Welcome to our community

Be a part of something great, join today!

Log in
  • Hey all, just changed over the backend after 15 years I figured time to give it a bit of an update, its probably gonna be a bit weird for most of you and i am sure there is a few bugs to work out but it should kinda work the same as before... hopefully :)

Contax Zeiss Survival Guide

David: My understanding is that the Nikon version focuses in the same direction as the Canon version (I believe Dan Kanes confirmed that) so I was going to buy a Nikon version when I was ready and use a Nikon G to Canon adapter so that I could still use manual aperture but use the lens on Canon mount (and Nikon if I ever wanted to)
 
Samir Patel said:
David: My understanding is that the Nikon version focuses in the same direction as the Canon version (I believe Dan Kanes confirmed that) so I was going to buy a Nikon version when I was ready and use a Nikon G to Canon adapter so that I could still use manual aperture but use the lens on Canon mount (and Nikon if I ever wanted to)
Click to expand...

Samir I believe you are right, all versions of Sigma are constructed same way, regardless of whether they are Nikon, Canon, etc.
 
DAVID BARKAN said:
BTW, I shot a short film last weekend and I'm just in love with the 35, 50, 85 1.4s trio... they all match perfectly and have the same special character wide open, especially the 35 and 85, soft but "sharp enough".
I shot them on 5K Full on the Epic, will post some screens as soon as they let me.

cheers.
Click to expand...

Awesome. Can't wait to see frames and vid!!! Yeah, the 1.4's are movie magic, for sure. They are my go to primes on almost every shoot.
 
Something a little different.

Couldn't find my macro as I watched a large bee on my window sill so grabbed the first thing I could. This is the 28mm Hollywood with a £40 Raynox 250 on the end of it

World's largest bee on my window sill by Soma Pics, on Flickr



And then I was all like 'ooh I wonder what other lenses look like with the Raynox attached'.

So here's the Zeiss 85mm f1.4 at around f5.6ish.


Orchid by Soma Pics, on Flickr

Orchid by Soma Pics, on Flickr

Orchid by Soma Pics, on Flickr
 
Yeah, stunning colours Ben. Fascinating details and compositions too. Thanks for sharing more of that Zeiss magic.
 
Martelli Philippe said:
Hello everyone ,
Does someone own a tele apotessar 300 F2.8 contax ? Your 300 Ben is already an amasing lens.
Click to expand...

Yeah that IS some pretty serious glass there. So serious I gave up any illusions of getting it, and "settled" or the iconic Nikkor 300 2.8, and had RP lens mod and convert it to Letiax.

That said, if anyone can get their hands on one, then...WOW...is all I have to say.

Same for the 200 f2.
 
Mike Harrington said:
Just picked up a 21 2.8 for cheap....
Very impressed....almost zero breathing, super sharp wide open. A bit short on the focus throw compared to other contax
Click to expand...

Yes, its a great piece of glass. Focus throw is a little more cramped true; putting it on a bartech was a real eye opener as it "mapped it" to feel considerably longer.
 
$850 Canadian...

almost flawless MMJ

I thought it was a pretty good deal

so far I got the 21, the 50 1.4, the 35-70, and the 135 2.8

My next will be the 85 1.4 that kinda completes the set....and if I have budget the 35 1.4
 
Mike Harrington said:
$850 Canadian...

almost flawless MMJ

I thought it was a pretty good deal

so far I got the 21, the 50 1.4, the 35-70, and the 135 2.8

My next will be the 85 1.4 that kinda completes the set....and if I have budget the 35 1.4
Click to expand...

Nice kit! I'd consider one of the macros too (both 60 and 100 are very special), and possibly the 100-300 ( a very special zoom with lots of coverage, and very small footprint. I think the thread is 67mm believe it or not). Or the 80-200, which for budget is superb (and at 200mm is a capable macro also, somewhere in 4:1 range)
 
Nick Morrison said:
Nice kit! I'd consider one of the macros too (both 60 and 100 are very special), and possibly the 100-300 ( a very special zoom with lots of coverage, and very small footprint. I think the thread is 67mm believe it or not). Or the 80-200, which for budget is superb (and at 200mm is a capable macro also, somewhere in 4:1 range)
Click to expand...

Yes the macros did cross my mind....

I think in my case, I work with a lot of TV producers that are used to shoulder mounted cameras with 20x zoom lenses, so a more practical lens for me would be that 35-135 zoom.

The 100-300 would be good as well, but that focal range doesn't seem to come up as much in the work I've been doing.....more a 18-85 kinda range ( I wish there was a parafocal constant aperture lens in that range in canon mount....probably should have got the red zoom)

EDIT:

Just checked the charts on that 100-300, and wow....I think that is the sharpest 100 that they made....even more then the primes.

For the info of forum readers....if you didn't already know you can see all the MTF charts of the entire Zeiss C/Y lineup here
http://www.zeiss.ca/camera-lenses/en_ca/service/download_center/contax_yashica.html

And from everything I've read, zeiss MTF charts are a little more trustworthy then most others...
 
Ben Scott said:
I sort of a little bit hate you :)
Click to expand...

LOL

I was actually looking for a 28mm, just to save a bit of money....but when I saw the 21 I realized I probably would never see one that cheap again....
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top