Zeiss Distagon 25mm vs Zeiss 28mm

[9designs]

I have a 24mm Tamron, but didn’t feel the need to use it whilst touring costal towns this week. I found the step between CZ 18 – 28 – 50 mm fine. If you need such fine steps buy a CZ zoom ! ! !
I have a Sigma 17–35 for my Nikon F80, the difference between 25 and 28 is very small. So when I bought my wide angles a couple of weeks ago for the RX I went for the 28 T* as it’s easier to find, cheaper, and is supposed to be very sharp etc. If forced I could use my 24mm, as yet I haven’t had chance to do an image quality comparison, as I have yet to see my pictures from 18 or 28 CZ.

I bought the 18mm CZ on fact that I really like the Sigma 17-35, which was my first experience of ultra wide, so powerful, great fun walking to the front of a crowd and still fitting the whole subject in ;-)))) The CZ should give the same opportunities with excellent optics.

 

[dja]

>>What kind of good alternatives are there for the 25mm? I have come across the Yashica 24mm, the Sigma 24mm and the Cosina 24mm. Has anybody tried any of these lenses and either of the Distagon 25mm and Distagon 28mm? How do they compare?<<


I have a Yashica ML 24mm lens that has been highly rated at several sites I've seen,(http://www.cdegroot.com/photo/yashica/yashica-slr-faq-4.html#ss4.4) but I've never really been impressed. I have several ML lenses that I like very much (including the WONDERFUL 15mm fisheye) but the 24mm seems a little soft to me. My Tokina 28-70 seems sharper at the wide end. I suspect I have a less than perfect ex&le.

FWIW,
Dave

 

[europanorama]

>What kind of good alternatives are there for the 25mm? I have come >across the Yashica 24mm, the Sigma 24mm and the Cosina 24mm. Has >anybody tried any of these lenses and either of the Distagon 25mm and >Distagon 28mm? How do they compare?

 

[europanorama]

pls do not exaggerate: we have recognized that there are almost no difference between the 28mm and 25mm(its almost a 26mm). thats why you can get a little bit more on your picture. and now its 3D! strange opinion. 28mm is not 3D but 25 is.... if you really want 3D you will have to shoot with eighter a two-lens camera or time-parallax(move the camera after first shot(no action only static subjects). then put left at right side and vice-versa. by cross-eye-viewing you can see real 3D-stereo! nothing else is 3D. that mystique!

 

[europanorama]

>I have a Yashica ML 24mm lens that has been highly rated at several >sites I've >seen,(http://www.cdegroot.com/photo/yashica/yashica-slr-faq-4.html#ss4.4) but I've never really been impressed. I have several ML lenses that I like very much (including the WONDERFUL 15mm fisheye) but the 24mm seems a little soft to me. its not sharp in the corners,and left and right side! discussed endless times that zeiss,no zoom-lenses have the highest quality. no need to waste time reflection/testing. buy used cheap-non mm-lenses plus rts III, a tripod and sharp film(new kodak high definition (200 asa) color negative film and you will see what real quality is.

 

[dirk]

"pls do not exaggerate: we have recognized that there are almost no difference between the 28mm and 25mm(its almost a 26mm). thats why you can get a little bit more on your picture. and now its 3D! strange opinion. 28mm is not 3D but 25 is.... "

Michael,

just try it and you know what I mean. I know 3 people personally who were using both, the 28mm and the 25mm and ALL 3 agree on that 3-D impression of the 25mm. ALL 3 used from that moment on 99% of the time the 25mm for their purposes. This can not be by accident.

It does not make sense to discuss this in technical terms. As with many other things, you can not interprete/verify everything with technical terms available for us like MTF data etc. Just try it out

It is the same with the new N-lenses and G lenses. They have many improvements over the lenses designed before 1996, which you can NOT see in the MTF charts, Vignetting curves etc. i.e. colour correction, stray light (I do not know in the moment the exact expression for "Streulicht") etc. The same counts for the body constructions of cameras. Only few people know that only 50% of the amount of stray light is caused by the lens, the other 50% is caused by the camera body. But this would go too much off topic in this thread...

Dirk

 

[kingreverent]

> Dear Michael, There is something like a "3D" effect, it is very hard to explain if someone didn't see it before. It's like popping up, out of the paper of all kind of things, like the bricks of a wall, the bones's of the face, the microstructures... You can only see this effect if you devellop and print your own black and white or color papers, or do tranparancies. You see this "3D" effect at Leica, Contax and others brands...if you get their professional line of lenses....

 

[molte]

Dear Zymler and Dirk

I am intrigued by, and sceptical of this 3D effect. I would like to know wh= ich lenses/focal lengths produce this 3D effect.

It sounds a bit like discussing 'bokeh'.

 

[ou1954]

>Posted by Dirk on Sunday, June 01, 2003 - 1:14 pm: > >"pls do not exaggerate: we have recognized that there are almost no >difference between the 28mm and 25mm(its almost a 26mm). thats why you >can get a little bit more on your picture. and now its 3D! strange >opinion. 28mm is not 3D but 25 is.... " > >Michael, > >just try it and you know what I mean. I know 3 people personally who >were using both, the 28mm and the 25mm and ALL 3 agree on that 3-D >impression of the 25mm. ALL 3 used from that moment on 99% of the time >the 25mm for their purposes. This can not be by accident.

I keep reading 3-D impression. Since it cannot be described technically, maybe you could describe it some other way.

Maybe there are some images posted somewhere one could look at, or maybe someone could email some images outside the list showing the difference in impression.

I have a German 25 and don't see anything 3-D in the pictures it takes. I like it for some situations, but unless I really need that angle of coverage I prefer a normal lens which doesn't make everything so small.

Thanks,

Don

 

[ou1954]

>Posted by zymler on Sunday, June 01, 2003 - 2:50 pm: > > > Dear Michael, There is something like a "3D" effect, it is very hard >to explain if someone didn't see it before. It's like popping up, out >of the paper of all kind of things, like the bricks of a wall, the >bones's of the face, the microstructures... You can only see this >effect if you develop and print your own black and white or color >papers, or do transparencies. You see this "3D" effect at Leica, Contax >and others brands...if you get their professional line of lenses....

Could it perhaps be the change in perspective near the edges of the image which cause this impression, perhaps the fact that you are looking at the bricks at a greater slant angle.

I can't relate any such effect to whether you develop your own images or someone else does, nor to the use of color negatives developed by the photographer and transparencies which are usually developed by an outside lab.

I suppose that if one takes two shots of a face, one with a 50mm lens and the second with a 25mm lens and you change the subject distance to keep the same image size, the 25mm shot, taken closer up, will display a higher percentage of size difference between the nose and the ears than that shown by a 50mm lens. Is this perhaps what you are talking about?