirror of an SLR. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
bill_marshall1 Posted March 10, 2006 Share Posted March 10, 2006 Yes, Fred, a Zeiss 25 for SLR will be a Distagon. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
harvey_edelstein1 Posted March 10, 2006 Share Posted March 10, 2006 Of course the Distagon is the slr version of the Biogon but some of the Distagons are just as good according to Photodo tests as Biogons. Of course common wisdom as I pointed out in my prior post should be superior for an Rf true wide angle design not a retrofocus design. Probably Zeiss will design a comparable quality Distagon for the ZF nikon mount. In the case we are talking about whether a true wide angle lens used lets say used in photographing landscapes mounted on a tripod would be better served by ttl framming of an slr or using a non coupled shoe mounted VF which sells for $350 additional dollars. Even if we were using the cameras handheld as long as the shutter speed is above 1/60 sec. the SLR's advantage in having accurate focus, no parallex and accurate framing should yeild very consistant in focus and properly frammed exposures even in close-ups. Its too bad the ZI rangefinder can't couple 25mm to the RF. The F2.8 is the reason the lens is so expensive and the shallower dof of wide open exposures makes accurate focus important. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
eliot_rosen1 Posted March 10, 2006 Share Posted March 10, 2006 "Its too bad the ZI rangefinder can't couple 25mm to the RF." ? I thought this was a rangefinder coupled lens. Where did you get the idea that it is not coupled? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
fred_c1 Posted March 10, 2006 Share Posted March 10, 2006 <Of course the Distagon is the slr version of the Biogon> The same way an orange is the citrus version of the apple. <Of course common wisdom as I pointed out in my prior post should be superior for an Rf true wide angle design not a retrofocus design.> I wonder why Leica re-computed the wideangles into ASPH retrofocus lenses. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
joseph_wang3 Posted March 11, 2006 Share Posted March 11, 2006 Zeiss Distagons are as impressive as their Biogons, in particular, most of them are able to focus in much shorter distance than the rangefinder. Here is an example of Contax Zeiss Distagon 28mm f2.0. It can focus down to 24cm. In this short distance you can get subjects with very interesting perspectives. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
joseph_wang3 Posted March 11, 2006 Share Posted March 11, 2006 try again Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
alejandrokeller Posted March 11, 2006 Author Share Posted March 11, 2006 Joseph, you have to write a caption in order for your images to appear as such Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
joseph_wang3 Posted March 11, 2006 Share Posted March 11, 2006 I am not sure what the problem is. I have also put the same photo on this site with no problem. http://www.contaxinfo.com/cgi-bin/discus/board-auth.cgi?file=/14022/399738.html Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
alejandrokeller Posted March 12, 2006 Author Share Posted March 12, 2006 Alas, for members only Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Bill Blackwell Images Posted March 12, 2006 Share Posted March 12, 2006 25mm Zeiss Biogon ZM T*<div></div> “When you come to a fork in the road, take it ...” – Yogi Berra Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Bill Blackwell Images Posted March 12, 2006 Share Posted March 12, 2006 One more...<div></div> “When you come to a fork in the road, take it ...” – Yogi Berra Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
keirst Posted March 12, 2006 Share Posted March 12, 2006 The Zeiss 25mm/2.8 Biogon ZM <i> <b>is</b> rangefinder coupled </i> down to 0.7M on most M mount cameras, but decouples under 0.7M to 0.5M (similar to the Leica Super Angulon 21mm/ 3.4). In this uncoupled close-up range you have to guess or measure with an external ruler. When shooting close-ups it would be wise to stop down and bracket focussing and camera position (or use an SLR 24 or 25mm instead, since accuracy is much easier).<br><br> The Zeiss 15mm/2.8 Distagon ZM is the new lens that is not rangefinder coupled, all of the other ZM lenses are coupled. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
icuneko Posted March 12, 2006 Share Posted March 12, 2006 The Zeiss site states: "The result was a whopping 400 lp/mm on film, recorded with the Biogon 25 at f/4 in the center of the image. " What they don't tell is that off-center and in the corners it's only 67.4316 lp/mm. LOL! Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
joseph_wang3 Posted March 13, 2006 Share Posted March 13, 2006 Here is a message for S. Linke. I am not sure where you get the number. To me, ZM 25mm Biogon is breathtakingly sharp even at the corners. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
keirst Posted March 13, 2006 Share Posted March 13, 2006 Surely S. Linke, you are joking, as indicated by the decimal point. The MTF curve Zeiss measured for this lens indicates it loses little imaging quality at the corners at f/5.6. In this regard it's superior to any previous wide angle design ever made for 35mm. At f/4 the corners may not be quite even with the center performance, but they could not be as bad as you joke. The lens is has has high resolution and contrast to the corners in the enlargements I've made. I usually use f/5.6. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
icuneko Posted March 13, 2006 Share Posted March 13, 2006 OK, OK ... it's 69.4316 lp/mm and not 67.4316 lp/mm. Sheez, some guys can't take a joke... Or is it a case of my lp/mm is bigger than your lp/mm? LOL! Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Create an account or sign in to comment
You need to be a member in order to leave a comment
Create an account
Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!
Register a new accountSign in
Already have an account? Sign in here.
Sign In Now