Zeiss ZK LBA - pics, notes, thoughts?

tcom · 05-30-2009, 08:23 AM

Thank you to all the contributors here.

I do have the Zeiss 100/2. I visited yesterday a photo fair (Professional Imaging in Zürich), and stopped at Leica (Leica is the distributor of Zeiss here in Switzerland). I had a look at the Zeiss lenses. They had all lenses, but unfortunately in ZF mount. I handled a few of the lenses, and the one that attracted me most was the 25/2.8, and after reading through this thread, there is one on the way to me...

HoHo · 05-31-2009, 01:38 AM

I have the ZK 50 1.4 Planar and here are two pics.

I love these Lens, my next will be the 85 1.4.

tcom · 06-18-2009, 12:09 PM

A few shots with Zeiss Distagon T* 25/2.8 ZK:

Mann · 06-20-2009, 08:57 AM

Anybody got more pictures of the 50mm/1.4 Planar? Please post them. I'm thinking of getting it or the 35/2.0 Distagon. Eventually, I'll get 'em both, but I don't know yet which to get first. Which one is more versatile?

Duplo · 06-20-2009, 10:41 AM

Originally posted by Mann

Anybody got more pictures of the 50mm/1.4 Planar? Please post them. I'm thinking of getting it or the 35/2.0 Distagon. Eventually, I'll get 'em both, but I don't know yet which to get first. Which one is more versatile?

I do not have any shots at hand and have only used them on 35mm, but IMHO the 35/2 is the better one of the two. The50/1.4 is the one lens in the zeis lineup that never really impressed me.

But they are very different lenses in terms of focal lengths.
I would base my choice on what FL you need the most.

Mann · 06-21-2009, 04:18 AM

Originally posted by Duplo

I do not have any shots at hand and have only used them on 35mm, but IMHO the 35/2 is the better one of the two. The50/1.4 is the one lens in the zeis lineup that never really impressed me.

But they are very different lenses in terms of focal lengths.
I would base my choice on what FL you need the most.

But why didn't it impress you compared to the 35?

augustmoon · 06-21-2009, 06:46 AM

Personally, I thought that the Voigtlander SLII 58mm, also made by Cosina to be the better of the two (vs ZK 50 1.4) A bit sharper, a little less CA, slightly more interesting Bokeh, even a little cheaper as well.

The Zeiss 50 Macro, on the other hand though, is truly outstanding, but a lot more expensive.

The 35 is also a little more interesting in use, and because of focal length, perhaps will be a lens that gets used a little more in a wider variety of occasions.

Duplo · 06-21-2009, 02:04 PM

Originally posted by Mann

But why didn't it impress you compared to the 35?

The OOF renderings were not quite as good as other 50mm primes available and not up to the other zeiss lenses IMHO.

Now the 50mm f2 macro-planner is a totally different story and most impressive.

FDM · 06-22-2009, 01:52 AM

Originally posted by Duplo

The OOF renderings were not quite as good as other 50mm primes available and not up to the other zeiss lenses IMHO.

Agreed. The bokeh on the 50/1.4 is sickening. But, besides that, I find the IQ (sharpness, contrast, etc) excellent.

Considering the 35 mm versus 50 mm dilemma, I would start by considering which focal length is the most useful for me. A 35 mm on an APS-C sensor is equivalent to 52 mm. Some consider this a versatile focal length, but many find it boring (too close to the field of view in human vision). On the other hand, a 50 mm is equivalent to a 75 mm. Great for portraits! But the bokeh might be a problem if you're into large apertures... Allow me to (once again) shamelessly advertise my blog (link below), where you can find many images taken with the 50/1.4.

OrenMc · 06-22-2009, 03:24 AM

I would sure like to see a comparison between ZK100/2 and VL 125/2.5.
I am kind of obsessing in macro lenses right now and if the right deal came along right now..........

amati · 06-22-2009, 03:50 AM

I have most of the series from zeiss zk line up and my favorite is my 35mm f2 zk

tcom · 06-22-2009, 12:19 PM

Originally posted by OrenMc

I would sure like to see a comparison between ZK100/2 and VL 125/2.5.
I am kind of obsessing in macro lenses right now and if the right deal came along right now..........

