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!

25mm lens

geraint

Member
I am fascinated by the so called 3D effects of this lens , but as I have the 28mm/2.8 is it a waste of money?
 
Hi Geraint,
I have the 25 and like it although I rarely use it. In fact I haven't used it for ages probably because I also have the 28 in the G system.
I have read rather disparaging remarks about the 28 but I have never noticed any problems. I haven't noticed any particular special 3D effects though.
Cheers,
John
 
HI Geraint, do you have any s&le pictures or links/urls which would show this 3D "effect" you speak of? isn't it just unsharp corners due to not so good flatness of field (interpreting
Zeiss MTF data sheet)? So maybe if you have an object like an U-ring, like a banana such a lens would be cool(?). (like the old Minolta MD Rokkor 2.8/24 VFC ?) --rainer
 
Thanks John and Rainer ,it was Dirk on this site that mentioned the 3D effect but I cannot show any images as I do not have the lens but I am trying to decide whether to get it.
Geraint
 
Hi

yes, I have a totally different impression of images made with the 25/2.8 and 28/2.8 lens. The latter one is for me more a "normal" wideangle. Same image made with the 25/2.8 gave me always a totally different look although just 3mm difference.

On the other hand, the impression of this 3D effect was not so much bigger with a Zeiss G21/2.8 compared to the 25/2.8. But this is a very personal feeling when looking at slides.

I think you should take some testshots with both to make up your own mind. As far as I rememeber, the 28/2.8 is optically superior according to the specs. But i am talking only about the impression the images gave me, so no science ;)
 
Thanks Dirk for your reply , Can you descibe the difference in 'look' in words .

so would you buy the 25mm if you had your time over?
 
Hi Geraint,

this is impossibly to say at least for a non-native speaker
happy.gif


For me the 25mm gives an image of i.e. a landscape a 3D effect. I have the feeling I can put my arm "through" the slide to touch the mountains at the background. (Fuji Velvia 50).

But I would not count on my own preferences. It depends on your own expectations. If you ahve never used a 24 or 25mm, it will be a different experience to an 28mm. But it can also be possible that you will like the 28mm more.
 
Dirk,
What a brilliant description of 3D effect:
"I have the feeling I can put my arm "through" the slide to touch the mountains at the background."
Cheers,
John
 
Dear Dirk,
would it be possible that you post a low res scanned (velvia) slide on this thread for illustration which would should a little bit the signature of this lens?
just because the old.photodo.com rating of: 3,4 (according to their special rating system for 2D Targets (!) says this is one of the worst lenses in the contax yashica system ever.

Thanks a lot, rainer N.
 
I asked myself the same question last summer and took a quick landscape shot using 2.8/25 @5.6 and 2/28 @5.6. Here we go:
2.8/25 @5.6
473697.jpg

2/28 @5.6
473698.jpg

Here are the crops of left upper corner (this is IBM lab working on new hard drives as rumor says):
2.8/25 @5.6
473699.jpg

2/28 @5.6
473700.jpg

The film used was Velvia PVP-100, camera RTS III. Scanned by Minolta 5400 Elite II using absolutely the same settings. No photoshop processing whatsoever except converting to jpg.
Honestly, I don't see any difference besides perspective and sharpness. Am I doing something wrong?
 
Back
Top