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!

Zeiss 645Zoom 4590

> > > > I would take 35mm and 80mm. The 45-90mm although a good lens, for portrait, > it cannot rival the 80/2 and 80/2 is least expensive lens of the line and > offer excellent quality for portrait and general purpose. For landscape, 35mm > is covering more than the range of 45-90. But the best if you have the 3 then > you may not need 45 and 55. > > Brgds/Kaisern > > >
 
I believe the 45-90 also takes a larger filter. Perhaps you should strike a deal with the dealer for the 80/2 and 45/4.8 (?).

For a shift lens I use my Hasselblad PC Mutar and a Zeiss 40mm/4 on the Contax 645 via an Adapter.
In actuality, the Contax makes a fine focal plane body for all the Hasselblad lenses.
 
>Jack, I would like to respond to your question by looking at your needs as a photographer. You said you shoot primarily landscapes and occasional portraits. It’s for that reason I suggest getting two prime lenses over one zoom for the fooling reasons 1. The primes are faster. 2. The 35mm offers a wider angle of view that allows you to properly capture and frame a shot that you may not be able to with the 45-90 zoom. 3. Although I think we all agree that Zeiss glass is better than almost all others, primes are still sharper than zooms. 4. It has been my experience that the only time I need a zoom is when I can't set up a shot or control the environment, i.e. weddings, or sporting events. In landscapes and portraits you in almost all circumstances have the ability to control both. Good luck, in any event I know you will love your new lenses.

>
 
> Jack, You answered your question when you say that you'll surely eventually get the Zeiss 45-90 zoom. So it seems inevitable that you'll end up with this, you might as well buy it first. Of course, nothing replaces testing-shoot with all 3 and then decide. Obviously, if the quality of the zoom is not up to your standards (speed/color/resolution), then you'll end up with the 2 prime lenses. Most of my shooting in 35mm has been with a moderate wide-tele zoom. The benefits of quickly choosing a focal length and cropping have been more important to me than the limited speed. Only when I need the additional speed will I use the wide-angle, normal and tele lenses. If the max aperture and performance of the 45-90 is satisfactory upon your use, you probably won't bother with the 35 and 80.
 
dear Guy and guys:

many thanks for your frank and thoughtful advice. i am leaning toward the 35 and 80 for starters, mainly b/c i would like to dabble in extreme wide angle (i note the shortcomings of this perspective). also, i somewhat tire of the 24-85's slowness in the n series.

jhs
 
i appreciate the advice on the lens selection. i decided to go with the 35mm and 80mm. i've shot several rolls and am very pleased with both lenses, esp. the 35mm. i probably will not go with the zoom for some time, opting for a longer lens in the near term. the only downside with my selection is the filter dilemma (none of my n filters fit on these two new 645 lenses). contax really makes a killing on the periferals, don't they? ever priced a polarizer for the 35mm? more than half the price of an nx body!
 
Back
Top