Zeiss Distagon 15 f/2.8 ZE Official

[infared]

I would love to see a comparison of the Sam Yang and the new Zeiss!!!!!

[Axilrod]

Wow and to think I though the 14L was expensive, $3k for a wide angle?!   Im guessing it must perform incredibly well, as that's even expensive for a Zeiss lens.  That's over $1k more than the most expensive ZE lenses available (35 1.4, 21 2.8 and 100 f/2 are all $1850).

I was looking forward to this one, but I guess I'll have to pass. 

[Axilrod]

I would love to see a comparison of the Sam Yang and the new Zeiss!!!!!

That's not a very fair comparison, a $300 lens vs a $3000 lens, but here you go:

http://www.the-digital-picture.com/Reviews/ISO-12233-Sample-Crops.aspx?Lens=794&Camera=453&Sample=0&FLI=0&API=0&LensComp=769&CameraComp=0&FLIComp=0&APIComp=0

Looks like the Zeiss is crushing it for the most part.

[Jeffrey]

Ken Rockwell's review says this lens is the best wide angle lens available for full frame cameras. I can't wait to purchase this lens.

[mb66energy]

cool 3000 $ ... not very cool

I think that access to quality tools will be more and more a matter of a bigger wallet.


Have been to fast with my opinion/decision. In Europe it will cost the same as the
EF 2.8 14 from Canon. It's just a matter of overall quality and the need for AF and
willing to buy M95 screw in filters ...

If this lens gives outstanding results, it might be worth the 3000 $ / 2150 EUR ... and than
it's the only missing lens for my switch to fill frame ... besides from the 40mm pancake.

O.k., I will start to save the money ...

[5D Freak]

i am totally happy with my Canon 14L II.  no complaints.

With the samples on The Digital Picture
Canon 14L II vs Nikon 14-24:
Distortion - Nikon distorts heavily - the canon wins by a big margin here
CA - Similar (slight edge to Canon)
Corner sharpness - Canon wins
I would buy the Canon at the more expesive price point for 14mm

The Ziess seams on par with the 14II in most reaspects. The 17tse kicks ass in all aspects. Ziess can hold filters - a big plus for landscape work.

Why do so many people glorify the Nikon 14-24 over Canon and Zeiss offerings. Price maybe, but thats all

[contrastny]

i am totally happy with my Canon 14L II.  no complaints.

The Ziess seams on par with the 14II in most reaspects. The 17tse kicks ass in all aspects. Ziess can hold filters - a big plus for landscape work.

Why do so many people glorify the Nikon 14-24 over Canon and Zeiss offerings. Price maybe, but thats all

It can hold round filters, but how can it hold slot filters with the built in lens hood? It looks like an amazing lens, but I wish it could hold ND grads in a LEE filter holder or similar.

[telephonic]

I give this lens a "wow" for its price. Have to bear ramen for all my life to get hold of this lens, I think.

[Gcon]

It takes screw in filters, but with the built in lens hood it doesn't look like you can use ND grads, etc.

That's what I was thinking. I actually got mildly excited about this lens before I realised the metal hood can't be detached (unlike the plastic hood of the 8-15mm L fisheye).

I'll make do with the 16-35mm f/2.8L II USM, until which time that Canon updates their wide-angle offerings sometime in the next 12-18 months.

[zyx1989]

in my opinion : if this lens can't Autofocus, it wouldn't stack up against EF14L II (or I) no matter HOW GOOD the optical quality might be

[tron]

I know I am not comparing apples to apples and that 2mm difference is a big deal in wide angles but
for someone who does not need exactly that and has no infinite money the Canon TS-E 17mm L is a much
better choice. Of course your mileage may vary.

Actually I do have the Zeiss 21mm lens and I am very happy with its quality (even at the edges...)

[Mt Spokane Photography]

i am totally happy with my Canon 14L II.  no complaints.

Thanks, I didn't know about the samyang. It looks like a great buy!

 
Or, you might get the Samyang 14mm like mine.  Check out the left side.
 

 
.

[jrista]

Sounds like a beautiful lens (as expected from Zeiss.) I'm rather curious about the built-in, non-removable lens hood though. I'd love to get a lens like that (especially with low distortion) for my landscape photography, but not being able to remove the lens hood really kills it for that purpose. It entirely eliminates the use of any ND/GND filtration!

Does that sound like an odd move on Zeiss' part to anyone else?

[DJL329]

Sounds like a beautiful lens (as expected from Zeiss.) I'm rather curious about the built-in, non-removable lens hood though. I'd love to get a lens like that (especially with low distortion) for my landscape photography, but not being able to remove the lens hood really kills it for that purpose. It entirely eliminates the use of any ND/GND filtration!

Does that sound like an odd move on Zeiss' part to anyone else?

The one it's based on, ZM mount, also has a built-in hood, so it really shouldn't be a surprise.  That one takes 72mm filters, but it costs $4,600!

http://www.bhphotovideo.com/c/product/361526-REG/Zeiss_1457_856_15mm_f_2_8_ZM_Lens.html

This one also takes screw-in filters, albeit 95mm ones, so I don't see why it couldn't take ND/GND filters.

[woofmeow]

I'm completely lost now with this announcement.
I love wide angle, and used tokina 11-16 on crop.
And i love zeiss. They now have 3 ultra-wides: 21, 18, 15.
Now i'm moving to full frame, and was considering tokina's replace (i miss it so much).
21mm seems to be an outstanding lens, but not as wide as i would like.
18mm is a sweet spot focal length to me, but appears to have unpleasant color errors in rendition.
And a new 15mm is lovely but costs.. and it may be bit too wide for me.
Maybe it is time to go 100mm macro instead and explore