Need advice on replacing a Carl-Zeiss 85mm F1.4 T*Planar ZK

[jacques c pelletier]

<p>Hi everyone,<br>

Perhaps this is not the right thread for this, but I am considering selling my Zeiss 85mm F1.4 T*Planar ZK (Pentax K-mount) and replace it with a Limited lens, maybe. I don't think I have used it more than 20 minutes altogether and of course it is in pristine condition. Paid a lot of $$ for it too! Works great on the K10D and K20D and probably on all older models ... I have not tried that.<br>

I am looking for a lens which would be great for portraits and maybe for a couple of other situations (landscape?) and which has AF and the possibility to manually fine-focus, such as with the DA* lenses. I already have a DA*16-50. Of course, the wanted lens should be as good as the Zeiss.<br>

Any advice/recommendation would be greatly appreciated.<br>

JP</p>

[rose_duclos]

<p>Hi Jacques - There's a wealth of great glass out there. Are you thinking to get away from the 85'ish focal range? </p>

<p>There's the Pentax 77mm that's worth considering. And, how about the Voigtlander 90mm? (I think Arkadii's a believer in that one...) I was also just quickly checking out Gandy's site - and saw that they now have a KA mount for the VC 58mm f1.4 Nokton. (can't go wrong with good glass for less than $400 price tag).</p>

<p> </p>

[noah_maier]

<p>It sounds like you want a top quality prime, but I was confused by your statement "and maybe a couple of other situations (landscape?)". For now I'll recommend the versitile DA* 50-135mm, the best zoom lens you can buy for a Pentax.</p>

[rose_duclos]

<p>Goodness - why would he want a zoom for? Primes are so much better. :) </p>

<p>And, some of those VC prices ... I'm really being tempted by that 58mm Nokton... But, with having 3 - 55mm f1.8 (m42) glass, and the pentax 50mm f1.4 - Do I really need another lens in that focal range? :)</p>

<p>Jacques, have you tried any of the old m42 glass yet? :) Some of those old taks are good fun to play with.</p>

<p> </p>

[andrewg_ny]

<p>Jacques, it's YOUR thread...how can it not be right? To my knowledge, the Zeiss lenses are excellent so I can only assume you're hoping to replace it with something of similar high quality but more user-friendly.</p>

<p>Unfortunately the Voightlander 58 and 90 offerings that Rose mentioned (as good as they are reputed to be) fail your AF requirements. Jacques, when you say "manually fine-focus", are you referring to "quick-shift" focusing, where you can touch up focus manually without disengaging AF?</p>

<p>The lenses closed to the Zeiss would probably be the <a href="http://photozone.de/pentax/127-pentax-smc-da-70mm-f24-limited-review--test-report">DA70/2.4 Limited</a> and <a href="http://photozone.de/pentax/128-pentax-smc-fa-77mm-f18-limited-review--test-report">FA77/1.8 Limited</a> . Which of these is "better" is a frequently-debated ad-nauseum topic in the Pentax community but here' my summary.</p>

<p>DA70 pros: cheaper, smaller, quick-shift focusing (FA77 requires that you disengage AF), more even performance with better borders, probably sharper than FA77 at wider apertures than f/4. Probably slightly less prone to purple-fringing.</p>

<p>FA77 pros: faster max aperture, slightly higher peak center performance at medium apertures, film-compatible (and for future larger sensor if you're concerned with this) including aperture ring. Slightly better in terms of lateral CA.</p>

<p>Obviously the focal length is different as well, and some say the DA70 would actually test to somewhat less than 70mm...however this is a designed-for-digital lens and the shorter focal length is a very digital-friendly 100-105mm equiv. Both offer a very high level of build quality.</p>

<p>Which offers more mystical 3-D image rendering properties is open to debate. I went with the DA70/2.4 but some can't say no to the larger max aperture (and other pros) of the FA77.</p>

[jacques c pelletier]

<p>Thanks to all for the much appreciated quick replies ... I will be back later on to answer the responses .... got to go to work.<br>

