This section allows you to view all posts made by this member. Note that you can only see posts made in areas you currently have access to.
Why does everyone respond to dilbert's nonsense? Can't we just ignore his posts and hope he goes away? It would make this forum much more enjoyable.
Sanj, I have found this to be the case with my Zeiss 21mm f/2.8, an incredible lens, which I bought for its true superiority over the Canon, 16-35mm f/2.8L II, in both sharpness and contrast. ...BUT after selling my Canon zoom and purchasing the new Canon 16-35mm f/4L IS, I have the same dilemma as you...the image quality from the new Canon zoom is so close to my Zeiss that I (horror of horrors! LOL), am considering selling the Zeiss. Same deal as you...the f/2.8 aperture just isn't enough that I find myself using it, and the IS and the AF on the Canon are making it my lens of choice.
There is that other reason not to sell the Zeiss, though....I get such real enjoyment out of just holding it and lustily coveting it.
The Canon pales in comparison there!
Sanj...I also notice...eh hem....that you are holding on to your Zeiss 135mm f/2.0 which (according to Dustin Abbott's timely review), blows away the Canon counterpart for sharpness and micro contrast. Very wise of you...as that Zeiss still has practical AND coveting qualities that are second to none!
So...with that in mind it should be easier for you to pry your little fingers off of your 15mm and 35mm Zeiss's and let someone else have a little coveting time, at a discount...c'mon...you can do it...just close you eyes and hold you 135mm...that's a boy.......
Carefully reconsider buying Zeiss lenses. I have had them and with the new Canon lenses I do not think the Zeiss I worth it. My opinion.
Thanks for the reply, but the thing is, I really want to use a manual focus lens (I know, it's all in the mind) so that I am forced to slow down and think more about what I am about to shoot.
So please ignore the brand mentioned and try to help me choose between a 35mm or a 50mm focal length
Canon... has very similar qualities and has autofocus, is lighter and cheaper.
That is exactly how I feel about Zeiss lenses I've had in the past. They are sturdy and cool-looking, but they don't do anything Canon lenses can't do (and Sigma it turns out), and they are heavy, expensive, and lack auto-focus
Seems pretty straight-forward - if you won't use them replace them. You're dealing with two of the finest lens
designs for 35mm, but the best lens in the world is useless if you don't use it. If you need to sell them to finance
the next lens, do it. Just don't feel bad when you later remember how good it was and wished you'd kept them.
I can't understand why Canon would persist to make F4 lenses, specially ones that are designed to be upgrades (Fisheye 8-15mm f4).
Probably the most pointless aperture setting there is.
Exactly!no news here: "we look forward to the advent of high-resolution model of the EOS". We are all looking forward to that. This poor guy works for Canon and he is looking forward to the same thing we are.
Pretty much my thoughts.
That there is heresy! How dare you blaspheme and validate Nikon's 36MP D800/D810 or Sony's cameras?
You should be saying that a high MP will be hard to work with, your computer is not fast enough, storage cards too small, pixels will be smaller and noisier, etc.
Everyone knows that a high megapixel Nikon is the devil's spawn, while a high megapixel Canon will be a godsend.....