New Zeiss 35/1.4 Color Fringing Issue

[mlmusto]

Carl Zeiss presents a new moderate wide-angle lens

OBERKOCHEN, September 1, 2010 – A woman is sitting at the bar of a dimly-lit cafe. Lost in thoughts, she doesn’t notice the glass of wine the bartender places before her. From a distance, a photographer tries to capture her mood. He brings her face, which is leaning toward her phone, into focus. Everything around her becomes a blur, and the lights in the background coalesce into a wild “dance” of diffuse shapes.

This shot will only work with a fast lens with short focal length and harmonious bokeh. Carl Zeiss introduces a new lens for just such images: the Distagon T* 1,4/35.

*********************

Now. it is a nice shot but the fringing is distractive and the background bokeh is not quite as advertised. Wild dance?

--
http://mlmusto.zenfolio.com/

 

[pluton]

If you can't see it, then sell your equipment. Start with the glaring bokeh highlight next to her head and every other one in the image.

Call back when you're not a teenager any more.
--
-KB-

 

[binary_eye]

"From a distance, a photographer tries to capture her mood."

From a distance? Of what, approximately four feet? Not a particularly discreet distance as it seems to suggest.

 

[Moonwalker]

"What "character"?"

The character of a lens is defined by several aspects. The way a lens renders highlights (e.g. the very soft transitions to highlights of the 45mm f/2.8P), the transition from plane of focus to foreground / background for different objects (point light sources, branches, grass, etc. e.g. the behaviour of the 105mm f/2DC vs. the behaviour of the 85mm f/1.4D), the amount of abberrations (e.g. the beautiful longitudinal abberrations of the 105mm f/2 DC), the amount of optical distortion, the amount of sharpness available at a specific aperture, the amount of vignetting (e.g. from the AF-S 70-200mm f/2.8G VR I), the behaviour in backlight situations (e.g. the problematic 135mm f/2DC), ... to name just a few aspects. They all can have an impact on the final image - if you really use the lens in different situations and with different settings.

The image sample shown has out-of-focus point-light sources which remind me a bit of the rendering of the Nikon 28mm f/1.4D. Of course we are just looking at one image. A single websized image doesn't tell the whole story of a lens (if it tells anything at all).

"Are not offical samples always bad..."

Not necessarily. They might not be the best images, but they often are acceptable. I just have a problem with the people in this forum who start complaining about almost any new lens even though they don't own it. Or the people who have taken a couple of images in a showroom and make their judgement after those shots.

Markus

 

[Fave Photog]

Where?

If you can't see it, then sell your equipment. Start with the glaring bokeh highlight next to her head and every other one in the image.

There are many next to her head. If you are referring to the bright isolated one near her forehead, that is a colored light. It had better be colored in the image too or Zeiss will be having trouble selling this lens.

Here is the same image, with Cyan removed. You be the judge:

Notice that there are some others with solid color throughout: you should have no trouble locating the yellow and red ones.

The color fringe looks more green than cyan.

It's cyan.

That makes it pretty typical because it will switch to magenta borders on the near-field out of focus highlights.

It's not clear why you chose to comment about the coatings.

I didn't. I said with today's technology, coatings, etc. that such results should be a thing of the past...paraphrased. My concentration was on technology.

This looks more like a longitudinal chromatic aberration issue. If so that is due to design characteristics of the glass, not the coatings. It would be interesting to see how the o.o.f. highlights look at f/2 (especially compared to the Nikkor after being closed down 1/3 stop to match).

Personally, I think the bokeh is a bit busy looking. That wine glass is very distracting.

--

'He who works with his hands is a laborer. He who works with his hands and his head is a craftsman. He who works with his hands and his head and his heart is an artist.'
--Francis of Assisi--

 

[Fave Photog]

If you can't see it, then sell your equipment. Start with the glaring bokeh highlight next to her head and every other one in the image.

Call back when you're not a teenager any more.

--

'He who works with his hands is a laborer. He who works with his hands and his head is a craftsman. He who works with his hands and his head and his heart is an artist.'
--Francis of Assisi--

 

[binary_eye]

Here is the same image, with Cyan removed. You be the judge:

Is there some rule that all specular highlights must be pure white? It's completely obvious that whatever caused that highlight was cyan and that it's not a lens aberration. The photo was, after all, taken at a bar where there are likely different colored lights and reflections from bottles of colored alcohol.

 

[David Rosser]

I just don't get this thread, a f/1.4 lens is intended for taking atmospheric pictures at full aperture. I'd be quite happy with the sample if I'd taken it. The 8" wide print I have made of it (that is what photography is about isn't it?? - prints??) looks good to me, absolutely no sign of any fringes and a very obvious separation between the forehead and the green out of focus light behind.
--
Dave
http://www.rosser.pwp.blueyonder.co.uk
http://www.pbase.com/dgrosser

 

[Fave Photog]

I just have a problem with the people in this forum who start complaining about almost any new lens even though they don't own it. Or the people who have taken a couple of images in a showroom and make their judgement after those shots.

Out of all the possible images that Zeiss could tout as an example of this lens' abilities. this is the one they chose?