Cheers!<br>

JP</p>

[stemked]

<p>I think I agree the 77mm f1.8 limited in autofocus is your best option. A cheap-o lens that wouldn't be an improvement on what you have but would earn you cash from the sale of your current lens is a 85mm f2 Juipter (manual focus) lens.</p>

[mountainvisions]

<p>That 90mm Voigt was my find Rose!!!</p>

<p>Just sort of happened upon it after seeing Mike E talk about his 125mm Voigt. A little research later and I found that the 90mm Voigt was an amazing lens if you could see past the f/3.5 (of course it is sharp at 3.5). My guess is has that been a 2.8 it would have sold for far more than I paid for it, which was far less than a lens that good should ever sell for. Build, optics, consistency, could be the best all around tele lens I have ever used.</p>

<p>Since I'm not a fast lens user (nothing against them, even like em sometimes, but don't like carrying them) the 3.5 didn't bother me a bit so I went with it. There was a small amount of buyers remorse because despite the lens being very compact it is not all that light. The brass build makes this sucker hefty, but it is built to last a lifetime, looks nice too.</p>

<p>Anyway, for the price, you could sell the Zeiss and buy the Voigt + the 70mm Limited (which gives you AF, and touch up focus) and probably a 21mm Limited as well. Or get the 70mm and the 15mm. Or the Voigt and the 15mm.</p>

<p>Regardless of which way you go, you can get 2-3 good lenses for the sale of the Zeiss.</p>

<p>Personally, if it was me. I'd get the 15mm which is a true wide angle limited, and the 90mm Voigtlander which is just a stellar lens.</p>

[rogerdaltx]

<p>If youre trying to match the Zeiss 85 f/1.4, then I'd agree with Doug that the FA 77 limited is your best option. I currently have both the DA 70 and FA 77 limited and of the two I prefer the 77, but as been mentioned several others have tried both lenses and came to the opposite conclusion. </p>

<p>From a manual focus perspectice it's larger focus ring and slightly better dampening make it easier to manual focus. Center sharpness is a bit better with the 77 over the 70. I'm mostly a portrait guy these days I love the rendering of the 77 for head / bust portraits. I am at a bit of a loss as to the comment about landscapes as a mid-tele is usually not thought of as a landscape lens. But either of these would be very capable of tight landscape shots. Also as been mentioned the 77 does have a slight bit more tendances for purple fringing over the DA 70. But I almost always use it in controlled studio lights, so that is not an issues for me and the fringing is by far the exception not the norm. Unless you're shooting into bright backlight highlights I doubt it would ever be a problem. Plus the 77 just feels better, like a more substancial optic over the DA70. Coming from a Zeiss MF lens <strong>EVERY </strong> Af lens is goning to come up short in feel and fine tuning for MF, but I the FA77 is closer than any lens I can thing of. .</p>

[mountainvisions]

<p>Roger,</p>

<p>70-200mm is an excellent landscape lens. People get very caught up in "i need a wide angle for landscapes" but the reality is very few landscape shots really "need" a wide angle.</p>

<p>I'd say 70% of my landscapes are "normal" range shots (28-70) with the other 30% split between long tele and wide angle. Personally, I'd rather have a 90mm in the bag than a 10mm.</p>

<p>The 70/77/90mm all fit nicely into the landscape niche, although I would agree that these aren't ideal primary lenses.</p>

 

[michael_kuhne]

<p>Both the 70mm and 77mm Limiteds are fine lenses. Build and quality are on a level with Zeiss, though with remarkably compact design in both cases, for their speed and focal length. But the 70mm LTD is in reality 65mm, while the 77mm LTD gives you the full 77mm. So, it would be closest to your Zeiss, as it is also with its f/1.8 speed. It also features an aperture ring, so it will work fine on any Pentax 35mm film model. Feel and grip for MF are excellent.</p>

