I love my Zeiss 21/2.8

To ask a question regarding the Zeiss Distagon T* 28mm f/2.0 Lens with ZF.2 Mount for Nikon F vs. the Nikkor 28mm f/1.8 and the 24mm f/1.4. Some opinions regarding the overall performance and experience is appreciated.

My thoughts are this is a nice prime, either on a DX (D400 if it gets here) and FX. Also, I was thinking of using it on a Fujifilm X-E1 with a Novoflex adapter.

And, your help is appreciated. I do know the test of the Zeiss lens shows it is very sharp.

Godless said:
Check out Photozone.de and Lenstip too. They have reviewed the Zeiss ZF range.

I have looked there - their tests are too generic for what I look for in a portrait lens. Zeiss have a look, some say 3d. The Nikkor does as well, to a point. As Beso put, the intangibles are what I look at. At the price for the Zeiss, it doesn't mean much for me - I want the VR & macro of the Nikkor so it's not going to go anywhere.

I am currently debating whether to purchase the Nikkor AF-S 85mm f/1.4G or the Zeiss Makro-Planar T* 100mm f/2 ZF.2. Since the purpose is primary as a portrait lens the manual focus on the Zeiss is not an issue for me. The reviews on both are very, very good with a slight edge perhaps going to Zeiss for bokeh and the intangibles of color and warmth. One local shop tells me the Zeiss is very good but parts and service are difficult. He suggests sticking with Nikon (but he sells Nikon and not Zeiss). I would like to hear from others with experience regarding these two lenses and also service related comments. The cost difference is only about $150 between the Nikon and Zeiss and at this level that is really pretty minimal.

TaoTeJared said:
Has anyone tested/compared Nikon counterparts? Or even seen any good reviews that do this?

Check out Photozone.de and Lenstip too. They have reviewed the Zeiss ZF range.

I love using the 105 for portrait work and seeing what the Zeiss does, just makes me mesmerized. But I have seen the Nikkor do close to the same but never have been able to find close enough comparison images to tell. Most Zeiss users usually have a distinct feel to their images (experience) that many images of the Nikkor users lack so sometimes it is hard to tell.

If my eyes were better, and didn't have the need for AF as much, I think would have a full set of Zeiss glass.

I wish I still did, but I sold my copy two years ago to acquire the AI-S 85mm 1.4 If I can find a friend who's got one Ill definitely compare them since I've always missed the 105VR and would love to see how it stacks up.

You don't happen to have access to the 105mm 2.8 vr to compare do you? Always wondered how those two stacked up.

Im awaiting delivery of my copy of the ZF.2 100mm f2 Makro. Should be here tomorrow looking at where its tracking now. Got it brand new for an absolute steal at $1649(MSRP$2099). Will likely be stuck on my D700 for while once I get my hands on it. :]

And Im looking very seriously at eventually selling my 14-24 to help fund the ZF.2 15mm, at least whenever it becomes available.

The Zeiss has metal everything. Even the lens hood is metal. The ZF.2 has electronic CPU contacts. You manually set the aperture ring to the f22 and then you can change fstops electronically via your camera's command dial. The Zeiss is an excellent lens but it's hard to focus manually with modern DSLRs. I prefer using them on my film cameras instead.

The .2 lenses have metal contacts?

gnarly said:
I am looking at the Nikkor AF-S 85 F1.4G lens and was wondering if anyone has used the Zeiss T85 F 1.4, and might know how the two compare. I have read some reviews on both and my inclination would be to go with the Nikkor. The price point is about the same, and the fact that the Zeiss is manual focus is not a deal breaker for me.

I have been looking at that as well. I would love to hear anyone who has used the 85mm.

I have been watching the ZF (non .2) on ebay and some are dropping in price if you catch it just right. The .2-s also msrp much higher than the older versions. I do like the what .2 adds though. Buying one of these would be one that will last for many, many years so although the price matters, I can live with paying more for something that will not fail.

I have considered the Voights but just as the Zeiss, many are right in the range I already have covered with good glass.

I don't like hearing the 25mm may not be the best. That would be the focal length I would look at along with the 28 and 21. Shooting DX puts me in a bad position for focal lengths I want to shoot. This maybe one of those I keep my eye on till I go FX.

I am looking at the Nikkor AF-S 85 F1.4G lens and was wondering if anyone has used the Zeiss T85 F 1.4, and might know how the two compare. I have read some reviews on both and my inclination would be to go with the Nikkor. The price point is about the same, and the fact that the Zeiss is manual focus is not a deal breaker for me.

