Zeiss ZF 18mm f/3.5 Distagon First Impressions
Related: Zeiss, Zeiss 18mm f/3.5 Distagon, Zeiss Distagon, Zeiss DSLR Lenses, Zeiss Lenses
The Zeiss ZF 18mm f/3.5 Distagon (see July 7 details) arrived yesterday. It shares the same build quality and ergonomics as the other 7 ZF lenses, but its oddball shape is quite unusual: a narrow lens barrel (about the same diameter as the ZF 50/1.4) that flares outward to accommodate an 82mm filter size and a oversized and substantial metal lens hood. It’s unusual, because only about half of the frontal area is occupied by glass.
The otherwise compact dimensions are greatly increased visually by the flaring of the lens barrel and the relatively large lens hood, well optimized for coverage, not just a simple round hood as with the rest of the ZF line. Could this be to mitigate the lens flare problem? Keep reading for more on flare below.
Zeiss ZF 18/3.5 Distagon
As readers of this blog and my comprehensive Zeiss ZF Lenses review know, I’m a big fan of the ZF line, shooting them for most of my work. Judging a lens by one performance characteristic is not very useful, unless that performance characteristic is one envisioned for specific uses—
One of my hopes for the 18mm f/3.5 Distagon which I mentioned in my June 25 entry has been dashed: the desire for an ultra wide angle which can be shot directly into the sun with little or no flare (like the ZF 25/2.8 Distagon). That is not to be. The UFOs produced by the ZF 18/3.5 are quite troublesome. See for yourself by mousing over the image below to see the ZF 18/3.5 compared to the Nikon 14-24mm f/3.5G, both at f/8, both shot and processed identically. To be clear, veiling flare (overall contrast) is superb. But the UFOs (ghosts) are prominent.
Mouse over to see Nikon 14-24mm f/2.8G
Both lenses shot at f/8, 1/1600 sec, processed identically from RAW
Further field shooting confirms that any light striking the front element results in ghosts. This result is quite unexpected and out of character compared to other ZF lenses. My guess is that the complex design of the ZF 18/3.5 (13 elements in 10 groups) was optimized for performance characteristics that did not allow as effective flare control as with the 10-element 25/2.8 Distagon. But that’s just a guess, and I’m hoping the Zeiss factory can explain why a prime lens is handily outperformed in the flare department by Nikon’s 14-24/2.8 G zoom lens with 15 elements in 11 groups.
Of course, Nikon’s huge and heavy 14-24mm is tough competition: without a doubt it is the finest wide angle zoom ever produced, certainly the best in its range by a huge margin over anything else. The question is what qualities the Zeiss 18/3.5 offers to make it appeal over and above Nikon’s zoom. My full report will make its way into Zeiss ZF Lenses.