<p>Neither lens is prone to CA's, but the 77mm LTD as tested by Photozone demonstrated possible purple fringing under extreme bright backlit conditions- at wide aperture, but problem resolved otherwise. Since it is a stop faster than the 70mm LTD, that lens is incapable of facing the same circumstance. This fringing is found so often with Pentax lenses, it seems there may be a sensor involvement as well. The K10D was used in their testing. Their test also revealed significantly less vignetting for the 77mm LTD. I have the 77mm LTD and can tell you it performs very well at f/1.8, and excellent beyond.</p>

<p>The 21mm, 43mm and 77mm LTDs are a great trio!! Wonderful for light traveling. Those with say the DA* 50-135mm and a TC would make one heck of a kit!</p>

[stemked]

God point Justin. I recall John Shaw used to say his best landscape focal length was 100mm (film). I have landscapes using lenses up to 500mm!

[miserere_mei]

<p>I'm with Andrew.</p>

[michael_kuhne]

<p>Again, depends on what kind of landscape. The 21mm LTD is very fine, as a moderate wide angle. Both wide and tele can be useful. Of course, it depends what perspective you're looking for. The 77mm LTD is useful for many things. Portrait, candid (with its small unobtrusive size), various other people shots, even some nature, and low light use.</p>

<p>Another fast prime I really like is a moderate wide Sigma 24mm f/1.8 EX DG. Smaller and better performing than its 20mm cousin. It is well-built with a very good MF feel, but not costly. Here is a shot I recently posted in another thread, wide open, hand held at 1/15 sec. on the K100DS.</p>

<p> </p><div></div>

[young_y]

<p>About a year ago, I came very close to buying the Zeiss in ebay - with the ebay 10% discount and all. Instead, a friend of mine ended up buying one. I got to borrow it for a day or so since he used my discount. :) From that experience, I may be able to add a few "impressions" about the Zeiss and the 77mm in comparison.</p>

<p>First, both lenses are susceptible to purple fringing in a similar way. Although I think the Zeiss is a little worse in PF, you won't see much improvement with the 77mm. So, the difference in purple fringing would be marginal a factor for me. </p>

<p>The 77mm significantly smaller and lighter than the Zeiss, which, I think, would be a factor if you wanted to take it along a trail and take it to the street. </p>

<p>Though the 77mm is slowest in AF speed among the non-macro limited (on the other hand, it is the best one among the limited in terms of manual feel and performance), it is adequate in overall AF performance. I often take it out in the street and have had little problem with its AF. However, I would be a liar if I said I were completely happy with the AF speed. </p>

<p>The Zeiss is known to be a little sharper than the 77mm, but the difference is not meaningful to me as they both are critically sharp. </p>

<p>A more subjective matter. My "impression" is, the 77mm is slightly contrastier and deeper in color on my K10. When I took indoor portraits under normal lighting, the Zeiss rendering was a bit clearer and lighter (which I prefer for portraits). The difference may not be meaningful with digital but could be a factor on film. Except that, I didn't notice much difference in portraits between the two lenses. Then again, I used the Zeiss for a day or so... </p>

<p>Hope you find what you are looking for. </p>

[arkadiy_chernov]

<p>Hey Justin, and Jaques...<br>

No offense, but I'm definitely the official priest of the temple of Voigtlander now...I even got a guy overseas selling those VL for MUCH LESS than Gandy. Just PM me..and I'll give you guys the email.<br>

But, yah..Justin got the credit of getting me into VL. So...the 90mm is really an awesome lens, I've been using it for portraits, close ups, and even macro with extension tubes. Plus..all the pix that you guys see on the POW are all VL shots. I just suck sometimes for lacking ideas and technique =)<br>

IMHO, the whole SL series from the 2002....meaning 90, 125, 180...and I think there was a 75 Heliar...are all very close in quality to the Zeisses. If not, read the reviews on photozone.</p>

 

[mountainvisions]

<p>Hey Ark,</p>

<p>I'm glad you are enjoying those lenses, and I don't mind passing the torch to you. The stuff you have shot with them has been good in my book.</p>

