Zeiss ZE 35mm f/1.4 Distagon for Canon EOS coming soon

I expect to have a review sample of the Zeiss ZE 35mm f/1.4 Distagon for Canon EOS by about February 10th. The Nikon ZF.2 version will not appear until late March or early April.

I'll be expending considerable time and effort on evaluating the 35/1.4 Distagon in my Guide to Zeiss ZE / ZE Lenses, so stay tuned for comparisons and examples.

In the meantime, the Zeiss Guide already has some bokeh examples, and see my September blog entries.

Based on what I saw from the prototype back in September, the new 35/1.4 should be on your must-have list, along with the 21mm f/2.8 Distagon, 50mm f/2 Makro-Planar, and 100mm f/2 Makro-Planar.

See my handy list of Zeiss lenses for Canon and list of Zeiss lenses for Nikon.

.

Feb 1st price increase on Zeiss 21mm f/2.8 Distagon and Zeiss 35mm f/2 Distagon

A significant price increase is coming Feb 1st on the Zeiss 21mm f/2.8 Distagon and the 35mm f/2 Distagon, both of them favorites of mine.

Update: I expect to have the Canon (ZE) version of the 35mm f/1.4 Distagon by about February 10th. The Nikon ZF.2 version will not appear until late March.

The 21/2.8 Distagon is really a must-have lens for Canon or Nikon. The 35/2 is excellent also, but some users will want the new 35mm f/1.4 Distagon, which is due in February-March I expect a review sample within a few days.

See my handy list of Zeiss lenses for Canon and list of Zeiss lenses for Nikon.

Down jackets, wool jackets, gloves and hats

What do I wear in the outdoors when I need to stay warm and dry?

I've documented my key pieces of outerwear in Weather Comfort: Down Jackets, Wind/Rain Protection, Gloves.

Reader comments on photo tours, lens reviews

Reader Chuck T writes:

This photo tours section of your website has not been updated for 2011. Do you have any tours planned already? I am very interested.

DIGLLOYD: for spring tours to Yosemite/White Mountains, I have to wait until May or so because there is a 6 week window as to when the roads will open. I am considering offering a late February tour in Death Valley, contact me if interested.

Thanks for the truly HONEST, EXACTING, & DETAILED feedback on equipment. I have always felt there was too little in most reviews, but could never say that about yours. I have pushed myself back towards prime lens without auto-focus (i.e. Zeiss 100mm & 50mm - both ZF.2 Macro lens). I am certain you already know my results, but even I am surprised at the quality of these photos. From a user interface point, they are also a joy to use. Keep up the great work. I will continue my part and read everything.

DIGLLOYD: optical performance isn’t always everything, but the Zeiss lenses are terrific in both optics and build quality, with the only drawback being manual focus. The 100mm f/2 Makro-Planar and 50mm f/2 Makro Planar are standouts.

Death Valley National Park photo tour late February

As noted below, I am planning a late February photo tour in Death Valley. Contact me immediately if interested.

I tailor my tours to the specific interests of attendees, which are limited to three.

See my two travel pieces on Death Valley.

Zeiss 28mm f/2 Distagon new examples

Just published in my Guide to Zeiss ZF / ZE Lenses is a new page of examples with the 28mm f/2 Distagon, with an emphasis on dusk and moonlight shots.

Zeiss lenses are available as Zeiss ZF.2 for Nikon or Zeiss ZE for Canon EOS.

Canon EF Extender III 1.4X with EF 70-200mm f/2.8L IS II and 70-20mm f/4L IS

I've posted another comparison using the new Canon EF Extender III 1.4X, showing how it performs with Canon EF 70-200mm f/2.8L IS II and the Canon EF 70-200mm f/4L IS. See my review in DAP. Next up is the EF Extender 2X.

The EF Extender III 1.4X acquits itself fairly well on the f/2.8 zoom, turning the f/2.8 zoom into a 98-280mm f/4. But whether it meets your needs will depend on the nature of what you shoot.

Canon EF Extender III 2X with EF 70-200mm f/2.8L IS II and 70-20mm f/4L IS

I've published a comparison using the new Canon EF Extender III 2X, showing how it performs with Canon EF 70-200mm f/2.8L IS II and the Canon EF 70-200mm f/4L IS. See my review in DAP.

The EF Extender III 2X acquits itself fairly well on the f/2.8 zoom, turning the f/2.8 zoom into a 140-400mm f/5.6. But the results at f/5.6 are not so useful in my view, making it an f/8 lens for reasonable quality. After all, 23 elements + 9 elements is a huge stack of glass, and any optical issues are magnified by 2X.

