[Tas]

A bit old this one, it was taken on my travels back to brisbane from Newcastle. I will have new images again now that I have a K-1 back to mount the Zeiss on.



Tas

[MJKoski]

Ya. 21mm has "built-in" rounded gradual neutral density filter. Another superb feature. And it makes pictures look pretty.

[Fenwoodian]

I am somewhat surprised, that I have not seen the (relatively recent) Zeiss 25mm f2 on this thread yet. It was never produced in ZK mount, but should be relatively easy to Leitax convert.
For me personally, 21mm is just too wide. I used the 28mm f2 for years and liked it, but it always was just not wide enough, and therefore lacking the touch of wide angle perspective that I like, just before perspective distortion takes over.
I use the Zeiss 25mm f2 on the Sony A7r with an adapter, but should I eventually go for the K1, then a Leitax mount should do fine.
The 25mm is a newer design, and has virtually no CA's and also a very lively color rendering and high resolving power, that makes it suitable as a landscape lens. If you do like the very wide angle look of the 21mm distagon, then that is still a great lens.


Chris

Chris, to my knowledge, no one has yet come forward with photos from a Leitax converted Zeiss 25mm f/2 on a K1. There are no images with this combination on Flickr that I could find.

Some of us hear have been very happy with the results from the Zeiss 25mm f/2.8 on the K1. Maybe that's why none of us have tried the Zeiss 25/2 on the K1.

It's a very expensive lens, and therefore I can certainly understand someone not caring to be the first to try it.

I agree with you that it should not be too tough to Leitax convert it. I do hope that some day you take the plunge and get a K1 so you can try out your Zeiss 25/2 on it and let us all know what you think of this lens on the K1.

I just got back from an extensive shoot in Georgia. I primarily used my Zeiss 35mm f/1.4 . For the run and gun type of street shooting I was doing, I hate to admit it but I found the Zeiss 35mm f/1.4 lens to be "uncomfortably heavy". Don't get me wrong, it's a great lens, but you really don't want to carry it all day on a K1 with a viewfinder on it. I wonder if some of the hesitancy about folks trying the Zeiss 25mm f/2 on the K1 might also have to do with it's larger size?

[Tas]

Yes, I will make do with my 25/2.8 as it is what I have in ZK mount. If 'someone' wants to post zome 25/2 mounted on a K-1 I'd be interested in seeing how it looks.



However, whilst I can't buy anything at the moment there's some very good discounts on new stock of certain Zeiss lenses like the 135/2, 15/2.8, and 18/3.5 at B&H.

SLR Lenses, DSLR Lenses | B&H Photo Video

Man I wished I had some coin to throw at some of these.

Tas

[NZ_Ross]

Man I wished I had some coin to throw at some of these.

Don't we all

[Chris Mak]

Chris, to my knowledge, no one has yet come forward with photos from a Leitax converted Zeiss 25mm f/2 on a K1. There are no images with this combination on Flickr that I could find.

Some of us hear have been very happy with the results from the Zeiss 25mm f/2.8 on the K1. Maybe that's why none of us have tried the Zeiss 25/2 on the K1.

It's a very expensive lens, and therefore I can certainly understand someone not caring to be the first to try it.

I agree with you that it should not be too tough to Leitax convert it. I do hope that some day you take the plunge and get a K1 so you can try out your Zeiss 25/2 on it and let us all know what you think of this lens on the K1.

I just got back from an extensive shoot in Georgia. I primarily used my Zeiss 35mm f/1.4 . For the run and gun type of street shooting I was doing, I hate to admit it but I found the Zeiss 35mm f/1.4 lens to be "uncomfortably heavy". Don't get me wrong, it's a great lens, but you really don't want to carry it all day on a K1 with a viewfinder on it. I wonder if some of the hesitancy about folks trying the Zeiss 25mm f/2 on the K1 might also have to do with it's larger size?

