interesting...

[Shane Kelly]

http://www.definitionmagazine.com/journal/2011/6/2/re-housed-zeiss-lenses-baby-primes.html

 

[David Mullen ASC]

How are these different than the CP2's?

 

[Christopher Barrett]

The 50, 85 and new 35 are all t/1.4's in the ZF line but are 2.1's in the CP2 line. These would also be smaller/lighter than CP2's if you're into that.. I was thinking of getting just those 3 as an emergency low-light kit.

 

[paul engstrom]

Apparently the 100mm is also 1.4 -- at least I think that's what its labeled in the picture of the link...

 

[Clint Lealos]

You think they will cost... more or less than CP2s?

 

[G Lap]

The 50, 85 and new 35 are all t/1.4's in the ZF line but are 2.1's in the CP2 line. These would also be smaller/lighter than CP2's if you're into that.. I was thinking of getting just those 3 as an emergency low-light kit.

F/1.4 in ZF.

 

[Alexander Ibrahim]

How are these different than the CP2's?

They appear to be rehoused ZF.2 SLR primes. So I expect they have the same iris as the SLR lenses.

Overall they appear to be more like the Duclos conversion than the Compact primes.

Also, the write-up doesn't mention PL mounts, just EOS/EF , F, E and MTF mounts. Having PL mounts would be sort of a big deal to me.

The 50, 85 and new 35 are all t/1.4's in the ZF line but are 2.1's in the CP2 line. These would also be smaller/lighter than CP2's if you're into that.. I was thinking of getting just those 3 as an emergency low-light kit.

f/1.4 or t/1.5

Apparently the 100mm is also 1.4 -- at least I think that's what its labeled in the picture of the link...

The 100mm Zeiss lens is f/2. Suppose this fellow could have changed the aperture assembly, but it seems more likely to me that the picture was doctored incorrectly by mistake.

You think they will cost... more or less than CP2s?

I expect less than the Compact Prime, much less possibly. Probably just over the price range of the converted Duclos lenses.

I should note that I read what you guys read ... I just read the Zeiss literature on the CP's very closely recently.

 

[Stephen Williams]

I was thinking of getting just those 3 as an emergency low-light kit.

I would just get 2 of them, 85mm & 100mm are very close together. I suspect only the 35mm & 85mm are really 1.4

 

[Shane Kelly]

How are these different than the CP2's?

Not as good. Probably a lot cheaper. No pl mout option But maybe a good interim set for someone. I have a set of cp.2 and a set of zf1's, each has it's advantages. I thought that I would sell the zf's when the cp's came in but decided to hold on to them for smaller jobs. Also, they are great stills lenses.

 

[Steve Wake]

The 100mm Zeiss lens is f/2. Suppose this fellow could have changed the aperture assembly, but it seems more likely to me that the picture was doctored incorrectly by mistake.

Definitely doctored incorrectly. In the picture there are two digits for focal length on the front ring. Blurry, but looks like 85 or 35. Sloppy - makes you wonder.

The other issue with the 100 could be how much it extends. Focus distance infinity to 1m it extends 10mm, but from 1m to minimum .44m (it's a "macro" lens and has FF magnification of 1:2 at .44m) it extends another 40mm.

 

[Daniel Soderberg]

Apparently the 100mm is also 1.4 -- at least I think that's what its labeled in the picture of the link...

Haha, if you look closely at the top of the 100mm it also says it's a distagon (a design for wide angle Zeiss lenses only). It seems he copy and pasted the line for the 35mm. I think it reads 1,4/35. The 100mm is F/2.0.