Canon EF Extender III 1.4X on Canon 135mm f/2L

I've posted my first comparison using the new Canon EF Extender III 1.4X, showing how it performs with the 135mm f/2L against the Canon 70-200mm f/2.8L IS II and 70-200mm f/4L IS.

See my review in DAP.

The extender acquits itself fairly well, but you'll have to judge for yourself as to whether it fits your needs at various apertures.

Focusing the Pentax 645D with the Zeiss 3X loupe

Just posted in my review of the Pentax 645D in DAP are my findings using the Zeiss 3X tripler as a focusing aide.

Be careful on part numbers, you'll want Zeiss part number 522 012.

 

Update on Eizo CG303W 30" professional display

In my Jan 12 entry, I reported on the mouse-jump problem I was experiencing with the Eizo CG303W 30" professional display.

Eizo contacted me today with something to try, and I am pleased to report that the mouse-jump problem has gone away. Here are the instructions I used.

1. Connect the monitor using the Dual Link cable into the monitor Input 1.
2. Turn off the monitor using the front power key (Far right).
3. Hold down the "Signal 1-2" key (Far left) and press the power key at the same time which will bring up the Display setup option below.

4. Select Single Display and press the Enter key which will bring up the signal selection option below.

5. Select Dual Link using the up/down keys and press Enter.
6. Start your system and you should see the difference.

The Single Display / Dual Display means that two input signals can be displayed as if the CG303W were two displays. I don't have any use for this feature, and probably never will, but some people might, I suppose.

One thing I'm not clear on (I've inquired) is whether selecting Dual Link above then makes the display capable of 8-bits only; while Apple drivers still aren't in Mac OS X 10.6.6 to support 10-bit, when that day arrives it would be an ugly choice between a mouse-jump problem and 8/10 bit.

Canon EF tele extenders III

I have both of Canon's new tele extender III teleconverters in hand, I've shot them with several lenses, and I'm preparing a report on them. I'm testing them with the EF 135mm f/2L, the 70-200mm f/2.8L IS II, the 70-200mm f/4L IS, and the 300mm f/2.8L IS.

At about $499 each, Canon clearly considers them serious tools.

Just released in January 2011, the new EF Tele Extenders promise to improve image quality over the two earlier generations of teleconverters, which have never proved satisfactory to me on high resolution digital.

Do the new converters offer good enough quality to really not feel like a serious compromise? Remember that performance can vary lens by lens, and can vary on a zoom lens with the focal length. So the answer might vary, but so far it looks like the results are very good in general.

Reader comments — Nikon 35mm f/1.4G and 35mm vs medium format

Pieter K writes:

First of all i want to say how much I enjoyed reading your articles.

I guess you are the first reviewer putting the 35mm cameras and midsize sensor cameras well in perspective. That the lenses are usually a weak point (except with Leica) is also interesting. and that Live View is a necessity is obvious for me trying to get 24MP out of my Nikon.

I have a request about the 35mm 1,4 Nikkor test. Could you add a page with 1,4 shots only so it is more obvious what the sharp unsharp combination looks like. I would prefer it with subjects at various distances so you clearly see at what point you still can isolate a subject.

DIGLLOYD: I intend more work on my Nikon 35mm f/1.4G review, especially many more examples. I am waiting for a replacement lens from B&H Photo, having sent mine back due to the asymmetry I show on the comparison page (see right/left crops). I want and in this case need a copy as close to perfect as possible, as a reference lens, since in my view the new Nikon 35/1.4G is the best wide angle yet designed by Nikon, albeit one that could not autofocus properly (still waiting for a response from Nikon on that). My Nikon D3x is also in for a full service check and verification, so that when I resume testing I can state clearly that the D3x meets all Nikon specifications. Also, I do plan on comparing the Nikon 35mm f/1.4G to the Zeiss 35mm f/1.4 Distagon, which should arrive soon.

Pentax 645D lens tests

In my Pentax 645D review, I've added a ton of lens stuff:

Published: Pentax-A 200mm f/4 on the Pentax 645D.

Published: Pentax FA 80-160mm f/4.5 @ 80mm on the Pentax 645D.

Published: Pentax FA 80-160mm f/4.5 @ 120mm on the Pentax 645D.

Published: comparison of Pentax-A 150mm f/3.5 versus Pentax FA 80-160mm f/4.5.

Published: test of the Pentax 67 55mm f/4 on the Pentax 645D.

Published: test of the Pentax 67 300mm f/4 on the Pentax 645D.

Published: blur from the Pentax 645D shutter at low shutter speeds.

