NikonGear'23
Gear Talk => Lens Talk => Topic started by: atpaula on February 25, 2018, 22:43:16
-
Some time ago I said that this lens opens a new world of possibilities, but have not tried these possibilities since them.
See http://nikongear.net/revival/index.php/topic,648.0.html.
This lens can focus as close as 6 cm from the front element.
Today I tried these:
(https://nikongear.net/revival/proxy.php?request=http%3A%2F%2Fi1011.photobucket.com%2Falbums%2Faf237%2Fatpaula%2FaDFC_5913_zpsibv5n9aq.jpg&hash=a3327d3d359500789ff893ed33fc29c637499668) (http://s1011.photobucket.com/user/atpaula/media/aDFC_5913_zpsibv5n9aq.jpg.html)
(https://nikongear.net/revival/proxy.php?request=http%3A%2F%2Fi1011.photobucket.com%2Falbums%2Faf237%2Fatpaula%2FaDFC_5954_zpsuodzg0td.jpg&hash=1710ab0becc5cdf8fd0428c91fffdc8b0c0fb84e) (http://s1011.photobucket.com/user/atpaula/media/aDFC_5954_zpsuodzg0td.jpg.html)
(https://nikongear.net/revival/proxy.php?request=http%3A%2F%2Fi1011.photobucket.com%2Falbums%2Faf237%2Fatpaula%2FaDFC_5909_zpsv7pzzpf0.jpg&hash=f4ecbfeb7f60d10430981967f190b711a2ec5806) (http://s1011.photobucket.com/user/atpaula/media/aDFC_5909_zpsv7pzzpf0.jpg.html)
-
I like the relatively mild color. The backgrounds are very well controlled.
As this is a quite wide lens, I may also want to try to shoot the flowers from more extreme angles to exaggerate the steep perspective the lens offers.
-
As this is a quite wide lens, I may also want to try to shoot the flowers from more extreme angles to exaggerate the steep perspective the lens offers.
Thank Akira.
That's what I intended to do today, but have not found any interesting subject to play the perspective.
-
Thank Akira.
That's what I intended to do today, but have not found any interesting subject to play the perspective.
I was pretty sure that you would like to try that. Hope you enjoy the lens.
By the way, Hermeto Pascoal will come to Japan in May. I'm looking forward to visiting his show!
-
I was pretty sure that you would like to try that. Hope you enjoy the lens.
By the way, Hermeto Pascoal will come to Japan in May. I'm looking forward to visiting his show!
I envy him.
i'd like to go to Japan in May too!
;)
-
(https://nikongear.net/revival/proxy.php?request=http%3A%2F%2Fjohnkoerner.org%2Fwp-content%2Fuploads%2F2013%2F07%2Fzeiss25.png&hash=3f76d16d980141f01a65a6b42a668e78d6c0baa2)
I read this thread (and the original that preceded it) with great interest, mostly because I am a macro shooter ... though I dabble in other elements.
The reader should be aware there are two “Classic Zeiss Distagon T* 25mm lenses”: the f/2.8 and the f/2.0.
Almost every “lens rating site” will discredit the f/2.8 version (the subject lens here) and laud the f/2.0 (a landscape lens, with no macro potential) … for the simple reason the f/2 has better “corner sharpness.”
What the review sites don’t tell you (because they’re run by nerds, not nature photographers) is, while the f/2.8 version may be weaker in the corners, it is just as good in the center. Stopped down to f/8, it is also a pretty nice landscape lens, though it never achieves the level of the f/2 version.