Hi Dave,

Yes, the 25/2.8 does well on the K1. The 25/2 is very much a different lens though
I had the 25/2.8 ZK for some time, although I only used it on the K5IIs apsc camera.
I know, the 25/2 is an expensive lens when you buy it new. I bought four Zeiss ZK lenses 5 years ago new. The thing is: I would not buy them new again: mostly Zeiss lens owners treat their lenses very well, and they are built to such a standard, that you will never notice adifference in operation or IQ between a new lens and a used lens.
That is why I e.g. have now sold my 85/1.4 ZK and bought a second hand 100/2 ZF.2, which I was never able to find in ZK mount. I got the 25/2 ZF.2 for 800 euros, just like new.
Due to the replacement of these older ZF/ZE lenses with the milvus line, ans also the introduction of the loxia and batis lenses, there is increasing opportunity to get like new second hand copies at affordable prices.
The interesing thing about the Zeiss 25/2, is that it is a very modern, very well corrected lens with e.g. a high level of transparency in the shadow areas (where the older designs tend to block things up a bit), and very high detail (also due to complete absence of CA's) on the 36mp sensor.

Chris

[sculptormic]

I am somewhat surprised, that I have not seen the (relatively recent) Zeiss 25mm f2 on this thread yet. It was never produced in ZK mount, but should be relatively easy to Leitax convert.
For me personally, 21mm is just too wide. I used the 28mm f2 for years and liked it, but it always was just not wide enough, and therefore lacking the touch of wide angle perspective that I like, just before perspective distortion takes over.
I use the Zeiss 25mm f2 on the Sony A7r with an adapter, but should I eventually go for the K1, then a Leitax mount should do fine.
The 25mm is a newer design, and has virtually no CA's and also a very lively color rendering and high resolving power, that makes it suitable as a landscape lens. If you do like the very wide angle look of the 21mm distagon, then that is still a great lens.


Chris

This discussioin on FM forums convinced me to buy the 25/2.8 insteadof the 25/2 for my type of work and I don't regret it. if i would have been a portrait photographer I would have gone for the fast version. Fast is not always better!

sculptormic wrote:
This is what i red in photozone.
Anyway I am glad I canceled my buy on ebay of this lens and bought the Pentax-A 24/2.8 instead.

Verdict

As a German website we'd love to report that we've seen another great Zeiss lens (home, sweet home after all) but at the end of the day the proof is in the pudding (or maybe in the "Kraut" here) and it just doesn't taste all that good. The Zeiss Distagon T* 25mm f/2.8 ZF performed pretty good in our Nikon APS-C review but it didn't impress during our full format lab tests. The resolution capabilities are...Show more →

This an answer I got from Tariq Gibran. Very helpfull!

The issue with tests from Photozone is that they often have little relevance for lens performance at infinity. Photozone photographs test charts to generate their MTF's and these charts are photographed at relatively close distances. So, if a lens is designed to perform best at distance and does not have say a floating element design, it's going to test poorly on a close test chart while in actual use, it could be an outstanding performer at greater shooting distances. A much better MTF measurement to go by is the one that Zeiss actually publish for all of their lenses. The Zeiss MTF's are based on infinity for general purpose lenses. If you compare the Zeiss MTF charts, you will see that the Z*25/2.8 is better outside of the center than the 25/2 as the faster 25/2 MTF shows a major dive (greater than the 25/2.8) by the time the corners approach. What the 25/2 has going for it, beyond the extra stop, is a bit more resolution in the center. It also supposedly renders beautifully. So, if you wanted a great editorial lens for say environmental portraits, the 25/2 would be an exceptional choice but if you wanted a lens that delivered better across the frame performance at longer shooting distances, than the 25/2.8 is the better choice.

Btw, the field curvature of the slower Z* 25/2.8 is at it's worst at close distances but is negligible at distance. This seems to be the opposite as compared to the Z* 25/2 and why the slower lens is better for distance.

"The 25/2.8 Distagon is wonderful all-around lens with unique close-up properties, and outstanding performance at distance. It won’t test well on by-the-numbers lab testing at close range, so ignore such nonsense and try this lens for landscape or extreme close-up use and you’ll be delighted with its brilliance and color."

diglloyd.com: Mini Review: Zeiss ZF/ZE 25mm f/2.8 Distagon

"When one starts with the wrong premises (“shoot a resolution chart at close range and that’s the measure of lens“, one naturally finds that the Zeiss 25mm ƒ/2.8 Distagon is a mediocre lens at close range on a planar target. It is why I don’t shoot resolution charts anymore— garbage in (inappropriate premises)= garbage out."

diglloyd blog: Reader Likes The Zeiss 25mm ?/2.8 Distagon After Trying It

Lloyd got this one right.