More Pentax 645D lens tests coming

I'll be posting more lens results in my Pentax 645D review soon, including the following:

• Pentax 67 55mm f/4
• Pentax 67 300mm f/4
• Pentax-A 150mm f/3.5, including a comparison to the 80-160mm zoom.
• Pentax-A 200mm f/4
• Pentax FA 80-160mm f/4.5 zoom at 80/120/160mm

Zeiss 35mm f/1.4 Distagon MTF, distortion, vignetting

Good news— when Zeiss delivers the data sheet, it means that the lens shipments are usually not far behind, and so I have a reasonable hope to have a review copy of the Zeiss 35mm f/1.4 Distagon by month’s end. See my preview of the Zeiss 35mm f/1.4 Distagon in the Guide to Zeiss ZF / ZE Lenses.

MTF curves below are at 10, 20, 40 line pairs/mm. MTF at f/1.4 is very consistent from center to corner, and offers a high level of performance even wide open. Stopping down to f/4 shows that there is likely some curvature of field, and astigmatism suggests some residual color aberrations beyond the edges of the frame (e.g., the corner areas). But that’s an educated guess based on MTF alone, not field shots. See Making Sharp Images for more on field curvature and MTF charts.

Bottom line is that wide open at f/1.4, we can expect outstanding results across the frame (for f/1.4), and that stopping down a little should yield top-class images, with very high contrast on fine details, but not in a perfect plane of sharpness (no fast wide angle avoids field curvature). Overall contrast on at f/1.4 on coarse structures looks to be lower than the Nikon 35/1.4G, which is just one facet of behavior that will make the images from it have a different personality from the Nikon— connoisseurs will want to own both.

Distortion is higher than I’d prefer, but should be easy to correct, since it’s plain barrel distortion, without a reversal (wave type).

Vignetting (and I like vignetting in fast lenses) goes away completely as a visible issue by f/4. More interesting will be off-center color rendition, e.g. whether the design has a ray angle from the exit pupil that causes a slight cyan color shift to the corners.

Technical specifications 
Focal length                35 mm
Aperture range              f/1.4 - f/16 
Number of elements/groups   11/9
Focusing area               0.3 m - infinity
Angular field** (diag./horiz./vert.) 63/54/37 °
Coverage at close range     18 x 12 cm (close-up)
Image ratio at close range  1:5 (close-up)
Filter thread               M 72 x 0.75
Weight                      900 g (not clear if this is ZF or ZE)
Length with caps            120 – 122 mm
Diameter                    78 mm
Mounts                      ZF.2 (F bayonet), ZE (EF bayonet)

Eizo CG303W 30" professional display, XRite Color Munki calibrator

I discuss a display and a display calibrator below, made by different companies.

Eizo CG303W 30" display

Update: Eizo was not aware of the mouse issue, and said they call me for details, but Friday has come and gone without a call. The mouse jump problem (see below) also exists on my 6-core Mac Pro. Hopefully it can be sorted out, but it’s hard to believe that Eizo has not seen this problem before, especially so since I have very credible evidence that it exists last year prior to a firmware update. Apparently, the issue still is not fixed.

Update 2: since I cannot yet calibrate the Zeiss (more on that below), I took a look with the stock profile the system finds (specific to the CG303W), and it’s poor— visible banding on a gradient, and too warm. So I cannot yet assess the display.

Eizo displays are top of the line units for professionals, so I was excited when Eizo graciously agreed to send me the ColorEdge CG303W for evaluation. Today I received it. The CG303W is a top of the line display which costs about US$5000. Physically, it's very nice: adjustment fore/aft, left/right, height/etc, black bezel. Two DVI ports (no DisplayPort). Even before calibrating (the system finds a profile for it automatically), it was apparent that it's an exceptionally high quality display.

The included hood is outstanding— but not very compatible with a 2nd display abutted to the CG303W for a continuous desktop, because the hood is 8 inches deep.

However, I immediately ran into two issues with the CG303W. I have not yet heard from Eizo on these issues, but the integrity of my reviews demands that I serve my readers first. My experience is a fact that any user could encounter, and therefore entirely relevant to prospective buyers. I'm sorely disappointed to have to say it, but it's what I'd want to know myself before buying.

(1) The CG303W has a fan, which vents out at the top of the display. Since the fan is right in front of me, the noise is more noticeable than my fully-loaded 12-core Mac Pro under my desk— and unacceptably distracting in my soothingly quiet office, no small matter when working 12-14 hours daily.

