CONTAX CLUB Carl Zeiss 討論區

哼！

_________________
I LOVE ALFA ROMEO

_________________
Please visit my photo gallery and your comments are always welcome!
I will add photos to it from time to time. Thank you!
http://www.flickr.com/people/yualbert

原汁原味.

_________________
Best Regards,

Terry Shum
香港互聯網康泰時攝影會幹事

right and really taste great!

_________________
Please visit my photo gallery and your comments are always welcome!
I will add photos to it from time to time. Thank you!
http://www.flickr.com/people/yualbert

Have you compared with ZM Lenses?

_________________
Best Regards,

Terry Shum
香港互聯網康泰時攝影會幹事

I am also cracking my head to choose between 28 and 25. One main consideration is that 28 does not need an external finder which is good for faster photography. However the MTF of 25 seems superior to that of the 28. Also in this forum seems most of the people are talking about the 25 and not much on the 28.

_________________
Rolleiflex 3003, SL2000F - SONY Alpha7R 1/2/4. A1
Carl Zeiss C/Y T* - QBM HFT - ZM T* - ZF T* - Batis T* - Otus T* - Loxia T*
Sony. Zeiss 16-35/4 T* G200600 GM100400 GM600
http://www.fuwen.net

If you are using ZI and not an eyeglass wearer, the whole viewfinder of ZI is almost the same as 25 frameline.

Thanks! I am not using ZI but is using Rollei 35RF/Cosina R2 so I believe my finder is at 28mm max.

_________________
Rolleiflex 3003, SL2000F - SONY Alpha7R 1/2/4. A1
Carl Zeiss C/Y T* - QBM HFT - ZM T* - ZF T* - Batis T* - Otus T* - Loxia T*
Sony. Zeiss 16-35/4 T* G200600 GM100400 GM600
http://www.fuwen.net

I think Rollei 35RF is 40/50/80 and R2 is 35/50/75/90. You need an external viewfinder anyway for either 25 or 28.

From MTF graph, user's comments and comment from Hasselblad's Product Manager, 25mm is the better lens.

28mm 之後的鏡, 如不用 external viewfinder 是可以靠估的, 但在構圖取景時, 右下角會被鏡頭及遮光罩阻擋了一大截, 很不方便。

Finally got the 28/2.8. Have tested the lens and is quite happy with it. Apparently my 35RF finder is good enough for picture framing, no need for an external finder.

However, take human at close range the pulling effect at the corners quite apparent. Hard to guage this on a range finder. For this matter I still prefer the SLR can judge image distorsion at corners better.

_________________
Rolleiflex 3003, SL2000F - SONY Alpha7R 1/2/4. A1
Carl Zeiss C/Y T* - QBM HFT - ZM T* - ZF T* - Batis T* - Otus T* - Loxia T*
Sony. Zeiss 16-35/4 T* G200600 GM100400 GM600
http://www.fuwen.net

有時間POST 啲相上嚟睇吓丫.....

我好想睇吓佢係咪真係咁3D!

_________________
I LOVE ALFA ROMEO

Sorry, I do not have any proper scanner at the moment so cannot post any thing good enough. I can scan from photo prints but I think that way does not do justice to the lens.

Anyway I find that with zeiss on film (or other brand for that matter) the photo to me always appear more 3D than digital.

_________________
Rolleiflex 3003, SL2000F - SONY Alpha7R 1/2/4. A1
Carl Zeiss C/Y T* - QBM HFT - ZM T* - ZF T* - Batis T* - Otus T* - Loxia T*
Sony. Zeiss 16-35/4 T* G200600 GM100400 GM600
http://www.fuwen.net

zeiss glass always allow more lights to be refracted. this is good for film but may not be as good for digital as it results in white / data-overflow which means lost of details.

that is why i think C/Y + EOS maybe a better choice than ZF + Nikon as the EOS CCD is not as light receptive as Nikon.

_________________
Contax : RTS, RTSII(50Y), RTSIII, Aria D, Aria(70Y), N1, ND, T3D(70Y), G2D
Nikon : FM3A, FM3AB
Leica : M9, X1
Fuji : X100
OM : EP2