yualbert 寫:
Raimondi 寫:
modernized version ... that does not say much.
actually i feel that what distinguishes contax C/Y and Z series the most is the glasses. They look quite different to me.
As I said in other post, "IMHO, the ZE lenses look "ugly" than C/Y lenses and ZF. Perhaps it is because they have no aperture rings. The finishing and color the the lens barrels are just not that good looking. Well, I know this is pretty subjective.
I am also afraid that the quality of the build/structure of the lenses are not that good. Perhaps it is because I (or probably others) had bad experience with ZM lens."
以小弟僅有的 Carl Zeiss 鏡頭比較...........ZF (或 ZE/ZK/ZS) 的操控感與對焦順滑度皆為最好
撇開個人口味之客觀因素.........以光學性能計小弟敢說 $8000 以下的 C/Y 鏡皆比不上 ZF 等的表現........
另外小弟亦早於年多前逐步出清手頭上的 C/Y 鏡..........現時亦只有 15/3.5, 35/1.4, 85/1.2, 100/4, 70-210/3.5 等數支
Whilst agreeing with wah's analysis, I will go further and say that none of the listed CY lenses can offer such optical performance as comparable to modern designs by Zeiss itself. The ZM 15/2.8 is a good example.
登入
註冊
問答集
搜尋