[MJKoski]

Zeiss 28/2 is another fine example of test chart shooting, it will fail wide open or near wide open due to large field curvature. But that is not how you would use the lens in real life...

[les3547]

Zeiss 21mm:



Extreme crop of that little brown area (distant grape vines) upper left edge:

[Chris Mak]

This discussioin on FM forums convinced me to buy the 25/2.8 insteadof the 25/2 for my type of work and I don't regret it. if i would have been a portrait photographer I would have gone for the fast version. Fast is not always better!

sculptormic wrote:
This is what i red in photozone.
Anyway I am glad I canceled my buy on ebay of this lens and bought the Pentax-A 24/2.8 instead.

Verdict

As a German website we'd love to report that we've seen another great Zeiss lens (home, sweet home after all) but at the end of the day the proof is in the pudding (or maybe in the "Kraut" here) and it just doesn't taste all that good. The Zeiss Distagon T* 25mm f/2.8 ZF performed pretty good in our Nikon APS-C review but it didn't impress during our full format lab tests. The resolution capabilities are...Show more →

This an answer I got from Tariq Gibran. Very helpfull!

The issue with tests from Photozone is that they often have little relevance for lens performance at infinity. Photozone photographs test charts to generate their MTF's and these charts are photographed at relatively close distances. So, if a lens is designed to perform best at distance and does not have say a floating element design, it's going to test poorly on a close test chart while in actual use, it could be an outstanding performer at greater shooting distances. A much better MTF measurement to go by is the one that Zeiss actually publish for all of their lenses. The Zeiss MTF's are based on infinity for general purpose lenses. If you compare the Zeiss MTF charts, you will see that the Z*25/2.8 is better outside of the center than the 25/2 as the faster 25/2 MTF shows a major dive (greater than the 25/2.8) by the time the corners approach. What the 25/2 has going for it, beyond the extra stop, is a bit more resolution in the center. It also supposedly renders beautifully. So, if you wanted a great editorial lens for say environmental portraits, the 25/2 would be an exceptional choice but if you wanted a lens that delivered better across the frame performance at longer shooting distances, than the 25/2.8 is the better choice.

Btw, the field curvature of the slower Z* 25/2.8 is at it's worst at close distances but is negligible at distance. This seems to be the opposite as compared to the Z* 25/2 and why the slower lens is better for distance.

"The 25/2.8 Distagon is wonderful all-around lens with unique close-up properties, and outstanding performance at distance. It won’t test well on by-the-numbers lab testing at close range, so ignore such nonsense and try this lens for landscape or extreme close-up use and you’ll be delighted with its brilliance and color."

diglloyd.com: Mini Review: Zeiss ZF/ZE 25mm f/2.8 Distagon

"When one starts with the wrong premises (“shoot a resolution chart at close range and that’s the measure of lens“, one naturally finds that the Zeiss 25mm ƒ/2.8 Distagon is a mediocre lens at close range on a planar target. It is why I don’t shoot resolution charts anymore— garbage in (inappropriate premises)= garbage out."

diglloyd blog: Reader Likes The Zeiss 25mm ?/2.8 Distagon After Trying It

Lloyd got this one right.

Not meaning to spark a comparison debate Having used both (albeit not on FF the 25/2.8), I can say that these are really two very different lenses, and with the Leitax conversion fairly easy, and the zf.2 25/2 easily found second hand at very reasonable prices, I can only recommend this lens for the K1 to those looking for a superb, modern, well corrected and allround 25mm, certainly as there is no generic alternative available for the foreseeable future.

Chris

[Chris Mak]

Chris, to my knowledge, no one has yet come forward with photos from a Leitax converted Zeiss 25mm f/2 on a K1. There are no images with this combination on Flickr that I could find.

