It's not bad at all it just doesn't have "the look" for me like some of the alternate options. I think this combo can tend to look a little "sterile". (I personally don't mind this "shortcoming") No interchangeable film backs/inserts must be changed after roll is finished. Not quite the level of plasticity/microcontrast we see in the Zeiss 80mm f2 *Note: After having a lot of practice with a 67, I would argue that someone who uses one all the time can change film almost as quickly if not more quickly than someone reloading their Contax. Not quite as low light capable at f/2.4 compared to 80mm f/2Įrgonomics not quite as advanced as other options It’s close, but I tend to find the images taken with the 105mm to generally appear a bit more “crispy” when compared I personally don’t think that the 105mm 2.4 possess the level of "creaminess” that is seen in photos taken with the Zeiss 80mm or the Cinelux lenses. High resolution, sharp, very pleasant bokehĮxcellent "pop" that rivals the Zeiss 80mm f/2 I have yet to see any images that convince of this.Ĭomparable or perhaps slightly shallower depth of field compared to 80mm f/2 on Contax 645Ħx7 negatives provide for a very interesting perspective I have heard others say that it’s bokeh is “busy” and/or “more distracting”. Good lens, but doesn’t have as much “pop” or character as the Zeiss 80mm Good lens, but seems a litte more sterile to me Good lens, but doesn’t have the same “pop” as the Zeiss 80mm" Great lens, but perhaps not quite as “smooth” of a renderingĮqual to if not better image quality than the Zeiss 80mm f/2Īnother great lens comparable to the Zeiss 80mmīeautiful lens with a “smooth” rendering similar to the Zeiss 80mm. After this little list, I’ll discuss my thoughts about body/lens combos compared, but just to give you a good idea of the other lenses we’ll be looking at and their image quality: Since we’re on the topic of lens importance, it’s a good time to skim through some of “the best” lenses that compare to the Zeiss 80mm f/2. If you'd like to some of my further thoughts on the Zeiss 80mm, be sure to check out my Contax Carl Zeiss 80mm f/2 Review. It is also interesting bokeh, but not too choppy or distracting. It's extremely pleasant in terms of buttery smoothness but isn't boring or flat as some lenses. This effect is a combination of the medium format perspective, quality of bokeh, transition of in focus to out of focus areas, sharpness of focal point, and over-all micro-contrast. In fact, a lens can have shallower depth of field, and yet have less pop than one with a wider depth of field. The subject "pops", and it's not merely just because of the bokeh, or shallow depth of field.
When we look at Zeiss glass, we see the pinnacle of this effect as far as popular modern film photography is concerned. Still, others say all the terms ultimately refer to the same thing. Regardless of the semantics, the pop-effect and what all actually creates it is hard to describe, though undeniable.
0 kommentar(er)