Auditory pollution 14 hours a day is a non-starter for me; it's a stressor. It's not that the noise is particularly loud, it's just that in a quiet environment it dominates. And I suppose that in even slightly noisy environments, one won't hear it. It might not bother many users, but it bothers me (perhaps I fall into the 15-20% of people who are "highly sensitive"). And some people just really are not bothered by such things, but I can't change my sensitivities any more than I can change the color of my eyes.

I'm told that smaller Eizo displays do not have a fan. In my view, a fan or lack thereof should be called out loud and clear in the marketing materials, but I cannot find the word "fan" anywhere in the marketing page, or the specifications.

(2) Mouse jump— I immediately noticed a herky-jerky problem with the mouse cursor, some might call it "mouse jump". I disconnected the Color Munki (not an Eizo product), as well as the USB cable to the CG303W. The problem persisted, even after several reboots and twiddling the Mouse control panel. I then disconnected the Eizo and reconnected my trusty NEC 30". The mouse problem, which had never before existed prior to the Eizo, disappeared immediately. I count on precise mouse movement in Photoshop and the like and cannot tolerate this issue.

If the Eizo folks can address these two issues, I'm all ears. But as it stands, either issue precludes using it for me.

Color Munki calibrator

The Eizo CG303W does not come with its own calibrator unit. The XRite Color Munki folks sent me an evaluation unit of the Color Munki spectrophotometer. The Color Munki (about $500) is multi-purpose display/projector/printer profiling device, highly respected by those working critically with color.

I tried calibrating the Eizo CG303W using the Color Munki. I tilted the display back to its limit, I positioned it as shown in the diagram, playing with the weighted strap appropriately (I've done similar things many times before with other brands). I guess I'm a dummy, because I could not get the Munki to balance and stay flat over the test target. Then I tried adjusting the zipper on the case, and it immediately separated (I forced nothing, it just came apart). I was not successful in rejoining the zipper, and since the Munki cannot be used without the case zippered around it, game over.

NEC 30"

To put it simply: my NEC 30" has worked without incident for the past 18 months (ditto for the 27" PA271W). No mouse problems, no fan, and the BK-SV model comes bundled with its own calibrator that balances without issue on the screen. Click a few buttons and I'm done. I'll forgo theoretical superiority for a system that is simple and easy for the 98% result.

Nikon 35mm f/1.4G focusing update

Over the past few weeks, I've reported on focusing errors with the new Nikon 35mm f/1.4G, and I previously had reported a survey on the 24mm f/1.4G.

I'm pleased to report that I've made contact with Nikon and that an inquiry is in progress, though no word on how long it will take to get back to me. Nikon has full access to my reviews and findings, and I'll be glad to work with Nikon in any way I can to move this issue forward, because the 35/1.4G and 24/1.4G are optically outstanding.

Zeiss 35mm f/2 Distagon examples

Just published in my Guide to Zeiss ZF / ZE Lenses is a new page of examples with the 35mm f/2 Distagon, a stalwart performer.

I hope to receive the new 35mm f/1.4 Distagon by the end of the month (see my September preview, also with examples in the Zeiss Guide). It will be interesting to see how the new 35/1.4 Distagon compares.

Zeiss 21mm f/2.8 Distagon examples in the high country

Just published in my Guide to Zeiss ZF / ZE Lenses is a new page of examples with the 21mm f/2.8 Distagon. Next up is the 35mm f/2 Distagon, and I hope to receive the new 35mm f/1.4 Distagon by the end of the month (see my September preview, also with examples in the Zeiss Guide).

Pentax 645D with Pentax-A 120mm f/4 — super!

Just posted in my review of the Pentax 645D in DAP is a new page on the Pentax-A 120mm f/4. At last! A lens worthy of the sensor in the 645D, and at f/5.6 to boot.

Reader comment and question on Making Sharp Images

Reader Mark M emails to say:

Wanted to say thank you very much for the excellent and incredibly useful Making Sharp Images (and DAP that I also subscribe too).

The subscription was a Christmas present and is worth every penny. Everything that I've read is being put to good use with my D7000, especially the sections regarding MLU with remote release (a first as my previous camera was a D50) and the sections regarding restoring sharpness.

If you have time could you consider the following question:

Your settings for Capture Sharpening using deconvolution in ACR do indeed bring out detail lost to the AA filter, but (even with the amount value lowered to 20-30 or so), it produces a fine noise/grain visible in my images (at 100% view) that I do not see within your examples. This is present on images that have been ETTR with a UNI-WB file so underexposure is not the issue. I wonder if perhaps the settings would need to be different for the D7000 sensor but playing with the sliders has not revealed a suitable result. I have tried backing off the amount as you suggest and applying Smart Sharpen, but that just amplifies the fine grain/noise that I am seeing. I really like the idea of using deconvolution sharpening for my Capture Sharpening but so far no joy! Is this something you have experienced and are there any settings you could recommend? Perhaps this method of capture sharpening is not suitable for crop sensors?

