Zeiss ZE 135/f2 -- Anyone use one / own one?

[can0nfan2379]

Hey all,

Thinking about maybe dropping the bucks for this used. Anyone own one or have used one on a 5D3? I've been using a Zeiss ZE 21 Distagon on my 5D3 and even though the 5D III doesn't have a precision focus screen option, I have to say the focus confirmation indicator in the viewfinder is spot on at 2.8 albeit this is a wide angle therefore a little more forgiving than a tele.

Little apprehensive about the focus confirm with the 135 though at f2. Having owned and loved the 85 1.2L II I can appreciate how narrow the depth of field is at 1.2.

Thanks for any info you may have.

 

[NWPhil]

I have a 1Dsmk3 and 5Dmk2 - no issues focusing with the Zeiss 21mm. I use it mostly for landscapes, so often trust on the hyperfocal range anyway.

Now, the new 135 f2 it's different story. Got it as a rental last week, and has a smooth barrel movement, but indeed is not a lens for street, or anything requiring fast action (as in snap the shot quickly).

It's great for landscapes, close-ups, portraits and sure you can use in other creative ways, but if you use it wide open, the DOF is narrow enough to ending missing the shot.

Beautifull crafted lens, heavy, with a solid feel and really smooth barrel movement. But at this range, I rather have the 100 MP or maybe the ef 135L - still have to try this one.

Depends on the intended use you have for it - the bokeh is beautiful, and produces nice sun stars too

 

[sanj]

I do! Love it for video. Not used it much for stills yet.

 

[can0nfan2379]

"It's great for landscapes, close-ups, portraits and sure you can use in other creative ways, but if you use it wide open, the DOF is narrow enough to ending missing the shot."

Hi NWPhil,
Thanks for your thoughts. Do you mean to say that the DOF is narrow enough to miss your shots because focus confirm doesn't work or is inaccurate?

My experience with the 85 1.2 is that so long as you are steady, the AF of the 5D3 and the 85 1.2 will nail focus perfectly providing your technique is good. If you are shooting unsupported at 1.2, the DOF is so narrow that any body sway / fore-aft movement on my part is enough to ruin the shot. I often stopped down the 85 to 1.8-2.2 and my keeper rate shooting handheld unsupported increased substantially even on moving targets in servo.

 

[NWPhil]

Hi NWPhil,
Thanks for your thoughts. Do you mean to say that the DOF is narrow enough to miss your shots because focus confirm doesn't work or is inaccurate?

My experience with the 85 1.2 is that so long as you are steady, the AF of the 5D3 and the 85 1.2 will nail focus perfectly providing your technique is good. If you are shooting unsupported at 1.2, the DOF is so narrow that any body sway / fore-aft movement on my part is enough to ruin the shot. I often stopped down the 85 to 1.8-2.2 and my keeper rate shooting handheld unsupported increased substantially even on moving targets in servo.
[/quote]

No, not at all a lens issue, or even from the camera - yes, that obviously places me as the problem LOL - but my excuse relies on the subjects and time of the day I was shooting - street and around sunset.
AF an tracking would have worked better, no questions that's why your keeper rate got better - not saying that you don't have good technique, but I think is safe to assume the without the servo mode and AF itself, your rate might have been lower.
The shots I took at still subjects were fine - anything that was moving or I had to take the shot with short prep time...was not
I find the Zeiss 135 f/2 to be a wonderful lens, but not for street photography - so my fault, not the lens
Yes, I would still buy if I did not have a 80-200 2.8L which for me works better in street photography.

 

[can0nfan2379]

AF an tracking would have worked better, no questions that's why your keeper rate got better - not saying that you don't have good technique, but I think is safe to assume the without the servo mode and AF itself, your rate might have been lower.
The shots I took at still subjects were fine - anything that was moving or I had to take the shot with short prep time...was not
I find the Zeiss 135 f/2 to be a wonderful lens, but not for street photography - so my fault, not the lens
Yes, I would still buy if I did not have a 80-200 2.8L which for me works better in street photography.
[/quote]

I totally agree with you Phil regarding moving targets, manual focus and my experience with the 85 1.2 II. The few times that I have tried to manual focus on a moving target have usually been a disaster -- manual focus on a static subject not too bad.....getting off a shot with short prep time -- also very very difficult with MF on the 85.

I guess my main reason for considering the Zeiss would be for shots that I have reasonable time to prep for rather than the impromptu shots that are usually required in street photography