Results 1 to 6 of 6

Thread: Zeiss 15mm f/2.8 vs 14mm f/2.8 L II

  1. #1
    Senior Member
    Join Date
    Jan 2009
    Posts
    759

    Zeiss 15mm f/2.8 vs 14mm f/2.8 L II

    Seeing as Bryan's already got the 12233 crops up, I thought we should start a thread on which one would be better.
    For a start, in the bottom crop, the Zeiss is a bit darker (1-stop more vignetting), but the L has a lot more CA (look at the square).
    The mid-frame on the Zeiss looks sharper, the '14' is a lot better than the L.
    In the centre, the zeiss looks a bit rotated compared to the L, and there's a dead pixel on the '3' of the '36'. I'm not sure this is a property of the Zeiss lens or not. Maybe Bryan's been using his test camera too much and really really needs that 1DX upgrade.
    At any rate, the L looks like it wins in the centre, more definition of the black/white boundaries in the circles.

    Can't tell shich one looks more distorted, almost even.

    But man, with that lens cap on, even mounted on the 1Ds3, it looks worse than my Zodiak 30mm Medium-Format fisheye...
    An awful lot of electrons were terribly inconvenienced in the making of this post.
    Gear Photos

  2. #2
    Senior Member
    Join Date
    Jan 2009
    Location
    Planet Earth
    Posts
    2,973
    It looks like the Zeiss is better in the mid frame and edges. But both lens are very sharp. For the way I would use such a lens, I think the sharpness in the edges and midframe would Zeiss the edge here.

    For me, whether I choose one or the other, the deciding factor could very well be filters. The 14m uses drop in filters and has a front lens that bulbs out. The 15mm appears that it can handle a screwed front filter.

    I had a 14mm for about a week, and sent it back and got a 16-35mm II instead. I wouldn't mind having a super wide lens in my kit. I still go back and look at some of my pictures I took with it, and they are great. Coupled with DXO it would be a great lens to have for the current assignment.

    I would be happy with either lens attached to my camera, no matter what it looks like.

  3. #3
    Senior Member
    Join Date
    Jan 2009
    Location
    San Francisco, CA
    Posts
    243
    What do you mean coupled with DXO?

  4. #4
    Senior Member
    Join Date
    Jan 2009
    Posts
    759
    Well, we know Zeiss is pricey, but that's a lot for a specialist prime, $50 change from $3000...
    http://www.the-digital-picture.com/N...aspx?News=2124
    An awful lot of electrons were terribly inconvenienced in the making of this post.
    Gear Photos

  5. #5
    Senior Member
    Join Date
    Jan 2009
    Location
    Planet Earth
    Posts
    2,973
    Quote Originally Posted by Jordan View Post
    What do you mean coupled with DXO?
    Part of DxO's program will correct the distortion you get from wide lenses, provided DxO supports this lens. When it corrects the distortion the picture will be much wider.

  6. #6
    Senior Member
    Join Date
    Jan 2009
    Location
    Planet Earth
    Posts
    2,973
    Quote Originally Posted by Dr Croubie View Post
    Well, we know Zeiss is pricey, but that's a lot for a specialist prime, $50 change from $3000...
    http://www.the-digital-picture.com/N...aspx?News=2124
    Such a specialty lens, I think this one could definitely be a rent only lens.

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •