Zeiss CP.2 and Sony PL Primes Comparison

[Mark K.]

Hi Guys,

We recently put together a comparison test between the Zeiss CP.2s and the Sony PL Primes that shipped with the F3. You can see the full review at our shiny new blog 'The Forge': http://www.dreamsmiths.com.au/blog/

If you're in the market for affordable PL glass, it might be worth a look-see.

 

[Patrick Wieland]

Pretty noticeable difference in the Zeiss and Sony.

 

[Nick Morrison]

Is it just me, or did the CP2's look much sharper/cleaner at T2 on the 50 and 85? I wasn't expecting the Sony's to look that washed out wide open.

But I guess that's it. The Sony's are WIDE OPEN at T2, whereas the Zeiss 50 and 85 are actually F1.4 designs (even if the 50 is "limited" I believe to f2, but the design is still a 1.4). Which means the Zeiss are really starting to show some MUSCLE at f2, whereas the Sony's are wide open and straining their designs to the max.

But even stopped down, the Sony's didn't really show that much punch. That (intentional) flare must have really been doing a number on them. I wonder what they would have looked like without that window blasting in the back.

Still, I'm kind of a fan of Zeiss glass, so I'm glad they didn't embarrass.

 

[Jacek Zakowicz]

From my experience in projection Sonys are sharper than CPs wide open...

 

[Mark K.]

Is it just me, or did the CP2's look much sharper/cleaner at T2 on the 50 and 85? I wasn't expecting the Sony's to look that washed out wide open.

We saw a clear difference with the 50mm, but the 85mm looked incredibly close to the Zeiss to my eyes.

But even stopped down, the Sony's didn't really show that much punch. That (intentional) flare must have really been doing a number on them. I wonder what they would have looked like without that window blasting in the back.

Although the Sonys definitely lose out for contrast wide-open, they still seem to hold quite a lot of detail, there's certainly sharpness there - even under all that veiling flare.

 

[Alan Peterson]

The Zeiss 85mm showed some fairly prominent CA while the Sony seemed to have it pretty well under control. I take it these were the original Sony cine primes released alongside the F3 and not the new ones?

 

[Mark K.]

The Zeiss 85mm showed some fairly prominent CA while the Sony seemed to have it pretty well under control. I take it these were the original Sony cine primes released alongside the F3 and not the new ones?

Yep, these are the primes that were released alongside the F3. We'll try and get our greedy little mitts on the new Sonys for evaluation when they're released.

CA looks like a dead heat between the 85mm lenses wide-open to my eyes. The fringing appears to have basically the same width and intensity, and it remains on par when stopped down to T/4 (at which point it's barely visible).

 

[Alan Peterson]

I'm seeing some yellow fringing along the vertical part of the window frame that's much more pronounced on the Zeiss.

 

[Mark K.]

I'm seeing some yellow fringing along the vertical part of the window frame that's much more pronounced on the Zeiss.

Interesting, I'm not sure whether that's fringing from the lens though, or the dodgy yellow highlight fringing that sometimes pops up on Sony cameras in Rec709 gammas.

 

[Clayton Burkhart]

I think most people should realize that the Zeiss lenses are coated to create more contrast. This often gives the impression of greater sharpness. In this way they would most certainly be better for many straight to final output uses. However in the era of RAW and SLOG, greater contrast is not necessarily a good thing. Reduced contrast in order to retain detail is most important. I don't think it's an accident that there is more CA on the Zeiss. I think it probably comes with the territory of greater contrast.
What is clear to me however is that as soon as most of these lenses are closed down to T2.8 (and let's face it more often than not we are shooting even more closed down that that for the focus puller), most of the CA is gone and the image is neutralized. I see the Zeiss as having more varied usage than the Sony's and so I think the reasons for buying them would be different. Interchangeable mounts and FF capacity are worthy trade-off for the inconsistent T-Stops and slightly different color balancing from one lens to the next. In this day and age, no big deal. They do breathe a lot however, and I am more interested in how the Sony's react on that level and the kind of bokeh they have as a result.