Many thanks again for the excellent resources, in this age of internet 'experts' on every forum board out there, your precise and well researched info is invaluable.

DIGLLOYD: Deconvolution sharpening can be more of a problem for cameras with higher noise levels, but using a Masking value of 20-30 can greatly reduce the grainy look that comes with deconvolution sharpening in ACR. Some photographers making fine-art prints actually prefer a slight grain to the images, which can also paradoxically increase the impression of sharpness. Always err on the side of less sharpening during RAW conversion, as extra sharpening can be applied to a version of the image prepped for printing.

Focusing the Pentax 645D with camera focus assist

Just posted in my review of the Pentax 645D in DAP is a new page on the Pentax-A focus assist mechanism. It is not wise to assume that the focus assist/confirmation in the viewfinder is anywhere near accurate. I can focus more accurately by eye.

SPECIAL DEAL on a 2009 Mac Pro 2.93GHz as an MPG Pro Workstation (and also a 2.66GHz Mac Pro for $1799)

For photographers, sound, video, or graphics arts. Please see details over at MacPerformanceGuide.com. Note also that B&H Photo has dropped the price of the 2009 2.66GHz Mac Pro to a rock-bottom $1799.

Pentax 645D with Pentax-A 120mm f/4

Update! Just published in my review of the Pentax 645D in DAP is a new page on the Pentax-A 120mm f/4. More will be added over the next few days, but in short, the Pentax-A 120mm f/4 is easily the best lens I’ve yet used on the 645D, by no small margin. I refer to the manual focus version, I have not seen or tested the FA version.

I do very little macro work, but I thought I’d try the Pentax-A 120mm f/4 macro on the Pentax 645D. Here, handheld at ISO 1600, is a matchbox cover measuring 32mm across (I cropped off about 1mm). This is at 1:1 reproduction, since the Pentax sensor is 33 X 44mm.

The matchbox is slightly bowed (not perfectly flat), and this was handheld as best I could, but I’d say sharpness is looking very good at close range. ISO 1600 certainly has done very nicely here. (Note that this isn’t a test so much as a picture I liked).

A study with AF fine focus adjust on the Nikon D3x and Nikon AF-S 35mm f/1.4G

Added to my review of the Nikon AF-S 35mm f/1.4G in DAP is a new page with a study of the efficacy of the Nikon D3x AF fine focus adjust feature, a focus bracketing exercise using Live View, +2, +4, +6, +8, +10, +12, +14, +16, +18, +20, and important because it shows not just accuracy but variability.

Reader comments on Pentax 645D review

Reader David P over in the UK comments on my review of the Pentax 645D in DAP. I have some more material coming as more lenses arrive, and the weather cooperates.

Many thanks for your comprehensive review of the 645D. This is a camera I had my eye on since it was first "announced" several years ago, and after it was released in Japan earlier in 2010 I quickly bought a set of lenses off the 'Bay - 35, 55, 75, 135, 200. Time will tell if this was a good choice (an obvious worry about the 200, after your findings).

Thanks also for the continuing high quality of your site in general, way the best of its type - serious reviews of professional equipment - on the web these days.

Nikon AF-S 35mm f/1.4G compared to Nikon AF 35mm f/2D

Added to my review of the Nikon AF-S 35mm f/1.4G in DAP is a new page with a comparison of the Nikon 35mm f/1.4G to the Nikon 35mm f/2D.

Pentax SMC FA 45-85mm f/4.5 on Pentax 645D

Added to my review of the Pentax 645D in DAP are three new pages showing how the Pentax SMC FA 45-85mm f/4.5 performs at 45mm, 65mm, 85mm.

Update! I've added full-width actual-pixels crops at f/4.5, f/5.6, f/8, f/11 for 45mm, 65mm, 85mm.

New Year's special on diglloyd.com subscriptions

Happy New Year! May you live every day of your life in high states.

Get everything on this site for $45 off the individual prices. Offer good through Jan 1 at 10pm.

Pentax 645D examples with 45mm f/2.8 and SMC FA 45-85mm f/4.5

Added to my review of the Pentax 645D in DAP are is a new page of examples with the Pentax SMC 45-85mm f/4.5 and Pentax-A 45mm f/2.8.

Included are three full-resolution unsharpened examples for your own analysis.

See also my other updates earlier today.