But don't run away yet :)
If a prospective owner would take the time to read actual user reviews, those who have tried both invariably return the f/2 version, and keep the 2.8 version, because of the limited usefulness of former, compared to the extreme versatility of the latter 8)
When a user actually gets up from a lab bench, and goes out to use these lenses in nature, he quickly begins to enjoy the fact the subject 2.8 version has a 1:2 reproduction ratio (compared to a 1:6 reproduction ratio in the f/2), as well as a 2.36″ (6 cm) minimum working distance ... compared to a 5.2″ (13 cm) working distance in the f/2 :D
Further, and just as important to nail super-detailed shots of flowers, etc., the 2.8 version has 330° of focus throw, for precision-focus, compared to 120° of focus throw in the f/2.
So, when trying to decide between the two Zeiss 28 Distagons, if you’re a pure landscape shooter, then the f/2 version is probably the superior choice. However, if you’re a multi-dimensional wildlife shooter, particularly if you’re into macro (flowers/insects), then you don’t care about ‘corner sharpness,’ as much as intimate proximity, working distance, as well as maximum reproduction ratio ... so the f/2.8 version will be the clear choice.
The combination of features, involving good reproduction ratio married to small working distance, is what prompted the NIKKOR - The Thousand and One Nights No.57 (http://imaging.nikon.com/history/story/0057/index.htm) article, by Kouichi Ohshita, celebrating the Nikkor 28mm AI-S. In the article, Oshita says,
- While many users tend to focus on aspects and specifications (sic), I think that more importance should be placed on minimum focus distance and maximum reproduction ratio. These aspects are directly related to the degree of flexibility a lens offers. For example, have you ever photographed flowers with a normal zoom lens, and then switched to a telephoto lens to make the flowers appear larger or closer, only to find that you couldn't make the flowers appear any larger or closer because the minimum focus distance for the telephoto lens was quite long? Micro lenses are the best lenses for situations like this. Therefore, with actual shooting, the minimum focus distance is every bit as important as focal length. If we look at brochures in this way, the unique characteristics of the AI Nikkor 28mm f/2.8S covered in this tale become clear. It has a minimum focus distance of just 20 cm, one of the shortest among wide-angle lenses, and a high maximum reproduction ratio of 1/3.9x. This is one of the reasons this "approachability" is still included in our manual focus lens lineup.
This features are what endeared me to the little 28mm AI-S :)
However, with the truth of the above passage in mind, the 28mm AI-S can't hold a candle to this Zeiss.
This Zeiss has a 3x closer working distance, twice the reproduction ratio, as well as twice the focus throw.
It is with great excitement and anticipation that I just took delivery of my own mint copy today ;D
Perfect timing ... as all the rains will make for a beautiful spring ... so I hope to share some nice flower images soon.
-
Thank you for the insightful comment.
I bought the f/2.8 instead of the f/2 exactly because of the close focus feature.
There is a world of possibilities with it.
-
I decided in favour of the 2.8 versions for two reasons:
- Depending on who reviewed the two Zeiss Classic 25 mm lenses the 2.8 didn‘t fare worse than the 2.0. E.g. digloyd stated that the zone of sharpness was angled outward with the 2.0 (seen from photographer’s position) whereas it is curved inward for the 2.8 which is preferable in my esteem for photos of one main motif in the foreground. In such a situation I am not in need of corner sharpness and the curvature of the Zone of sharpness of the Zeiss 2.0 could turn out to be counterintuitive.
- Size: I like to be mobile outside. Heavy lenses hamper. E.g. during our Scotland meetup I used almost only Zeiss 25 mm 2.8 paired with a Zeiss 50 mm 2.0 Macro. Only very rarely did I miss a tele lens. If anyone cares: Pictures from that trip including exif info should still be available in this fine forum.
Cheers,
Günther
-
Thank you for the insightful comment.
I bought the f/2.8 instead of the f/2 exactly because of the close focus feature.
There is a world of possibilities with it.
Agreed! Thank you for making me look at it more closely (pardon the pun).
Had work to do ... but receiving it today made me want to play hookey ... so I took it out for a quick spin.
These images were taken today, and it was windy (in fairly-bright, uneven light) so the close-up work was a bit of a challenge.
