Anyone have the Zeiss 2/135 APO Sonnar yet?

Started Feb 27, 2013 | Discussions thread
joejack951 Senior Member • Posts: 2,682
Re: Zeiss 135 F2 vs Nikon 135 F2 DC

Mssimo wrote:

joejack951 wrote:

Mssimo wrote:

Nikon really needs to replace the 135mm. As far as the 200 F2G, this is the same level as the Zeiss 135mm but as far as price, makes the zeiss seem like a killer deal.

The price of the Zeiss 135/2 couldn't be more irrelevant to that of the Nikon 200/2 VR. That's like trying to compare the Nikon 50/1.8 to the Zeiss 135/2.

Your math sucks. It would be closer to comparing a 91.125mm to the 135 or about 32.5% longer. So for 32.5% you would pay about 2.74 times the money. If you got the Zeiss, you would have a extra $3698 to spend. With that money you could buy a sigma 120-300mm F2.8.

The 50/1.8 and 135/2 are both roughly f/2 lenses, just the 135/2 and 200/2 are. Regardless of what quality you were comparing, to say the Zeiss is a "killer deal" at $2100 based on the price of the 200/2VR makes no sense. The 50/1.8 is also about f/2 (actually slightly faster) and has pretty amazing performance. It's also only $200, leaving you $1900 to buy a 28/1.8, 85/1.8, and a 16/2.8 fisheye! Or, using your logic, you've just paid 10 times the money for less than 2.5 times the focal length. Does that make the 50/1.8 a "killer deal"? Of course not because you can't compare those lenses.

Also, i know its a different lens. You missed the whole point, we were talking about color correction not the length of the lens.

See above. You've missed my point, or you weren't making much of a point before. I can't recall someone wanting to buy the Nikon 200/2VR solely because of "color correction".

 joejack951's gear list:joejack951's gear list
Nikon Coolpix AW100 Nikon Coolpix P7700 Nikon D300S Nikon D3S Nikon AF-S DX Nikkor 17-55mm f/2.8G ED-IF +5 more
Post (hide subjects) Posted by
Keyboard shortcuts:
FForum PPrevious NNext WNext unread UUpvote SSubscribe RReply QQuote BBookmark MMy threads
Color scheme? Blue / Yellow