Poll: what is your preference? 24-70 II @28mm or Zeiss 2/28 ZF

qianp2k wrote:

I don't see much noticeable difference except slight difference exposures. Personally I don't fuzz on Zeiss lenses that are super expensive. This 24-70L II now can truly withstand premium prime lenses from Canon or third parties in this range although some prime lenses are still better in bokeh and can shoot below F2.8.

All of my Zeiss lenses (save for my Contax CZ 21mm purchased long ago which I adapt to my Canons) are ZF models (native nikon mount) and there is a larger difference between them and the 24-70G than against the 24-70 II. That's why I haven't divested the Zeiss as I have my Canon primes (exceptions being the TSE-17 & 100L). Most of my Zeiss have been purchased used so pricing has been good.

The only semi-disappointing Zeiss lens is the Zeiss 2.8/25mm. I had purchased the Contax version first from KEH (or similar retailer) and was luckily able to return it because it wasn't very sharp in the corners. Several years later, I purchased the ZF version expecting better but got the same. This time though, I bought the lens used off the Fred Miranda forum and I didn't feel that asking the seller if I could return the lens was fair to him simply because I didn't like the IQ. He probably would not have accepted the return anyway.

I am contemplating the 2/25 as a replacement for the 2.8/25 to boost overall sharpness in this FL. The Dig Pic hasn't shot a test chart for the 2.8/25 ZF because it appears they have limited their testing to the ZE versions. The 2.8/25 is not available in the ZE version so I cannot say with any precision just how much better an upgrade would be.

Much cheaper Sigma 35/1.4 is sharper than Zeiss T 35/1.4for example.

http://www.the-digital-picture.com/Reviews/ISO-12233-Sample-Crops.aspx?Lens=829&Camera=453&Sample=0&FLI=0&API=6&LensComp=726&CameraComp=453&SampleComp=0&FLIComp=0&APIComp=5

See the link above. The difference in sharpness between the Sig & the 2/35mm Zeiss which is used in my comparison is minimal to non-existent in certain zones. The CA in the Zeiss image is significant even at f8 but removable for the most part. For IQ, with sharpness being a virtual dead-heat (in the Digital Pic comparison at least), I would think the tilt would go to the Zeiss for its character (color and microcontrast) and operationally to the Sigma for being AF.

-- hide signature --

http://qianp2k.zenfolio.com/