- This topic is empty.
New Zeiss 21mm prime
-
http://www.dpreview.com/news/0809/08091901carl_zeiss_distagon_t_21mm.asp
The original version of this lens is very sought after, often fetching between £1000-£2000 on Ebay. For any landscapers looking for a great wide-angle prime, this could be the one!
nfl-fan wrote:
Price looks stingy… but I’d love to give it a try for sure.
Yeah it is pretty expensive, but probably worth saving for. If you took care of it, I’m sure it would last for a long long time.
Already saving for the 5D Mark II… well… I’m going to start next week when I get paid.
nfl-fan wrote:
Already saving for the 5D Mark II… well… I’m going to start next week when I get paid.
It looks like an impressive camera, and if I can get hold of the funds I will probably get one. I would also need a quality wide angle lens, so these two would be a great combination. Probably a bit too expensive though.
Which lens would you be using at the wide end with it?
I have about 6c credit on my Visa… I’d say it’ll be about 6 months before I raise the funds for a Mark II…
(Cue: Thorsten… 6 months to sort out the bugs)
I have a 16-35 L… so that should get me over the landscaping lens bit… I hope.
If you do get one… be sure and let me know.
J
I doubt very much it will be any sharper than Nikon and Canons current primes or even some of the newer zooms to be honest around this focal length.
Remember seeing some reviews a year or two ago of Zeiss lenses on Nikon cameras and there was not much difference in quality (but a big difference in price). From what i remember these lenses are not make my Zeiss they are actually made in Japan by Cosina. If max detail and sharpness is what you want for large prints of landscapes photographs move up formats…
M
nfl-fan wrote:
I have a 16-35 L… so that should get me over the landscaping lens bit… I hope.
If you do get one… be sure and let me know.
To be honest, this is probably what I will go for as well. Even if I had the money for the Zeiss, it would be hard to justify the extra expense when the 16-35 is such a great lens.
Martin – The advantage of the Zeiss would be the flare resistance, lack of CA, and more importantly, corner sharpness. The Canon wide angle primes are supposedly a little weak in all three areas.
SteveD wrote:
Martin – The advantage of the Zeiss would be the flare resistance, lack of CA, and more importantly, corner sharpness. The Canon wide angle primes are supposedly a little weak in all three areas.
Corner sharpness would be the exact same as the Nikons I reckon especially stopped down… anyhow had a look around the web for you (such a nice guy aint I) for the article i read a while back when they first came out for the Nikons but could not find it. Only one i could find is one from Kenrockwell, I dont really like him but have a read.. Its a comparison of a good few 50mm lenses compared against each other including a Zeiss… better get back to work
http://www.kenrockwell.com/nikon/50-comparison/index.htm#indexHave you considered the new Nikon 14-24, I know people are using this lens on Canon’s body’s together with the adapting ring, that seems like an awesome lens, however I don’t think you can put filter on it! but the optics :!:
You must be logged in to reply to this topic.