Will obviously take more serious shots as time progresses, but hope these are fun to look at :D
-
I decided in favour of the 2.8 versions for two reasons:
- Depending on who reviewed the two Zeiss Classic 25 mm lenses the 2.8 didn‘t fare worse than the 2.0. E.g. digloyd stated that the zone of sharpness was angled outward with the 2.0 (seen from photographer’s position) whereas it is curved inward for the 2.8 which is preferable in my esteem for photos of one main motif in the foreground. In such a situation I am not in need of corner sharpness and the curvature of the Zone of sharpness of the Zeiss 2.0 could turn out to be counterintuitive.
Agree completely. Diglloyd actually blasted this lens at first, from behind the bench, but when he went outside and actually used it ... he reversed his opinion completely ;)
Photozone, in particular, lambasted this lens ... but they walk outside and take cursory shots, and aren't really close-up or macro shooters at all. To give them credit, they did mention this:
- The Zeiss lens is capable of focusing down to just 17cm (min. object to front element distance: 6cm) which is a fairly unique feature in an 25mm lens. It is this feature, that despite its optical flaws makes the lens fun to use in the field nonetheless. The unusual and unique look of close up images taken with a fast wide angle lens defines the niche where the Distagon 25 shines.
As parenthetically-stated, the working distance (subject to lens) is a tiny 2.36″ (6 cm). It's so close, I didn't even use it at that distance today.
The point is, the reader has to learn to read these 'reviews,' not as absolutes, but with a grain of salt, learning to ignore the biases of the author and interpret the data based on one's own needs.
- Size: I like to be mobile outside. Heavy lenses hamper. E.g. during our Scotland meetup I used almost only Zeiss 25 mm 2.8 paired with a Zeiss 50 mm 2.0 Macro. Only very rarely did I miss a tele lens. If anyone cares: Pictures from that trip including exif info should still be available in this fine forum.
Cheers,
Günther
Agreed again, Günther. A lot can be accomplished with a 25 and a 50mm prime. (I used to favor the 28 and the 50 AI-S, now I am favoring Zeiss primes.)
This Zeiss is a bit bigger, and a bit heavier, than my lil' AI-S 28mm ... but not by that much ... but it feels reassuringly higher-quality in hand, and is a much more capable tool overall.
Would definitely like to see your images ...
Jack
-
Would definitely like to see your images ...
Jack
Just a few (25 mm + 50 mm) pictures from Scotland (mostly landscape pictures at f/8), but I think they show that this lens doesn't have to hide behind its "bigger brother":
https://www.flickr.com/photos/91483630@N08/albums/72157671992034842 (https://www.flickr.com/photos/91483630@N08/albums/72157671992034842)
Cheers,
Günther
-
Just a few (25 mm + 50 mm) pictures from Scotland (mostly landscape pictures at f/8), but I think they show that this lens doesn't have to hide behind its "bigger brother":
https://www.flickr.com/photos/91483630@N08/albums/72157671992034842 (https://www.flickr.com/photos/91483630@N08/albums/72157671992034842)
Cheers,
Günther
Nice.
For a macro-dedicated stroll this morning, I tried the Zeiss 25mm and the Voigtländer 125mm macro. I took some snapshots with both to compare the perspectives of the two.
I also used the Zeiss 25mm, reversed, with the aid of a Sensei PRO 58-52mm Step-Down Ring (https://www.bhphotovideo.com/c/product/1068043-REG/sensei_sdrpa_5852_pro_58_52mm_aluminum_step_down.html) + a Nikon BR-2A (https://www.bhphotovideo.com/c/product/37171-REG/Nikon_2657_BR_2A_Lens_Reversing_Ring.html) adapter. (My calculations show this lens achieves 2.7x magnification, reversed.)
