Wojciech Zielinski posted ...

Distagon 1.4/35 (Glatzel 1974 versus Current 2010) on APS-C

Distagon 1.4/35 (Glatzel 1974 versus Current 2010) on APS-C

Category: Zeiss Reviews

Posted: 05-27-13 3:03 PM - Views: 1818

By: Wojciech Zielinski

Back to post list


Share this topic with your colleagues

Start of discussion

I decided to publish this few shots because I was always curious if those two version really differs on or new design is only a new marketing approach. And I also decided because I used to shot with older version, I've already taken newer version and I have still possibility to gather those two lenses in one place and time.
You may find those information with a documentation of Contax/Yashica version and current ZF.2/ZE version. New version is larger (filter diameter grew up from 67mm to 72mm), longer (about 20mm), heavier (from 600g to 900g). You may find MTF's attached to documentation, when You compare it, You may find out that curve of newer version is slightly better (peltarion.eu/img/distoldnew.jpg]here at f/1.4). How is it going to result on RAWs? (those are jpg, which were made from RAWs with down-sampling from 70% at fan photos till 49% at cityscape).

Those shots are focused at lower-left letters of front plates at f/1.4. http://www.zeissimages.com/gallery/1155/U1155I1369685765.SEQ.0.jpg
www.zeissimages.com/gallery/1155/U1155I1369580429.SEQ.2.jpg]Left one presents front pupil of Distagon 1.4/35 ZF.2, taken with C/Y version.
www.zeissimages.com/gallery/1155/U1155I1369685498.SEQ.3.jpg]Right one present front pupil of Distagon 1.4/35 C/Y, taken with ZF.2 lens.
Those photos are taken with Sony NEX-5 (14MP) with manual mode and automatic white balance.

I decided to take very not sophisticated frames. It may help to focus on differences not to interpret their share in final outcome of whole photo.

Those are series photos focused with center plate of fan (label "sOlac"). It was taken with Sony NEX-7, aperture priority mode with auto white balance and ISO100.






(I dropped to shot with C/Y version at f/8)

Second series were taken with Sony Nex-7 and tripod too. The distance was near infinity (between 3m and infinity in barrel scale), ISO 100, I shot in aperture priority mode with multiple metering and auto white balance. I've focused in center group of tree. It is view from my window.









Have You wonder what version to buy or is it worth to upgrade from 1974 version to 2010 version? I answered myself, for me new version is worth to upgrade from older one.

At the ending, I wish to show You those photos, where both are focused at painting but rendering and details of loudspeaker's cable differs significantly for me. Both are taken with f/1.4 in manual mode and automatic white balance. Which lens' performance do You like more?


Thanks for Your time,
best regards, WZ.

PS. I believe that older version is less prone to color-shift at f/1.4, it has better better portability and it has nicer bokeh (IMHO). Newer version is more sharper at wide open (especially at borders of APS-C field) and quality of photos improves quicker while passing the same f-stops with newer version of Distagon 1.4/35. Please feel free for criticism and sharing You own experience with those epic glasses.


Reply from Wojciech Zielinski on 05-28-13 1:51 PM

Greetings Rainer,
Thanks for reading my thoughts and adding some of Your words to mine.

I haven't intend to make a blind criticism of any lenses. I tried to emphasize strong points of both construction. I believe that You should be pleased with Your equipment and it's more important than any opinion about Your equipment by others. There may be some similarity with marriage, human should choice 2nd half to make joyful bilateral relationship, not to change relation with 3rd side. When I wasn't happy with some of my lenses, I was looking for a different lens to fill some gap in my expectations. I like also to make decision with a prediction of effects. And I've never crossed-out any of my lenses, I am trying only to find best application to every of them.

On the other hand I believe it is not an skill to shot with extremely high-end equipment with average results, I believe the art is to shot with not most costly or not so popular equipment to achieve unexampled outcome. There is a much of commoners who affirm an first part about putting a lot of efforts to get inferior outcome.
But some of our friends and You may confirm second part of sentence. I am much moved with Your photos and I hope to see more of them. I am also interested in lens construction and other knowledge about lens so I am spending my time to learn more and more about my interests.

I hope that future camera will be capable to take photo with older lenses and non generic mounts. I see an advantage of current EF-mount and mirroless E-mount. I decided to choice e-mount over EF mount's due it allow to use ZM and Contax-G lenses too.

Best regards WZ.
Reply from Wolf Rainer Schmalfuss on 05-28-13 8:52 AM

Hi WZ, what is it doing any good for me to know, that the version A might be better than the verson B? I have the C/Y 1,4/35mm version, and I am very pleased with it on my FX Canon 5DMkII, and I will adapt this, and my other excellent Zeiss glasses for sure, in the near future, on other nice cameras to come! I don't make test shots, I know for sure, that my lenses, incl. the foreigners, are ALL good enough for me!
Please login to post or reply