Wide & Super Wide Angle Lens on Digital Sensor Belong to Zeiss

[fotografz]

Hmmm, I have to respectively disagree on the skin tone aspect. I shoot both Leica (M and R ) and a LOT of Ziess (total 645 system, total N system, and C/Y on RX and Canon 1DsMKII or 20D ... including 25/2.8, 28/2, 60/2.8, 35-135/3.3, 85/1.2, 70-210 ).

My general impression is that in the same light on the same camera the Zeiss C/Y glass is a bit cooler than the Leica glass.
(or it could be said that the Leica glass is a bit warmer). This is reflected in the photos posted above in my opinion.

Subjectively I prefer humans to have a warmer cast. For ex&le, my older Leitz 50/2 produces a very flattering skin tone.

HOWEVER, keeping on thread, I agree that the C/Y wide angles are hard to beat on the Canon 1DsMKII. The distortion of some L Canons is almost a crime. I tested a Zeiss N 17-35 verses a Canon 16-35 both at 17mm f/2.8, and the Zeiss won hands down ... especially in corner/edge sharpness. It remain to be seen how the Leica 21-35 performs on the 1DsMKII. As far as primes are concerned, the C/Y 28/2 is a wonder to behold and the 85/1.2 is superior to the Canon 85/1.2 (which I also own).

Just one man's opinion based on shooting thousands and thousands of photographs with all these different lenses on different cameras.

 

[wang]

What do you want to say, Albert ? Yours come from different lighting.
What I wish to say is that keeping the camera and lighting constant, my Leica 60 does not get a result as good as the other two.

To answer Marc's question as well, I was showing these photos to talk about skin colour. The photo from Contax 100 2.8 has a special lighting. It is not the kind that you usually use for portraits. The light comes from the top going down. The direction of light is vertical. This lighting method will accentuate the contour of the face. it will show up eyebags or wrinkles more easily. This lighting is for documentation of eyebags. Nevertheless, it has the typical skin colour from Zeiss on Canon. The one from Leica 60 has flash right and left 45 degrees to the face. It shows the typical colour from old Leica on Canon. DJ photo shows the typical colour from new Leica lenses.

 

[wang]

Although Contax 100 macro may not be as good as Leica 100 macro at low magnificant, what about Contax 100 2 ?
I find out that Contax 100 2 with extension ring or my AX performs better than my Contax 100 2.8 at low mag.

Despite my Leica 60 does not do well with Canon, I certainly get good shots from it for portraits in film. I like this lens with both colour and B&W.

 

[wang]

OK Marc, what about this one ?

The person in this photo is the same as the one taken by Leica 60. Same Lighting, same place but different camera. This time is Sony DSC717. To me, this has a warmer skin tone. The skin tone of this one is even warmer than the one taken by Contax 100 2.8 macro.
In your opinion, if you see the Leica one is warmer, I believe you have a different perception of colour from me. The perception of colour is different among individuals, it is determined by the genes.

 

[deshojo]

The focus on the 2nd of Chi's shots is slightly behind the one with the Leica, so the out of focus lips and cheek bones influences overall visual favour back to the Leica shot.

However, when it comes to colour I think this is one occasion when both points of view can be said to be correct.

The Leica, to my eyes, certainly provides more flattering skin tones. If I were a bride who had paid a sizeable fee for high quality wedding photographs, I would want to be flattered. Bugger accuracy, I would want to look as good as possible. The warmth stands out even more in DJ's shot, and I think most people would be happier with this very flattering tone.

However the Zeiss does seem to produce more accurate skin tones, which for medical research or assessment is absolutely essential.
As usual it seems that different lenses suit different purposes and tastes.

Looking at those Leica shots though they do look lovely, I hope I'm not now going to have to change my whole system to Leica...(aaarrrghhh!!!)

BTW Any news on that Leica R9 Digi module Marc?

 

[fotografz]

That one is very nice, but it is processed better than the others.
To many variables on the internet and conditions shot.

A truer test would be a locked down tripod with clean consistant light like Profoto and shoot a person with both type lenses on the same camera (1DsMKII).

But I am waaaaaay to busy doing real work to do made up work on top of it. Just shot a lake location job with Contax 645, Kodak ProBack, and Zeiss 35/3.5 from 5AM until light got to harsh. Also shot 1DsMKII with 16-35 as back-up. No comparison. C645 kit could handle the contrast and the Canon could not.

 

[nickser]

With regard to the Leica 60 2.8 and the Sony DSC717 you say the lighting is the same, the place is the same, but it definately looks like there are two quite different exposures with these two shots. The Leica shot to me looks flat. The background is so different in it's brightness with the Sony as well.

 

[albert4321]

As far as skin tone concern, there were too many variable as Marc mentioned.

Anyway, I don't have the luxury to own any Leica lens yet, so I can't comment on it. One thing I know if I'd shot my wife with DJ's 100 APO, she would be pissed (too much detail.)

I have never satisfy with Canon's skin tone. It has a funky yellow tone I seem to have trouble with. Perhaps I allowed too much ambient into my exposure. But the Zeiss usually is dead on.

Marc pointed out a interesting color observation that he prefers the warmer skin tone. Being in North America, I can certainly understand that and would agree with warmer skin tone does look better. However, as mentioned by few of the lab operators, most Asian, say Chinese or Japanese, does not like their skin look "yellow" (warm.) Perhaps that's the reason Fuji films are cooler and Kodak films are warmer. Well, European, perhaps redder.

 

[gunteach]

I think Albert might be on to something here as far as tone preferences are concerned. Early this month I got married in the Philippines and my new wife has very dark skin as compared to mine. While I was there, I noticed all the women trying to lighten their skin while all of them here in the US are trying to darken it, or so it seems. My wife much preferred the pictures I took of her in which her skin tone was "cooler", while I liked the other ones best that were closer to reality.

 

[djg]

I think the aspect of which picture is better is going to vary widely with the audience. Son just got married so he probably can give some perspective on this too

.

Albert, what do you mean "too much detail"??? I was going to post a 100% crop of the mouth & nose but it's too scary ...

Instead, here are some Leica 21-35mm Asph shots. The last one exibits very nice flare control.

http://improbablystructuredlayers.net/Special/_E9C2345_.jpg

http://improbablystructuredlayers.net/Special/_E9C2308.jpg

http://improbablystructuredlayers.net/Special/_E9C2316_.jpg

However, this being the Contax forum, I better get on topic

... with the CZ 35mm /1.4

http://improbablystructuredlayers.net/Special/_E9C1345.jpg