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

Paul Russell said:
I think Chris is referring to the the little black non-reflective tube that we all put into our Epic MXs to stop reflections between lens and OLPF. That was a user-installable item.
Click to expand...

Yeah, you're probably right!
 
It is being a while I haven't contributed to this thread with pics.
I've been involved a lot since august with the music industry.
I'm glad because working with musicians was my first passion and first professional gigs as an aprentice image maker a looong time ago.
Actually it has been more than 14 years I haven't been involved with musicians.
This shot was done at a music festival in the center of Paris (place de l'hôtel de ville)

For this live I used exclusively the marvelous beast 100/300,
I wasn't expecting using this zoom one day other than for wild life stuff, me think it was worth it.

4K HD shutter 1/50 (Casseurs Flowters)
F002_C004.jpg
 
Yes, they are great! If, for some reason, the fit isn't perfect, Sean will make it right. Buy with confidence!
 
@Brice - love those pics!! The 100-300 is so great! Nicely done!!! I just used the 25 AE recently too...on a History Channel job, so great.

I have lots of stuff to post as well, just waiting for things to make air...so I can share!!

I'd consider trying the 28-85 FYI, another beast. We seem to use it on every job at this point...

best
 
Thanks Nick,
I hope I could post more artists samples but Americans bands are a big no no :)
I like my 28 but rediscovering the 25.
I found the 25AE is really special in its render, remind me a bit the 50 1.7
I tend to use a lot the 100 F2 (especially for portraits), me think it is a killer lense, but lately the 100-300 caught me big time.

100-300
EiFFEL-RockEnSeine.jpg



100 F2 (Feu! Chaterton)
R002_C018.jpg


Cheers
B.
 
Thanks Ben,
I own already 11 Contax, thought I was done with the CZ and start collecting a new brand.
28-85 you said?
Some lens junky posting in this thread are really dangerous for my wallet. :)
B.
 
The sample below was shot with the 35-70, I wasn't suppose to do this interview as I was setting up the Epic.
Sean Lennon and Kemp Muhl-Irina Lazareanu poped up, didn't have the time to put any filters on or switch to a black shade with a higher shutter.
Anyway I closed done the lens at F22, yea I know it is naughty, but another camera was covering my ass.
I was thinking the result would have been worst than that.
This little zoom is rock solid.


35-70 4K HD@F22 (Sean Lennon and Kemp Muhl-Irina Lazareanu)
Sean_07428.jpg


Cheers
B.
 
Hey guys, I'm thinking of investing on the 28mm f/2 "hollywood", I remember someone made a comparison with the 28mm f/2.8, but I can't seem to find it here... any help?
cheers.
 
Well, they are quite different, one won't replace the other. If you are into sharpness and don't desperately need the extra stop, the 28mm 2.8 is a killer lens in a very small package.

The "Hollywood" is not as sharp until at least f4, clunky and expensive, but it has that hard to describe, kind of dreamy "something" the other one doesn't offer. Plus, if you use older Zeiss Superspeeds, it'll match perfectly.
 
Uli Plank said:
Well, they are quite different, one won't replace the other. If you are into sharpness and don't desperately need the extra stop, the 28mm 2.8 is a killer lens in a very small package.

The "Hollywood" is not as sharp until at least f4, clunky and expensive, but it has that hard to describe, kind of dreamy "something" the other one doesn't offer. Plus, if you use older Zeiss Superspeeds, it'll match perfectly.
Click to expand...

Interesting, considering my kit: 25mm, 35mm f/1.4, 50mm f/1.4, 85mm f/1.4 and 135mm f/2.8, seems like the hollywood would match better no? But for the price of it I could get the 28mm 2.8 and a 60mm Macro that I really want... humm... tough choice.
 
DAVID BARKAN said:
Interesting, considering my kit: 25mm, 35mm f/1.4, 50mm f/1.4, 85mm f/1.4 and 135mm f/2.8, seems like the hollywood would match better no? But for the price of it I could get the 28mm 2.8 and a 60mm Macro that I really want... humm... tough choice.
Click to expand...

It is a no brainer,
the 28mm 2.8, like Uli said so eloquently, is a killer lens.
As for the 60 macro, you definitively want and need it. ;)
B.
 
Seconded. The 60mm Macro is another killer lens. I use it for portrait more than for macro.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top