Zeiss 85 1.4 vs. Canon 85 1.8
There is for sale a used Zeiss ZE 85mm F1.4 T* in my hometown, and I seriously consider this lens, even though it costs twice as much as a Canon 85mm 1.8. Which lens would you go for? It will mostly be used for portraits of my family, and some landscape/nature. Perhaps some indoor sport, but that will not be decisive. Since the seller is living nearby, I will have the opportunity to test the lens.
I will use the lens on my 400D, which will be upgraded during the next two-three years. I assume the lens will outlive the camera.
I know that the Zeiss is manual focus, and that is not a problem for me. I used to shoot manual focus for 15 years before I got my 400D, and with the uses I intend to us it for, fast focus is not crucial.
I hope someone can help me out here. By the way, the Canon 85mm 1.2 is not an option, please do not annoy me with telling me how superb this lens is. Alas, I will never afford it [8o|].
What do you experts say, is the Zeiss two-three times better than the 85mm IQ-wise? I have read the reviews and compared the ISO-charts, and the Zeiss seems a bit sharper. However, I am not too familiar with the ISO-charts, and cannot translate the results into real life...
Lars
Re: Zeiss 85 1.4 vs. Canon 85 1.8
Quote:
Originally Posted by Lars
What do you experts say, is the Zeiss two-three times better than the 85mm IQ-wise?
No, it is not. The one of the biggest advantages for theZeissis the Bokeh, thats were were the 85mm f/1.8 is not as good.
Quote:
Originally Posted by Lars
However, I am not too familiar with the ISO-charts, and cannot translate the results into real life...
A ISO chart is a poster with black lines and such that you photograph and stare at 100%, it makes it easy to see all the lens defects. What you see translatesmostlywhat you see inreal life.
How about the Bower 85mm f/1.4? It's sharp enough and has great Bokeh and faster aperture than the Canon. Here is a link to the Vivitar 85mm f/1.4 review buy Ken Rockwell http://kenrockwell.com/nikon/85mm-corner-comparison.htmandanother one http://kenrockwell.com/nikon/85mm-center-comparison.htm(the Vivitaris just a rebranded version of the Bower, Samyang and others.)
John.
Re: Zeiss 85 1.4 vs. Canon 85 1.8
Quote:
Originally Posted by Lars
I know that the Zeiss is manual focus, and that is not a problem for me. I used to shoot manual focus for 15 years before I got my 400D
I'm guessing you shot manual focus on a film SLR, right? One with asplit screen and microprism ring on the focus screen, I'd bet. Those were designed to facilitate manual focusing. The focusing screen in your 400D, on the other hand, is designed to make accurate manual focusing with fast lenses more difficult. Not 'on purpose' but to compensate for the typical consumer lenses in use today, the standard focusing screens in dSLRs are laser-etched to make narrow aperture lenses seem brighter. As a result, the depth of field you see through the viewfinder is only as wide as ~f/2.5, even on a lens that's as fast as the Zeiss 85mm f/1.4. That means what will appear in focus in the VF is a DoF that's almost twice as deep as what will actually be in focus at f/1.4. It's for this reason that many people who use fast lenses and manual focus swap out the standard focusing screen for one designed for fast lenses, e.g. the Eg-S screen for the 5DII. There are no substitute Canon focusing screens for a 400D, but there is a 3rd party alternative from Katzeye. If you go that route, be sure you understand the consequences (e.g. AF points not there, or if you have them etched in they won't light up, effects on metering, etc.).
--John
Re: Zeiss 85 1.4 vs. Canon 85 1.8
Good pointNeuro, I just assume that everyone shoots manual lenses and know the consequences![:P]
I also have the 400D/XTi and it can be very hard at times to focus acurately, I also have a manual focus film camera with a split screen and it's beans in comparison! I shot a paradein manualfilmandevery shot in perfect focus.Also Rebels have very small viewfinders in comparison to XXd or 1d/1ds series camera bodies.
John.
Re: Zeiss 85 1.4 vs. Canon 85 1.8
I am familiar with the split screen and its advantages in manual focusing. When I said that I plan to upgrade my camera body in a few years, the possiblity to change into a screen suitable for manual focusing will be something I want to consider. All my macro shooting is done by manual focusing, but I have to admit that it would be more annoying to find a good portrait out of focus than a bug or flower that I am not related to at all.
I am also thinking invenstment-wise. I would like a lens that will keep me satisfied for decades (almost like the perfect wife [:P]). A body can be changed with a lighter heart when a better version comes up (no comparison needed [;)]).
I have read about the Vivitar/Bower lens before. Some claim that it is a lens that is equal to canon and nikon's 1.8 versions, other says that it is a bit hazardious to buy it, and that you can end up with a bad lens (particularly build quality).
Lars
