Zeiss Distagon 15mm f2.8

I believe this lens deserves a thread of its own. By far the best UWA lens I have ever used.

This is Aldeyjarfoss on Iceland. One of the most spectacular falls I have seen. Look at the formations in the rock. That tells the story of a dramatic creation of an island.

5DIII, 1/500s, f5.6, ISO200, with circular polarizing filter.
 

Attachments

  • _B3A0415.jpg
    3.2 MB · Views: 1,554

scottkinfw

Wildlife photography is my passion
CR Pro
Amazing shot Eldar, congrats.

Let me ask you what you likely have been asked a zillion times before. How hard is the manual focus? I have a cheap (but good) Samyang 14mm 2.8, and it is difficult for me, especially in low light. On top of that, with manual apterture ring, I have to sometimes open it up to really see to focus.

Another comment/question. The entire pic has amazing dof especially for f 5.6. The colors are quite vivid which I would expect from this lens with polarizer. So I guess my question is, is this close to how the scene really looked in person?

I also enjoyed your other shots, thanks for sharing.

sek

Eldar said:
I believe this lens deserves a thread of its own. By far the best UWA lens I have ever used.

This is Aldeyjarfoss on Iceland. One of the most spectacular falls I have seen. Look at the formations in the rock. That tells the story of a dramatic creation of an island.

5DIII, 1/500s, f5.6, ISO200, with circular polarizing filter.
 
Upvote 0
Thanks for your comments.

I find focusing with this lens (and the 21mm) to be quite easy in all conditions, especially if I can stop it down to 5.6 or more. DOF is quite deep at these focal lengths. With the 55mm and 135mm, I get a high hit rate from f2-2.8. Wider than that I prefer to use another focusing screen (Ec-S on the 1DX and Eg-S on the 5DIII). On this trip I did bring a 5DIII body, which had the Eg-S focusing screen. This screen is made for the 6D and 5DII (I think) and is not a perfect match for the 5DIII. And it may have gotten a bump or something, because it became impossible to use. So these are all shot with a standard focusing screen on another body. I do use the in viewer focus indicators though.

On the shot of Aldeyjarfoss, the colors are very close to how they appear in real life. I use Lightroom 5.5 and have lifted some shadow areas and deepened orange a bit, to improve visibility of the rock structures. Sharpness is set to 50, clarity, vibrance and saturation set to +10.

I did get a comment from a friend that I had overdone the green a bit on the other pictures. He was surprised to see that I had actually lowered both green and yellow luminance, to make it less screaming. The green is extremely green at this time of year on Iceland. Using the polarizing filter helps though (even though it carries a price tag of a decent lens ...)
 
Upvote 0
Iceland has lots of falls and a very high number of spectacular ones.

This is Godafoss, The Fall of the Gods. The Icelandic chief at the time (around 1.200 bc) was given the alternatives of becoming a good Christian or lose his head. After long and thorough considerations, he went for alternative one. He then threw all their Idols, Thor, Odin and the rest of them, in this fall. That is the reason for its name.

5DIII, 1/1000s, f5.0, ISO200 and polarizing filter
 

Attachments

  • _B3A0403.jpg
    3.7 MB · Views: 1,431
Upvote 0
JumboShrimp said:
Eldar ... Nice shots with your 15/2.8. I am jealous. Just wondering, will the Canon 16-35 IS be as good as the Zeiss in the 15-16mm range? Would like to see a comparison in a real-world situation.
Thanks!

I was never very happy with the 16-35 2.8L II. I appreciate the flexibility it provides for many photographers, but it was collecting dust with me.

The Zeiss is, within its limits (fixed focal length and manual focus), in a different league. Sharpness, distortion and CA are three areas where it really shines, compared to the 16-35. But it is not exactly cheap, so we should expect higher performance also. The closest (non-Zeiss) contender I have is the 17mm TS-E. But due to the front lens element, I end up using it without filters. The Zeiss uses a 95mm filter (terribly expensive stuff), which I have used on pretty much every picture I have taken with it.

I have no experience with the new 16-35 f4L IS.
 
Upvote 0
Eldar said:
More waterfalls, This is Skogafoss further south.

5DIII, 1/640s, f7.1, ISO800 and polarizing filter
More great work and I especially like this one of the Skogafoss waterfall. Also, on that last shot, I think you may have discovered a good reason for IS in wide angle lenses - shivering! Obviously it didn't affect this shot, but that might be good justification to try the 16-35 /f4 IS ;)
 
Upvote 0
mackguyver said:
Eldar said:
More waterfalls, This is Skogafoss further south.

5DIII, 1/640s, f7.1, ISO800 and polarizing filter
More great work and I especially like this one of the Skogafoss waterfall. Also, on that last shot, I think you may have discovered a good reason for IS in wide angle lenses - shivering! Obviously it didn't affect this shot, but that might be good justification to try the 16-35 /f4 IS ;)
I am on a three week trip up the north coast of Norway (most spectacular coast line you´ll find anywhere). I have one Lowpro pro trekker AW400 filled up and one pro trekker AW600 filled up, so Buying more stuff is a bit off my plans at the moment ;).
My favorite lens so far (prior to the eagles and puffins) is the Zeiss 15mm. I also expect to use the 17 and 24 TS-E lenses more. As of tomorrow, the mountains get more spectacular and then a tilt and shit lens adds value. The new 16-35 may be good, but at the moment I am not tempted.
 
Upvote 0
Eldar said:
mackguyver said:
Eldar said:
More waterfalls, This is Skogafoss further south.

5DIII, 1/640s, f7.1, ISO800 and polarizing filter
More great work and I especially like this one of the Skogafoss waterfall. Also, on that last shot, I think you may have discovered a good reason for IS in wide angle lenses - shivering! Obviously it didn't affect this shot, but that might be good justification to try the 16-35 /f4 IS ;)
I am on a three week trip up the north coast of Norway (most spectacular coast line you´ll find anywhere). I have one Lowpro pro trekker AW400 filled up and one pro trekker AW600 filled up, so Buying more stuff is a bit off my plans at the moment ;).
My favorite lens so far (prior to the eagles and puffins) is the Zeiss 15mm. I also expect to use the 17 and 24 TS-E lenses more. As of tomorrow, the mountains get more spectacular and then a tilt and S___ lens adds value. The new 16-35 may be good, but at the moment I am not tempted.
That's a whole lot of gear! I was being silly about the new 16-35 - you have a whole set of amazing lenses that cover this range and I've always wanted to give the Zeiss 15mm a try. I'm sure they TS-Es will be nice for this mountain shots as well.

Have a great trip and I look forward to seeing more excellent photos!
 
Upvote 0
I have posted some images from this mountain on other threads (17 TS-E and Initial impressions Zeiss Otus)

This is shot from within the hole in the mountain. This is a rare HDR shot of mine, with +/-3EV, in addition to a -3 underexposed, to be able to also see the islands in the sea through the hole.
 

Attachments

  • _B3A0705.jpg
    3.3 MB · Views: 1,024
Upvote 0