Some of us hear have been very happy with the results from the Zeiss 25mm f/2.8 on the K1. Maybe that's why none of us have tried the Zeiss 25/2 on the K1.

It's a very expensive lens, and therefore I can certainly understand someone not caring to be the first to try it.

I agree with you that it should not be too tough to Leitax convert it. I do hope that some day you take the plunge and get a K1 so you can try out your Zeiss 25/2 on it and let us all know what you think of this lens on the K1.

I just got back from an extensive shoot in Georgia. I primarily used my Zeiss 35mm f/1.4 . For the run and gun type of street shooting I was doing, I hate to admit it but I found the Zeiss 35mm f/1.4 lens to be "uncomfortably heavy". Don't get me wrong, it's a great lens, but you really don't want to carry it all day on a K1 with a viewfinder on it. I wonder if some of the hesitancy about folks trying the Zeiss 25mm f/2 on the K1 might also have to do with it's larger size?

Hello Dave,

Just quoting you, because the post is meant for you.
You seem to know a bit about these Zeiss lenses, and if I am right, you also have the Zeiss makro planar 100mm/f2.
I just received a 100mm f2 ZF.2 for use (like the 25mm) on the Nikon F/ Sony E adapter., and later on Leitax conversion.
Its in great shape really, considering it's half the price of new. It looks like new and the glass is clear and clean.
There is one issue however: when changing focussing direction, I get about 1mm of loose play before the (opposite direction) focussing action engages.
The play is not between lens and mount, but happens in the focus ring itself: so between front part and back part of the lens.
This play makes swift focussing at f2 very difficult, and also might be a signal that something needs readjusting in the lens before it gets worse (like screws progressively loosening after having lost the tight fit).

I assume this is in the lens itself, and not recommended for home do-it-yourself, like the Leitax conversion. But perhaps you know more about this lens?

thanks!
Chris

[Fenwoodian]

Hello Dave,

Just quoting you, because the post is meant for you.
You seem to know a bit about these Zeiss lenses, and if I am right, you also have the Zeiss makro planar 100mm/f2.
I just received a 100mm f2 ZF.2 for use (like the 25mm) on the Nikon F/ Sony E adapter., and later on Leitax conversion.
Its in great shape really, considering it's half the price of new. It looks like new and the glass is clear and clean.
There is one issue however: when changing focussing direction, I get about 1mm of loose play before the (opposite direction) focussing action engages.
The play is not between lens and mount, but happens in the focus ring itself: so between front part and back part of the lens.
This play makes swift focussing at f2 very difficult, and also might be a signal that something needs readjusting in the lens before it gets worse (like screws progressively loosening after having lost the tight fit).

I assume this is in the lens itself, and not recommended for home do-it-yourself, like the Leitax conversion. But perhaps you know more about this lens?

thanks!
Chris

Chris, over the years I've owned 4 copies of this excellent lens. Currently, I own one, a ZF version that I Leitax adapted.

My copy has none of the loose play you describe when focusing. In fact, it's got the same super smooth focusing that all of my other Zeiss lenses have.

If one were to Leitax adapt this lens, I doubt that the Leitax conversion would in any way affect the focusing of the lens.

Dave

[manishved]

[Fenwoodian]

Wow, am I excited!!

I just purchased a Zeiss Milvus 85mm f/1.4 ZF.2 Lens. Can't wait to Leitax convert it and try it out on my K1.

While I've Lietax converted many Zeiss ZF lenses, this will be my first Zeiss "Milvus" conversion.

I'll be sure to let everyone here know how the conversion process goes. I can't wait to test it against my Zeiss 100mm f/2 and my Pentax A 85mm f/1.4 lenses!

LensScore rates this lens the highest "non-Otis" Zeiss lens (even rated a bit higher than the Zeiss Apo Sonnar T* 2.0/135).

I just heard from David at Leitax. It sounds like so far, no one else has Leitax converted a Zeiss Milvus 85mm f/1.4 lens to the Pentax K mount. Looking forward to maybe being the first one to give it a try...

[Fenwoodian]

Zeiss 35/1.4 on K1

Handheld. F/2

How come every time I upload a large image file, what shows up in this forum is a smaller and softer version of my original??? Very VERY frustrating....