I have a few comparison shots taken with these lenses under Voigtlander 125 vs Zeiss 100 - a set on Flickr

OrenMc · 06-22-2009, 07:23 PM

Thanks a bunch for the link tcom.

Mann · 06-23-2009, 01:19 AM

Originally posted by FDM

Agreed. The bokeh on the 50/1.4 is sickening. But, besides that, I find the IQ (sharpness, contrast, etc) excellent.

Considering the 35 mm versus 50 mm dilemma, I would start by considering which focal length is the most useful for me. A 35 mm on an APS-C sensor is equivalent to 52 mm. Some consider this a versatile focal length, but many find it boring (too close to the field of view in human vision). On the other hand, a 50 mm is equivalent to a 75 mm. Great for portraits! But the bokeh might be a problem if you're into large apertures... Allow me to (once again) shamelessly advertise my blog (link below), where you can find many images taken with the 50/1.4.

It's nice to read what you write in your blog. Bokeh disease!

Okay, so the OOF areas aren't so good. I guess I'll wait a while and see what I'll do.

melander · 06-23-2009, 01:38 AM

do remember that the ziess is 1:2 macro and voigtlander is 1:1 macro

Similar Threads
Thread	Thread Starter	Forum	Replies	Last Post
Voigtländer LBA - post your pics, notes and thoughts.	thePiRaTE!!	Lens Clubs	1233	5 Days Ago 06:40 AM
A few Zeiss Distagon T* 2,8/25 ZK shots (3 pics)	tcom	Post Your Photos!	3	06-13-2009 11:05 PM
LBA: first pics with Zeiss 25/2.8	tcom	Post Your Photos!	5	06-12-2009 01:07 PM
Thoughts on taking pics of kids at the pool?	AlphaGAK20D	Photographic Technique	25	06-08-2009 10:26 PM
Voigtlander 125 vs Zeiss 100 (6 pics)	tcom	Pentax SLR Lens Discussion	7	08-18-2008 02:42 AM

05-30-2009, 08:23 AM	#106
tcom Veteran Member Join Date: Dec 2006 Location: Switzerland Photos: Gallery Posts: 1,293	Thank you to all the contributors here. I do have the Zeiss 100/2. I visited yesterday a photo fair (Professional Imaging in Zürich), and stopped at Leica (Leica is the distributor of Zeiss here in Switzerland). I had a look at the Zeiss lenses. They had all lenses, but unfortunately in ZF mount. I handled a few of the lenses, and the one that attracted me most was the 25/2.8, and after reading through this thread, there is one on the way to me...

05-31-2009, 01:38 AM	#107
HoHo Junior Member Join Date: Jul 2008 Location: Germany / Heidelberg Posts: 28	I have the ZK 50 1.4 Planar and here are two pics. I love these Lens, my next will be the 85 1.4.

06-18-2009, 12:09 PM	#108
tcom Veteran Member Join Date: Dec 2006 Location: Switzerland Photos: Gallery Posts: 1,293	A few shots with Zeiss Distagon T* 25/2.8 ZK:

06-20-2009, 08:57 AM	#109
Mann Senior Member Join Date: May 2009 Posts: 124	Anybody got more pictures of the 50mm/1.4 Planar? Please post them. I'm thinking of getting it or the 35/2.0 Distagon. Eventually, I'll get 'em both, but I don't know yet which to get first. Which one is more versatile?

06-20-2009, 10:41 AM	#110
Duplo Veteran Member Join Date: Nov 2006 Location: Copenhagen Photos: Gallery Posts: 924	Originally posted by Mann Anybody got more pictures of the 50mm/1.4 Planar? Please post them. I'm thinking of getting it or the 35/2.0 Distagon. Eventually, I'll get 'em both, but I don't know yet which to get first. Which one is more versatile? I do not have any shots at hand and have only used them on 35mm, but IMHO the 35/2 is the better one of the two. The50/1.4 is the one lens in the zeis lineup that never really impressed me. But they are very different lenses in terms of focal lengths. I would base my choice on what FL you need the most.

06-21-2009, 04:18 AM	#111
Mann Senior Member Join Date: May 2009 Posts: 124	Originally posted by Duplo I do not have any shots at hand and have only used them on 35mm, but IMHO the 35/2 is the better one of the two. The50/1.4 is the one lens in the zeis lineup that never really impressed me. But they are very different lenses in terms of focal lengths. I would base my choice on what FL you need the most. But why didn't it impress you compared to the 35?