Below shall describe the images (nothing fancy, just the versatility of the 25mm):
Photo 1: The Setting (white flowers blooming near a small creak)
Photo 2: Closest Working Distance of Zeiss 25mm (image taken with cell phone)
Photo 3: Closest Working Distance of Voigtländer 125mm (image taken with cell phone)
Photo 4: Results of Zeiss 25mm (single image at 1:2 magnification taken @ f/2.8)
Photo 5: Results of Voigtländer 125mm (single image at 1:1 magnification taken @ f/2.5)
Photo 6: Results of Zeiss 25mm (77-image stack at 2.7x magnification taken @ f/4)
Photo 7: Another shot taken with the Zeiss 25mm (unk magnification, taken @ f/5)
All-in-all, it is a pretty nifty and versatile lens :D
-
Nice study.
Thank you for that.
I’m waiting for an oportunity to use this Zeiss in landscape pics with some subject close in front, like a flower or an insect.
-
- Depending on who reviewed the two Zeiss Classic 25 mm lenses the 2.8 didn‘t fare worse than the 2.0. E.g. digloyd stated that the zone of sharpness was angled outward with the 2.0 (seen from photographer’s position) whereas it is curved inward for the 2.8 which is preferable in my esteem for photos of one main motif in the foreground. In such a situation I am not in need of corner sharpness and the curvature of the Zone of sharpness of the Zeiss 2.0 could turn out to be counterintuitive.
An excellent observation: I'd dearly love to retire my 24/2.8 AI Nikkor.
The 330 degree focus throw is a two edged sword: This would be a difficult lens to use with a moving subject but superb for working from a tripod at close range.
Now I'll peek at the price of the f/2.8 and have a little cry.
Dave Hartman
-
Nice study.
Thank you for that.
I’m waiting for an oportunity to use this Zeiss in landscape pics with some subject close in front, like a flower or an insect.
You bet.
I am waiting for the same thing ... spring's just happening right now, so it shouldn't be too long :)
Would love to check out your images when you get the time.
Next post I make, I'll put some more effort into the results and give her a serious check.
-
An excellent observation: I'd dearly love to retire my 24/2.8 AI Nikkor.
You'll be glad you did :)
The 330 degree focus throw is a two edged sword: This would be a difficult lens to use with a moving subject but superb for working from a tripod at close range.
I don't think 25mms are ever really used for 'moving subjects' ... maybe if reportage ... but it's still not too bad (if you're in the general range anyway).
Maybe if you jump from trying to photograph a bee on a flower ... to bigfoot in the distance ... you might be delayed (but even there, not so much :) ).
IMO, 330° of focus throw is a real benefit in 95% of any instance where you'd want to use a 25mm lens ... either for close-up (flowers) or really trying to nail the general area you want in-focus on a landscape (I often focus on the middle-ground, rather than infinity).
It certainly is a more pleasurable exercise (for me, anyway), compared to a typical landscape lens, with a paltry 90° to 130° of focus throw :-\
Now I'll peek at the price of the f/2.8 and have a little cry.
Dave Hartman
They're really not that expensive, David.
Brand-new = $1,100.
I got mine, in mint condition, box + everything else, for $624.95 (free shipping from Japan).
In questioning the seller, I discovered mine was "a storefront example," used for showing to customers, without ever actually being sold or used outdoors.
It still had the unclaimed/unregistered warranty card, which Zeiss just honored by confirmation email this morning, as a matter of fact.
Literally, I got this "as good as new" ... with the full warranty "as if" new ... for about $500 off the new sticker price.
Hell of a deal, if you ask me 8)
-
Flower Crab Spider (Mecaphesa Sp.) ♀
>>would fit on your pinky fingernail <<
Nikon D810 + Zeiss Distagon T* 25mm f/2.8, reversed
83-image stack @ 2.7x magnification
-
Flower Crab Spider (Mecaphesa Sp.) ♀
>>would fit on your pinky fingernail <<
Nikon D810 + Zeiss Distagon T* 25mm f/2.8, reversed
83-image stack @ 2.7x magnification
Great picture!