<p>The 20mm is out of the picture for me, but I'd love the 58mm at some point. And the 180 typically sells for almost nothing. What is funny is my 180mm 2.8 on Nikon is a great lens, so I think people are skipping it because it's not a 200mm?</p>

<p>Mike E points out how good the 125mm macro is, but it's WAY too pricey for me.</p>

<p> </p>

[arkadiy_chernov]

<p>Justin:<br>

I recently purchased and sold the 180mm, since it wasnt something that I would use, but I did so I could some money for the 20mm. It's quite pricey in US, but I'll get it from this Tai guy for 2/3 of the price, which is super convinient. I'm looking that one because my only wide angle is the kit zoom that came with the DL long time ago. I only use it to adjust my diopter, lolol. I heard good things about the 58mm, but the 40mm Ultron is the real deal. <br>

Anyway, when not using my VL, I use my 50mm lens from my K1000, which IMHO, is pretty awesome compared to modern digital lenses. <br>

My next big investments, are the Gemini 200 bowens with a bunch of modifiers...so expect some new approach to my shootin =)</p>

[jacques c pelletier]

 

<p>Rose:</p>

 

<p>Yes, I did get a look at the 77mm ... interesting pick indeed. Actually, it was one of my "former" choices before I get the Zeiss, which I cannot seem to control at all.<br>

Thank you for the feedback.<br>

JP</p>

[jacques c pelletier]

<p>Noah:<br>

I am looking for a quality lens alright, but not in the zoom palette. I have read good reviews on the 50-135 and of course that would be a good choice but I am looking for a fixed focal.<br>

Thanks for the reply, appreciated.<br>

JP</p>

[jacques c pelletier]

<p>Rose said<em>: Goodness - why would he want a zoom for? Primes are so much better. :)</em><br>

Yes, the fixed focal for portrait is what I am looking for. The Zeiss actually had a lot going for it, and it is a superb quality ... but I can't get used to it.<br>

JP</p>

[jacques c pelletier]

<p>Andrew said: "<em>Jacques, it's YOUR thread...how can it not be right? To my knowledge, the Zeiss lenses are excellent so I can only assume you're hoping to replace it with something of similar high quality but more user-friendly."</em><br>

You got it right on the button, Andrew. Indeed. I want a AF capable lens with "Quick-Shift", more or less like my DA*16-50, but in a fixed focal length.<br>

Hard choice between the 77mm Ltd and the 70mm Ltd, both being almost equal in focal length and, from the reviews up here, quite similar in rendering.<br>

All in all, what I have to do is to get one or the other, test it then sell the Zeiss if I find that more user-friendly. Probably will do that.<br>

Hard to believe that I have such difficulty getting used to a manual lens of that quality when I think about the "old days" when all my lenses were manual and that I didn't have much trouble with them. Perhaps it is because of all of those AF lenses I now own and I have lost the "touch". God only knows!<br>

Thanks for the reply.<br>

JP</p>

[jacques c pelletier]

<p>.... late .... gotta go sleep a bit ... back tomorrow to answer to all of the left-out replies.<br>

Great thanks to all who took the time to help with my dilemma.<br>

Cheers!<br>

JP</p>

[orly_andico]

<p>Jacques, if you really want Quick-Shift AF then it's the 70/2.4 for you.. the 77/1.8 doesn't have Quick-Shift.</p>

[rose_duclos]

<p>Arkadii, this talk of the VC 180 is perking up my interest. How big is it??? reason I'm asking is I have the Zeiss Jena 180 which I bought from our friend Hin - but the CZJ is a real BEAST of a lens - shaped like a football but a whole lot heavier. </p>

<p>It would make a good 'focal' length to use with the tall ships coming to Boston this summer - but, with it's weight - I can't imagine carrying it with me, nor setting up a tripod.</p>

<p>I find it rather disappointing that I have a LOT of really nice m42 glass, but much of the longer end stuff is NOT hand-holdable. So for events - like those soon to visit tall ships - I'm going to be limited to using my Sigma 70-300 APO zoom. :( (I like the lens - but, zooms really are not my first choice for pictures.)</p>

<p> </p>