Ps you could even stretch this post to encompass Zeiss, Leica R and perhaps Voigtlander lenses for Nikon as well. The voigtlanders are almost as good as the Zeiss glass! Excellent quality at most focal lengths especially wide like 15, and 21mm on Leica. I've heard good things about the 40 and 90mm for Nikon. Voigts have newly redesigned F mount system now! :)

By the way TaoTeJared, I forgot to mention some good news for you that you might already know about. The older 35, 28, 50mm ZF first versions seem to be very cheap now because of the release of the newer .2 versions. The newer versions as you probably know have automatic aperature confirmation on the nikon bodies with the normal camera F stop dial now. So not only are a lot of the older ZF popping up for sale used or still new over stock, but they have really dropped in price. I saw a 35mm ZF for $600 compared to the $900 I paid for it and half of the $1150 I paid for the newer 35mm .2 last March. Zeiss glass is top notch all the way and I use one ZM for my Leica system as well they are excellent!

By the way: It's a MOOSE! Not an elk (I can say this with confidence, living in MT and having shot numerous elk).

And FWIW, a female (cow) moose with young calf is one of the most dangerous animals in the woods. They will positively try to kill you if you get too close... we've had several people attacked and killed in the mountains near here. The bulls can be dangerous too, as can any large wild animal, but they are usually solitary and mellow. Cows with young...no. Watch out, don't get too close, and be ready to hide behind a tree or climb one. I always am armed in the woods in springtime.

My cousin told me a story about a cow moose whose calf was snatched by a grizzly, who killed and tried to eat it on the PATIO of a Jackson Lake (WY) Lodge cabin, while the room's occupant watched through the patio door in astonishment. Wild Kingdom. The cow moose charged in numerous times fearlessly and attacked the grizzly to try and rescue her calf, and finally drove the bear off but it was too late. Imagine the photo possibilities there!

@Tao: I have friends who have the 35 and 50 Zeiss lenses, and LOVE them. One does portraits and weddings professionally *Link Removed* though he's a Canon guy. The 25 is not the best Zeiss according to a friend who has one...the 35 and 50 are astounding i am told. I also just saw some great work shot in a steel factory in Pakistan with the 21 (?), wide open, and it was absolutely gorgeous and looked like it was shot wide open.

I think I will get the 50 Zeiss when I go FX. For portraits it would be great. I need AF for the 35 for moving subjects, or maybe I'll use the 24-70 for AF, and the 35 Zeiss when I want speed.

Link: *Link Removed*

i would rent several. http://www.lensrentals.com/rent/nikon/lenses/wide-angle/zeiss-zf.2-35mm-f2-for-nikon

Keep us posted!

@kanuck - Thanks for the info and great photo! I'm looking for a moderate (25mm,28mm,35mm) wide and/or the 85mm. I'm still shooting DX (D300) for the time being and looking for something wide that will grow with me.

I would go for the 50mm but I already have three 50s (need to sell a couple) and I love the G so much that I can't see me moving away from that for some time.

Shigzeo, are you in Seoul right now? I live close to Jongno about 20 minutes by bus or 10 by car to the major camera district. One thing I have noticed though is the prices have gone up the past few years but the selection remains very high. I just wish I could find the SW150 Lee filter for the 14-24mm now haha. Getting off topic...

Be careful, I have seen many reports of elk trampling people or goring them. Haha, and to think, you stopped, composed, focused, and had time to breathe. Gutsy with a manual focus lens and a big elk.

NSXType-R said:
Try that next time with a bear!

tried it once in Chitwan, Nepal and will not do this again. I was going through the jungle with two guides and they haven't notice a bear female with cubs in the bushes in front of us. that was an extreme kick of adrenaline. never again I would like to hear the same sound so close:)

as for this elk shot I was also surprised that it allowed me to come so close.

@Kanuck, we seem to live in the same city. Ever want to have a powow? I head back to Canada/Japan at the early part of next month, and I think it is time we (meaning you) exchanged lenses with me! Haha.

Yes, I was also going to say the same thing: you must have been standing damn close to that elk... something I haven't had the guts to do. I've seen hundreds in the woods, but never got up and close and personal on purpose. Never.

Hi,

The Zeiss lenses are fantastic I just traded in my older 35mm ZF for the newer ZF .2 last week finally. Its wonderful and I love having the auto aperature mode back again. The 50mm is more reasonably priced than the others. The 85 is expensive and the 100mm which is the best of the entire line is nuts. Where I live it costs more than the 14-24mm! If your curious you should start with the 50mm. I paid $1200 for my 35mm .2 but only $550 with the trade in of my old 35mm ZF otherwise I would have been out of luck.

Old 35mm ZF: