Welcome to our community

Be a part of something great, join today!

  • 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 :)

zeiss 15mm vs duclos 11-16mm

Peter Osinski

Well-known member
Joined
Jun 5, 2009
Messages
370
Reaction score
0
Points
0
Location
New York
which lens would be better to go with a set of zeiss zf primes?

duclos:

11-16mm range
can be made in nikon mount
covers full frame at 15mm

zeiss:

15mm only
matches zeiss set
covers full frame
similar mechanics to rest of set
sharper?
 
The Zeiss 15mm.

The Tokina 11-16 doesn't hold a candle to what the Zeiss can do, plus it'll match your other Zeiss glass as well.

Im not sure thats correct. Each lens is an individual, Ive learned that many times. Both are stills glass but if your using the Duclos moded lens then Id vouch for their quality assurance in glass selection. Im sure the Zeiss is a fine lens but I have to say the Duclos is also a very good lens.
 
I'm not bashing the 11-16, I'm just saying the Zeiss is almost in a class of it's own. MTF tests and general reports conclude it's Zeiss's best wide angle prime (And arguably the best WA stills prime as well). If Peter is looking for a matching lens to go with his ZF set, then the Zeiss is the only logical choice.
 
also 500 cheaper so thats good

I think you're mixing up PL mount Cinevised versions with still lens versions:

In EF mount: Tokins about $600 and the Zeiss ZE 15mm is $2950.
in PL mount a Duclos Tokia is $3500 and the Zeiss CP2 version is $5700

The Stills version of the zeiss looks like it will be difficult to filter with it's quite large built in hood.

Like any lens purchase this will depend on your budget and needs.

Matt Uhry
www.mattuhry.com
 
But this one goes to 11.......

true....but then again there is the wait list...choices choices. I remember you spoke very highly of your 11-16 when I bought that 9.5-57mm off of you
 
Zeiss is better and sharper. But which camera will you use in 2013? Canon 1dc or Red with Dragon or Red without Dragon?:-)
Zeiss 15mm is more Future Proof . Especially if it is CP.2. 14 blades, long focus throw, built like a tank and very little of distortion in Full Frame.
 
But this one goes to 11.......

That actually doesn't matter anyway since the Zeiss 15mm is wider.

The Zeiss is 15mm in 35mm (Full frame). The Tokina/Duclos is 11mm in S35 (1.6 Crop factor).

AFAIK if my math is correct, the 11-16 translates to about 17-25 in Full Frame, whereas the Zeiss is 15mm.

There's a common misconception where people think the 11-16 is the widest lens out there, and thats certainly not the case, especially not for full frame.
 
That actually doesn't matter anyway since the Zeiss 15mm is wider.

The Zeiss is 15mm in 35mm (Full frame). The Tokina/Duclos is 11mm in S35 (1.6 Crop factor).

AFAIK if my math is correct, the 11-16 translates to about 17-25 in Full Frame, whereas the Zeiss is 15mm.

There's a common misconception where people think the 11-16 is the widest lens out there, and thats certainly not the case, especially not for full frame.

11mm is wider than 15mm.
A Lens is a Lens is a Lens

The Zeiss covers larger sensor sizes than the Tokina, but then you're comparing sensor sizes, not focal length.
 
11mm is wider than 15mm.
A Lens is a Lens is a Lens

I think you are missing the fact that he's in Canada. There is the "Canadian Crop" factor. A Canadian argument only makes .6x the sense that an actual argument makes. Where as being European, your argument actually makes 1.2x the sense as a normal argument, so it's like 2.4x as rational as a Canadian argument. Make sense?
 
I think you are missing the fact that he's in Canada. There is the "Canadian Crop" factor. A Canadian argument only makes .6x the sense that an actual argument makes. Where as being European, your argument actually makes 1.2x the sense as a normal argument, so it's like 2.4x as rational as a Canadian argument. Make sense?

LOL, yes, I always suspected something like this was going on.
 
I think you are missing the fact that he's in Canada. There is the "Canadian Crop" factor. A Canadian argument only makes .6x the sense that an actual argument makes. Where as being European, your argument actually makes 1.2x the sense as a normal argument, so it's like 2.4x as rational as a Canadian argument. Make sense?

Thank you Nick!
 
Back
Top