May I remind you that it is they who are pointing to the bokeh highlights that are full of CA as an example of how fantastic this lens is. I find that counter-productive to their goal of selling this lens and rather mind-boggling to say the least.

If you have a "problem" with people who bring such an issue to the attention of prospective buyers of this lens, then might I suggest that it is you who has the 'problem'.

Zeiss: "Ooohh, look at the wonderful bokeh produced by this new lens!"

Casual Observer: "Um, did anyone at Zeiss happen to notice the CA present in the "wonderful bokeh" you tout?"

You: "People in this forum who point out issues with new products annoy me!"

--

'He who works with his hands is a laborer. He who works with his hands and his head is a craftsman. He who works with his hands and his head and his heart is an artist.'
--Francis of Assisi--

 

[ericfordh]

I wasn't ranting. Everything I've said has been all in good fun. It sounds like you want to argue - and I'm not in the mood.

 

[pandalee]

what's wrong with the photo?

I'm more disappointed they would choose to showcase this lens with such a stupid picture than by any performance issues revealed by the picture.

 

[Moonwalker]

"Um, did anyone at Zeiss happen to notice the CA present in the "wonderful bokeh" you tout?"

Unfortunately, longitudinal chromatic abberration (as well as spherical abberration) and good bokeh are connected.

I think we can see longitudinal color aberrations in the out-of-focus circles of the Zeiss image. If you correct them, you'll most probably get worse bokeh.

The 105mm f/2DC and 135mm f/2DC also have rather strong longitudinal color aberrations but absolutely beautiful bokeh.

Markus

 

[mlmusto]

subject prob. checking her email to see if she can find a guy who isn't a pixel peeper.
--
http://mlmusto.zenfolio.com/

 

[mikmik]

the only thing we can say now about that lens is that it will be big and heavy for a 35mm prime (and also the lens cap will be PITA)

apart of that I'm always happy to see new options

 

[ericfordh]

Just my subjective opinion.

It's like the Nikon 85G, there were the sample images on Nikon's site, and then there were Cliff Mautner's samples. I prefer sample images like Cliff Mautner's. Strongly. I'll leave it at that.

 

[andrzejmakal]

I'm not impressed with all of the Cyan color fringing I see in the 'sample' image that Zeiss is using in their press release to tout the capabilities of their new 35/1.4. Yikes! What's that all about? Easily removed in PP, but still...for 1,400 Euros?

Please click on (Original) to see how truly bad it is...or go here:

http://www.zeiss.com/C1256A770030BCE0/WebViewTopNewsAllE/4E1756D4AF56756EC125779000246827?OpenDocument





--

'He who works with his hands is a laborer. He who works with his hands and his head is a craftsman. He who works with his hands and his head and his heart is an artist.'
--Francis of Assisi--

Are you serious?
--
http://www.pbase.com/andrzejmakal/galleries

 

[Johan1967]

It is obvious not easy to accept for the Nikon fanboys that there are better lenses available for Nikon than Nikon's own plastic fantastic lenses.

 

[Tmax100]

Re: Call back when you stop Trolling n/t

God your any angry person aren't you?

 

[Iusefilm]

Hi,

How does it go ??? You can not teach new tricks to an old dog!???? I think somebody got a lot of money to get on internet forums and confuse everybody about basic photographic terminology, then posted several glaringly contradictory photos to highlight some amazing lenses!

With CZ we are not only talking about culture shock, but philosophical differences in what supposed to be a great characteristic in a lens! So, pin sharp performance at wide open is not one of them, perhaps...but the over all character and colour rendering is more important! You be the judge!

I agree with you, with this pedigree we should not be seeing pre WW2 lens aberrations!

CZ made some of the best lenses in the last century, why this stuff now??? Maybe nobody remembers the "real" CZ line for Contax! so they can get away with things as old as lens designs with the "new" kids on the block. Nothing like re-inventing the stone wheel!

I was convinced by better technical people than me, that what we are seeing in these "new" lenses are the results of trade offs made in improving mechanical designs in AF lenses. But what is more important in a lens??? a few ounces, AF or a very predictable draw???? We will always be confronted by the image, not by the mechanical wizardry of the outer shell!

My only negative comment about this whole thing! What age are these manufacturers live in????

The lens was announced only hours ago, but we already "hate it"! And nobody actually used the lens yet.
--
Tony K

 

[Fave Photog]

Re: Call back when you stop Trolling n/t

God your any angry person aren't you?

Because I refuse to get sucked into a pointless, merry-go-round argument with a troll, but, rather, choose to cut short the troll's attempt, that makes me an "angry person"?

You can choose to discuss the topic at hand...the CA present in the Zeiss example...or you can throw your lot in with the small handful of trolls who have tried to infect this thread.

I do not tolerate trolls, nor do I suffer fools well. Do not mistake rational, mature behavior for anger. Some of us like to discuss the merits of lenses, cameras and photography in general, and then some of us prefer to just make noise for the sake of being heard...quite similar to the baby who first discovers how to make blubbering, bubble sounds with his lips.

With which camp do you wish to become associated?
--

'He who works with his hands is a laborer. He who works with his hands and his head is a craftsman. He who works with his hands and his head and his heart is an artist.'
--Francis of Assisi--