G
Guest
I am trying to make a decision on the new 45-90 zoom. Has anybody had any experiences with this lens already. I sure would be glad to hear some feedback.
DPR Forum
Welcome to the Friendly Aisles!
DPRF is a photography forum with people from all over the world freely sharing their knowledge and love of photography. Everybody is welcome, from beginners to the experienced professional. Whether it is Medium Format, fullframe, APS-C, MFT or smaller formats. Digital or film. DPRF is a forum for everybody and for every format.
Enjoy this modern, easy to use software. Look also at our Reviews & Gallery!
You are using an out of date browser. It may not display this or other websites correctly.
You should upgrade or use an alternative browser.
You should upgrade or use an alternative browser.
G
Guest
> > > > Hi Chuck, > I got this lens when it is out new but not tried it often enough but can give > you my point of view on this lens is excellent built quality, in fact I > thought it is probably the best made zoom lenses I have ever used, either > 135mm or medium format ( Hasselblad or Rolleiflex ), for the size and well > d&ed MF focusing, the AF speed is good, same level as other 645 lenses, but > not as fast as 55/3.5 and 80/2, but it is OK. The lens is heavy but when it > is on 645 it is well balanced but somehow I would appreciate if it has a > tripod collar. The filter size is 95mm, same as the 35/3.5 and 350/4. > Picture quality, I have no photo made from 645 but have tested with N digital > using Nam-1 is very good, I would say the quality is equal to the fixed focal > lens of same range. > Brgds/Kaisern > > >
G
Guest
Kaisern,
Thanks for the info on the 45-90 zoom. I am interested to hear if you have noticed any barrell distortions at the 45 end. I have the N 24-85 and I have noticed slight barrell distortions at the 24 end. Not as bad as Nikors, but not as good as other Zeiss fixed focal lengths. I do alot of architectural shots so barrell distortion is a consideration. Thanks.
James Cheng
Thanks for the info on the 45-90 zoom. I am interested to hear if you have noticed any barrell distortions at the 45 end. I have the N 24-85 and I have noticed slight barrell distortions at the 24 end. Not as bad as Nikors, but not as good as other Zeiss fixed focal lengths. I do alot of architectural shots so barrell distortion is a consideration. Thanks.
James Cheng
G
Guest
> > > > Thanks, yes, there is slightly distortion visible for the N 24-85, and the > 17-35/2.8, the 45-90/4.5 is slightly better than the N lens but still visible. > But the fixed lens is much better corrected. Brgds/kaisern > > >
G
Guest
Kaisern,
Have you shot more pics with the 45-90 and what is your opinion now? How's low light focus? Have you used a polarizer on it? Thanks,
Guy
Have you shot more pics with the 45-90 and what is your opinion now? How's low light focus? Have you used a polarizer on it? Thanks,
Guy
G
Guest
Sort of jumping in here but I use the 45-90 all the time. The results are always good and quite often spectacular. I did have one strange thing happen with a circular polarizer that I still don't understand. Blue and green overrode most colors. The result was wild and the client bought it at a good price. But I still don't know what happened.
I was shooting an old rock schoolhouse high on a hill, using Velvia. There were no tans, beiges or reds in the transparency. The sky was an unreal blue and the grass was SO green that it snapped my eyes around. Of course I acted like I'd planned it that way.
Jack C.
I was shooting an old rock schoolhouse high on a hill, using Velvia. There were no tans, beiges or reds in the transparency. The sky was an unreal blue and the grass was SO green that it snapped my eyes around. Of course I acted like I'd planned it that way.
Jack C.
G
Guest
> Thanks for "jumping in". I appreciate your impressions. Are you missing any shots in low light situations due to only an f-stop of 4.5? Are you using a 95mm polarizer?
Thanks, Guy
Thanks, Guy
G
Guest
Hi again, Guy!
Yes, I was finding some difficulty in focusing in low-light situations and I bought the "normal" lens for that.
Jack C.
Yes, I was finding some difficulty in focusing in low-light situations and I bought the "normal" lens for that.
Jack C.
G
Guest
would like your opinion. if you had a choice between (a) the 45-90 zoom and (b) the 35mm and 80mm (the dealer is giving me a quotation with similar pricing for (a) and the (b) combo), which would you select? i mainly take landscapes and occasional portraits. have the n system and am accustomed to zooming from 24mm to 200mm. i suppose one question is how dramatic is 21mm (35mm in MF format) vs. 24mm in 35mm terms?
G
Guest
Jack,
I have the 35mm, 45mm and 80mm lenses. I have not tried the 45-90mm and don't know how sharp it is. Most of my work is landscape and environmental portraiture. I have been disappointed and don't use my 35mm very often as it renders the subject very small. I use it when wanting to really exaggerate a foreground subject while still having a strong background. Without a strong background it really doesn't work as the background subject comes out very small. The big problem with the 35mm is that unless you shoot dead horizontal the perspective distortion is big. I end up having to shoot and crop horizontally a lot to avoid ending up with a lot of boring foreground space. I do use it a lot in the Grand Canyon as the subject is so far in the distance the distortion is not noticeable.
The 45mm I use all the time. Great landscape lens that also works well with foreground subjects. It also has a fair bit of perspective distortion but not as much. I'm surprised how much I use the 80mm lens. I like it a lot.
One problem with having the 35mm is you'll have to buy another set of filters which in this size are very expensive. If the 45-90 is really sharp with great color rendition I would buy that. I think the 35mm is a good "extra" lens to own after you have your wide angle (45mm) to normal (80mm) range covered. My final solution for the perspective distortion shortcomings has been to start shooting 4x5 (I don't like correcting EVERYTHING in Photoshop!) I'd be curious if anybody has tried the Weiss tilt/shift 45mm lens as my 4x5 is a lot to lug around with my Contax! Happy shooting.
Guy
I have the 35mm, 45mm and 80mm lenses. I have not tried the 45-90mm and don't know how sharp it is. Most of my work is landscape and environmental portraiture. I have been disappointed and don't use my 35mm very often as it renders the subject very small. I use it when wanting to really exaggerate a foreground subject while still having a strong background. Without a strong background it really doesn't work as the background subject comes out very small. The big problem with the 35mm is that unless you shoot dead horizontal the perspective distortion is big. I end up having to shoot and crop horizontally a lot to avoid ending up with a lot of boring foreground space. I do use it a lot in the Grand Canyon as the subject is so far in the distance the distortion is not noticeable.
The 45mm I use all the time. Great landscape lens that also works well with foreground subjects. It also has a fair bit of perspective distortion but not as much. I'm surprised how much I use the 80mm lens. I like it a lot.
One problem with having the 35mm is you'll have to buy another set of filters which in this size are very expensive. If the 45-90 is really sharp with great color rendition I would buy that. I think the 35mm is a good "extra" lens to own after you have your wide angle (45mm) to normal (80mm) range covered. My final solution for the perspective distortion shortcomings has been to start shooting 4x5 (I don't like correcting EVERYTHING in Photoshop!) I'd be curious if anybody has tried the Weiss tilt/shift 45mm lens as my 4x5 is a lot to lug around with my Contax! Happy shooting.
Guy