06-21-2009, 06:46 AM	#112
augustmoon Inactive Account Join Date: Mar 2008 Location: Toronto, San Diego, Seattle Posts: 455	Personally, I thought that the Voigtlander SLII 58mm, also made by Cosina to be the better of the two (vs ZK 50 1.4) A bit sharper, a little less CA, slightly more interesting Bokeh, even a little cheaper as well. The Zeiss 50 Macro, on the other hand though, is truly outstanding, but a lot more expensive. The 35 is also a little more interesting in use, and because of focal length, perhaps will be a lens that gets used a little more in a wider variety of occasions.

06-21-2009, 02:04 PM	#113
Duplo Veteran Member Join Date: Nov 2006 Location: Copenhagen Photos: Gallery Posts: 924	Originally posted by Mann But why didn't it impress you compared to the 35? The OOF renderings were not quite as good as other 50mm primes available and not up to the other zeiss lenses IMHO. Now the 50mm f2 macro-planner is a totally different story and most impressive.

06-22-2009, 01:52 AM	#114
FDM New Member Join Date: Sep 2007 Location: Portugal Photos: Gallery Posts: 19	Originally posted by Duplo The OOF renderings were not quite as good as other 50mm primes available and not up to the other zeiss lenses IMHO. Agreed. The bokeh on the 50/1.4 is sickening. But, besides that, I find the IQ (sharpness, contrast, etc) excellent. Considering the 35 mm versus 50 mm dilemma, I would start by considering which focal length is the most useful for me. A 35 mm on an APS-C sensor is equivalent to 52 mm. Some consider this a versatile focal length, but many find it boring (too close to the field of view in human vision). On the other hand, a 50 mm is equivalent to a 75 mm. Great for portraits! But the bokeh might be a problem if you're into large apertures... Allow me to (once again) shamelessly advertise my blog (link below), where you can find many images taken with the 50/1.4.

06-22-2009, 03:24 AM	#115
OrenMc Veteran Member Join Date: Apr 2008 Location: USA Photos: Gallery Posts: 1,901	I would sure like to see a comparison between ZK100/2 and VL 125/2.5. I am kind of obsessing in macro lenses right now and if the right deal came along right now..........

06-22-2009, 03:50 AM	#116
amati New Member Join Date: Feb 2008 Location: ISTANBUL Posts: 7	I have most of the series from zeiss zk line up and my favorite is my 35mm f2 zk

06-22-2009, 12:19 PM	#117
tcom Veteran Member Join Date: Dec 2006 Location: Switzerland Photos: Gallery Posts: 1,293	Originally posted by OrenMc I would sure like to see a comparison between ZK100/2 and VL 125/2.5. I am kind of obsessing in macro lenses right now and if the right deal came along right now.......... I have a few comparison shots taken with these lenses under Voigtlander 125 vs Zeiss 100 - a set on Flickr

06-22-2009, 07:23 PM	#118
OrenMc Veteran Member Join Date: Apr 2008 Location: USA Photos: Gallery Posts: 1,901	Thanks a bunch for the link tcom.

06-23-2009, 01:19 AM	#119
Mann Senior Member Join Date: May 2009 Posts: 124	Originally posted by FDM Agreed. The bokeh on the 50/1.4 is sickening. But, besides that, I find the IQ (sharpness, contrast, etc) excellent. Considering the 35 mm versus 50 mm dilemma, I would start by considering which focal length is the most useful for me. A 35 mm on an APS-C sensor is equivalent to 52 mm. Some consider this a versatile focal length, but many find it boring (too close to the field of view in human vision). On the other hand, a 50 mm is equivalent to a 75 mm. Great for portraits! But the bokeh might be a problem if you're into large apertures... Allow me to (once again) shamelessly advertise my blog (link below), where you can find many images taken with the 50/1.4. It's nice to read what you write in your blog. Bokeh disease! Okay, so the OOF areas aren't so good. I guess I'll wait a while and see what I'll do.

06-23-2009, 01:38 AM	#120
melander Veteran Member Join Date: Jul 2008 Location: Sweden, Umea Posts: 876	do remember that the ziess is 1:2 macro and voigtlander is 1:1 macro