Reading mode: Light Dark

Added Lenses to lineup

  • Thread starter Thread starter cgarrard
  • Start date Start date
Go to last post
Hi Carl,

I guess the main question I'd have is if one owns the macro, is there a real reason to pick up the 50/1.7. Off hand, it seem the only reasons would be:
  • low light performance: but if the 1.7 is too soft below f2.8, then there's not much difference between the two, right?
  • focus speed: is there a real difference between the two here?
  • general IQ: I'll assume the macro will not give up much in terms of sharpness, but how about color, bokeh, etc.
Thanks,
-Al
--
http://www.flickr.com/photos/alwang
 
I thought everyone had one. I took a couple of family shots with it the other day and was shocked at how sharp they were - just perfect.

Please play around with it and share your opinion. I think it's just a great little piece of cheap glass for low light.
--
AEH
http://aehass.zenfolio.com/
Question: What do you do all week?
Answer: Mon to Fri. Nothing, Sat & Sun I rest!
 
ajff said:
My Zeiss lenses have been idle since migrating to Sony F717-828-R1
etc about 5-6 yrs ago.

I vowed never to return to changing lenses again.. but your
experience with Zeiss mated to EOS bodies really interests me.

I am tempted to go buy a Canon body just to have access to my lenses
should the need arise.

Do you have the adapters with focus-confirmation? Do they work? I have one with focus confirmation. It works ok but I think it indicates too large of an area in focus. Of course I guess that is actually the body.
Click to expand...
ajff said:
Do some bodies.sensors work "better" with the Zeiss? Well the 28/2.8 is a bit soft in the extreme corners on the 5D but works great on my cropped 30D. For the most part that's problem the concern if you use FF.

Any recomendations or hints (or drawbacks) would be much appreciated.
Click to expand...
If you can work with the manual focus then I'd say a lot of these lenses are better that Canon's. I do find the most the of the lenses don't meter perfectly and require a little exposure compensation. No big deal, just check you histogram.
ajff said:
Thanks,

A.J.
(equipment in profile)
Click to expand...
--
Long live the HMS Beagle
Critiques always welcome!
 
They would rather rip everyone off.

--
Direct your eye right inward, and you'll find a thousand
regions in your mind Yet undiscovered. Travel them, and
be Expert in home-cosmography.
-H.D. Thoreau
 
now you have to get the Big Beercan and what some call the Little Beercan (KM 34-70/4)...

I can also recommend the KM 20mm 2.8. I haven't had a lot of time behind this one yet; but from what I have seen I think its a good one. Esp if there is an A900 in your future ;)

I look forward to your Beercan posts, as I know it is probably my most used and favorite lens in my line up...

Good luck and enjoy -

Hapster
 
Which one is the big beercan?

According to someone who posted on our site, there is only one, but I know of at least two, the 75-300 and the 70-210, is that correct?

Yeah it looks fun, and its in stellar condition, can't wait to slap it on the A200 and have a go at it.

Carl
--
http://www.AlphaMountWorld.com

Get out there and paint some light.
 
The BBC is a very heavy tank of a lens...75-300 4.5 - 5.6 with a focus limit switch. Weights about 2 lbs or so...

I just posted some images with it over at AMW...there is only one.

The Beecan is the 70-210/4

If its a good copy - you will love it!

Hapster
 
Chad Marek said:
I am absolutely no fan of the 28mm. I found every copy I owned to be
unacceptably soft for a prime.
Click to expand...
You have high standards!

Seriously, I think it was Photodo that rated it pretty good.. less than most primes but more than most zooms, as I recall. So perhaps it is "soft for a prime", but it seems sharp enough to me (at least stopped down -- I don't recall being disappointed wide-open though). I just wonder if the criticisms of this lens are relative to other lenses or if there are copies that are worse than others?

I think I mostly like this lens as a lightweight all-purpose lens. I don't use it as much anymore after getting the 17-50/2.8, but my main gripe against the 28mm 2.8 is just the inconvenience of being a prime.

--
Gary W.
 
of the work out your arms will get toting that rig around.

The A700+Grip+Big Beercan (or even just the Beercan) = a very heavy (read sturdy) setup...

Good luck - I got both of mine from B&H - very happy with them as a vendor...

Hapster
 
OV Splint? not sure what that means...

Sorry about the "KM" just a bad habit I guess; figured at this point they are almost interchangeable and I have seen most everyone else refer to them that way since I began researching here about the lenses...

So far, what I have shot with the 35-70/4 has looked pretty good...odd range on the cropped sensor but maybe someday I will move up to whatever FF is the current fancy...

I cant really see myself outgrowing the A700 anytime soon though...

Thanks - Hapster
 
Guess the OV Split reference doesn't go far from Western NY or Canada.

Seems they don't make them anymore. It was a small 6.5oz or so bottle of Old Vienna (OV). Used to be brewed by Carling O'Keefe, but I think Molson bought them.

Anyway...I just bought a new to me 35-70/4 as my old one the aperature seized up.

D
--
ださかわ

 
Gottcha...

Kind of like "pony" bottles of Rolling Rock?

Thanks for clearing that up...

Enjoy the new (to you) lens...

Hapster
 
You must log in or register to reply here.

Keyboard shortcuts

f
Forum
p
Previous
w
Next unread
m
My threads
Mobile site
About
Editorial content
Cameras & Lenses
Community
All content, design, and layout are Copyright © 1998–2025 Digital Photography Review All Rights Reserved.
Reproduction in whole or part in any form or medium without specific written permission is prohibited.
When you use DPReview links to buy products, the site may earn a commission.
©GPS Media - Guides, Products, Services.
Back
Top