Zeiss Distagon 35mm f/2 - experience anyone?

I think I am ready to continue my search for a high quality, fast prime in the 24-35mm rangeto pair with my 7Dthat isn't outrageously expensive. I am a happy owner of the EF 70-300L, EF 85 f/1.8, EF 100L Macro and the Tamron 17-50 f/2.8.


I've bought and sold the...

• EF 24 f/2.8 - decent performance but not fast enough
• EF 17-40 f/4 - obviously not a fast lens
• EF 50 f/1.4 - a little long for my needs and significant AF irregularities

I really like my Tamron, but at f/2.8 and no IS, it's not really fast enough for a lot of indoor work. The EF 28 f/1.8 gets mixed reviews. The EF 35 f/2 is an old lens without USM for, now, almost $450. The EF 35 f/1.4 is aging and seems expensive at $1600. The EF 24 f/1.4ii is even more expensive.


Which leads me to the Zeiss 35mm f/2, which is over $400 less than the Canon EF 35 f/1.4 (and yes, a stop slower). Anyone use it on the 7D? Does the focus confirmation work reliably? I wouldn't use it for any sports or action -- only for indoor shots, landscapes, etc. for which there is time to futz around with manual focus.


The other, much cheaper alternative is the Sigma 30 f/1.4, but I am hesitant to get another APS-C lens right now. And I admit that the Zeiss's cult following intrigues me; when you read the reviews, it's like people would sell their kids to get their hands on one of these.


Or should I just jack up the ISO on my Tamron and live with it? Force myself to use my speedlite 430ex, which I often avoid because its size?


Thanks for your input!


Brian

G'day Brian, I have the 35mm Zeiss, it hardly ever comes off my camera.I bought the f/1.4, but the f/2 is also a superb lens.


The focus confirm works perfectly and I seem to get percentage wise more shots that I am happy with. I think that is probably because I take a bit more time and think about composition a little bit more. AF is faster and easier no question.


Zeiss has a feel and a following, you either like it or you don't.


Here is a shot from my garden when I first got the lens, it is shot wide open and has a bit of everything going on. Contrasty reds and greens and blown out sky, nice bokeh here and there and a bit of thin DOF/ 3D going on. Just click on it to view full size on Flickr.


http://farm6.static.flickr.com/5029/...ed52a374_z.jpg


Good luck,


Steve

Beautiful shot Steve. It is, as many have said about Zeiss lenses, a bit dreamy in its look; the plant in the center is so sharp, while the rest is pleasantly OOF. That

Here is a shot that should show fringing of there is some. This is a good one to view full size on Flickr.


http://farm3.static.flickr.com/2688/...f306f2e9_z.jpg


And this one just because the colour is soo nice.


http://farm4.static.flickr.com/3530/...d2bbd1f2_z.jpg


Steve

Hey Brian....ok I haven't any experience with the Zeiss 35 f2, but I have rented the 21 2.8 and the 50 f2 Makro Planar, and I can tell you that they are stellar lenses. As per the examples above, the have great contrast and colors...and bokeh. the only one I didn't like(also rented), was the Zeiss 85 1.4. the bokeh was phenomenal, but it just wasn't sharp wide open. check out Diglloyd.com for examples and comparisons against L lenses in great detail(unfortunately, it costs).


I wouldn't hesitate to rent the 35 f2 from Lensrentals.com, and find out yourself. But, at the same time, I use a sigma 30 1.4 on my 1D4 on a regular basis, and it shines pretty well!! I can't use it past more than f4-f4.5 because of the larger sensor than 1.6x, but that's not why I have it...I want and use it from 1.4-f2 99% of the time.


Good luck with your decision.


Gregg

Check out Bryan

Thanks for the ideas. I just rented the Zeiss for 6 days over Memorial Day. I