-
Flower Crab Spider (Mecaphesa Sp.) ♀
>>would fit on your pinky fingernail <<
Nikon D810 + Zeiss Distagon T* 25mm f/2.8, reversed
83-image stack @ 2.7x magnification
Wow! Striking portrait.
Dave
-
Great shots, but not for me, way too short working distance...
-
Great picture!
Wow! Striking portrait.
Dave
Thanks!
_______________
Great shots, but not for me, way too short working distance...
Thanks.
It is not my usual preferred working distance either (properly-oriented).
However, I can see it being useful for certain applications, giving perspective (subject + environment) that standard macro lenses cannot.
I am thinking of, say, photographing a mushroom at ground-level ... and yet capturing the forest in the background, things like that.
A standard macro would just isolate the mushroom, while this might give a more interesting (or even companion) perspective of the effort.
-
I am thinking of, say, photographing a mushroom at ground-level ... and yet capturing the forest in the background, things like that.
A standard macro would just isolate the mushroom, while this might give a more interesting (or even companion) perspective of the effort.
Bjorn has talked about using the the good 'ol 20mm f/3.5mm with a K-1 ring for similar application (I think). Of course, the vintage Nikkor is not a modern Zeiss, but the application you described sounds similar. An inanimate subject would work, you gotta be super close to the subject with the 20mm and K-1.
-
Bjorn has talked about using the the good 'ol 20mm f/3.5mm with a K-1 ring for similar application (I think). Of course, the vintage Nikkor is not a modern Zeiss, but the application you described sounds similar. An inanimate subject would work, you gotta be super close to the subject with the 20mm and K-1.
The Zeiss 25 mm f/2.8 isn't exactly a new construction, either.
It predates the Zeiss 25 mm f/2.0 and the newest Zeiss Milvus 25 mm f/1.4.
-
Presuming a 3 to 5 year design period before production and first sale, the Nikkor 20/3.5 AiS is roughly a 30-year older design than the current ZF 25/2.8.
-
To be honest, the detail of this lens, reversed, I don't think is as sharp as my Nikkor lenses reversed. Here is a different crab spider, taken with the Nikkor 20mm AI-S, reversed:
(https://farm4.staticflickr.com/3816/33514523295_5fda52e6ad_h.jpg) (https://flic.kr/p/T4yG9x)
Mecaphesa sp. (https://flic.kr/p/T4yG9x) by John A. Koerner II (https://www.flickr.com/photos/naturescapes007/), on Flickr
The above image was also taken on a bellows, and is about 4:1 (not 2.7), but the Zeiss (while seemingly less-sharp) does seem to have a creamier, less-harsh bokeh, with more pleasing transitions.
-
As I continue to play with this delightful lens, I am thinking its best function as a nature lens is Plant Identification (near and far) ...
-
Very nice examples of the lens capability.
Thank you.
-
Very nice examples of the lens capability.
Thank you.
Thanks here are a few that push the color limits (make you want to hide your eyes :) )
One of an Ice Plant (wide), the other at the lens' MFD close to a flower, and the third (reversed) at 2.7x magnification, focus-stacked.
-
Some more images to show the versatility of the lens:
1. San Dimas Canyon Mountain (Fireman's Trail, foggy morning) @ f/8
2. Western Poison Oak (Toxicodendron diversilobum) @ f/8
3. Western Poison Oak (Close) @ f/8
4. Western Poison Oak (Close II) same as previous, but @f/2.8
5. Flower Crab Spider (Mecaphesa sp.) 15-image stack, reversed, @ f/4
I made a comparison of close-ups, @ f/8 vs. f/2.8, and like the presentation better at f/2.8. (f/8 is clearer ... but f/2.8 draws you in ... kind of a swirly, focused in center-to-less-focused outer, heavy-vignetting effect).
For reverse-image stacks, f/4 is the sweets spot.