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!

CONTAX CY lenses on Canon EOS Bodies

Marc,

please be aware that I read from FM forum that the 28-90 does not fit any EOS dSLR body. I could be wrong. Someone posted a Zeiss/EOS compatability table there with or without modification for each sensors cameras. I could not find it anymore. But the chart shows the 28-90 does not fit 1.6x, 1.3x or 1x EOS body.

I too has an eye on this lens for R9 + D module.

I am aware all the pros for using zeiss on EOS fullframe body. But using adaptor and stop down metering is too slow for me.
 
In the line of lenses for the Eos 1DII or the 1DsII, it is beneficial to have some autofocus lenses for events or special conditions where manual focus under pressure or low light is challenging.

I took pictures in the dark side of L.A. last night where it is unsafe to get out of one's car. There I used my 21mm Distagon. I am not satisfied with the pictures in terms of focus under pressure.

I think the the 35 1.4L, argueable perhaps better than the Zeiss equivalent, being fast and autofocus would have been perfect.

My line up is the 15mm Canon fisheye, a wonderful bargain and easily defished, the 18, 21 and 28 f2.0 Distagons, the 28-85 Vario Sonnar, (a wonderful portrait and walk around lens) and the 50 1.4 Planar which i've never used, the 50 1.4 Can EF (very good but prone to birefringence purple blue line between high contrast areas under bright light (corrected, some say by Shay's purple fringe reducer).

After that, the Canon lenses: 70-200 4.0L and 2.8 L IS with a 1.4 extender.

I sold my 300 2.8L to finance my Zeiss lenses and because it is not long enough for my safari plans anyway LOL!

Not to have any autofocus lenses is, IMHO, a mistake driven by Zeiss purism, rather than common sense.

Especially at the long end, Canon lenses are superb.

Asher
 
I love my 28 F2 Distagon. I sold my Yashica 55 F1.2 to finance it and have not regretted it at all. The Yashica was a very good performer and I found it easy to focus (for me any way it was either in or out of focus). The temptation of the 28 F2 was too much so the 55/1.2 went off to Canada. I would have to be offered a shed load of money to part with the 28 now. It really is a cracker.

Paul
 
Thanks for the heads up Albert. It'll be interesting to see what the problem might be in mounting the Leica 28-90/2.8-4.5 on an EOS camera. Maybe the rear element protrudes to deep when at a certain focal length and interferes with the mirror... or something like that.

I encountered a non-compatibility issue mounting the Zeiss 60/2.8 Macro on an EOS 1DsMKII. The automatic stop down cam arm was just hitting the mirror box inside the Canon, which was easily remedied with my trusty Dremmel tool. Now it works on the Canon, but if mounted on a Contax body lacks the auto aperture function ... which I could care less about on a Macro lens usually used deliberately and slowly and costs less than $500 used.

But modifying a $3,200 Leica Zoom is another matter.

Asher, who's driven by Zeiss purism? I have, and regularly use Canon EF AF lenses: 14/2.8L, 16-35/2.8L, 24/1.4L, 35/1.4L, 50/1.4, 85/1.2L, 100/2.8 Macro, 135/2L, 70-200/2.8L (sold a 200/1.8L and 400/2.8L for lack of use verses cost ). AF lenses are a must for some applications, and I wouldn't go to a wedding shoot without some of them.

However, we stringently test lenses against one another in a drive to improve image quality as much as possible. In every case where we put a Zeiss lens up against a Canon, the Zeiss visibly won.

Wide angles from Canon are notorious for distortion and lack of sharpness at the edges. Plus, IMO, Canon has always had a sort of pastel coloration in general, which isn't glaringly apparent to the eye until placed next to the same shot done with a Zeiss lenses of the same or similar focal length. It just depends on the characteristics one prefers.

We did side-by-side test a Canon 35/1.4L verses a C/Y Zeiss 35/1.4 @ f/1.4. Both Irakly and I agreed that the Zeiss was better, had nicer out of focus areas and nicer over-all color with richer blacks. The sharpness wasn't an issue with either lens, but sharpness isn't everything I look for in a lens ... the emotional elements are just as important IMO.

As far as Canon Long glass, I'd generally have to agree with you. Superb. The 200/1.8 I used for a long time was wonderful as was the 400/2.8. So, I was surprised when the Zeiss 70-210/3.5
actually outperformed the Canon 70-200/2.8L. Not going to sell the Canon zoom over that issue. AF and IS is a wonderful thing.

Yet, AF and automation, while incredibly useful sometimes alters
a shooting style for the worse. In an assessment of my body of work over the past few years, I found that the images that defined my style and have brought me the most business, were overwhelmingly produced by 3 cameras and related lenses: Leica M, Hasselblad V, and Contax 645 or N with 645 glass (which I tend to manually focus).

But I grew up using manual cameras and learned the focusing tricks and art of anticipation that allows me to get the kind of images I want.
 
Well, I'm keeping my 24-70L and 100/2 USM "just in case" for those "snapshooting situations" like family outings, but they generally don't make it into my bag, me mainly shooting landscapes and trees and things that don't go bump in the shoot. Obviously, the right tool for the right job.

I'm actually really enjoying the manual focusing as I've found I get more involved with the subject and if you're not in a super hurry it's easier to select the optimum point in shallow DOF situations. I prefer to not mix & match manual & auto-focus as it tends to break your stride switching between the different shooting psychologies, if you know what I mean. We'll get there little by little (yeah, right).

I've been tempted by the 28/2, but the 28/2.8 is a fine and much lighter lens, not to mention I got mine in mint condition for $225. I can't make mine a tax deduction like you, Marc
biggrin.gif
.

So, I patiently await my CZ 18 from Italy as it winds its way through the hemispheres, so to speak ...

BTW, there are some things attached to the arm cropped out of my avatar picture on the left ... can you identify them?

http://improbablystructuredlayers.net/Webmaster.htm
 
Do you still have that RTS DJ? Beautiful camera. I just got a RX and love goofing off with it. It's so nice to handle.

Is that a 28-85/3.3 ? If so, do you recall what lens hood it took? Was it a step-up ring and a #1 hood? What mm was the step-up ring? I have that lens and can't find a hood for it.
 
Marc, I traded that RTS III and that 35-135 (you got the zoom part right
happy.gif
) plus a bunch more stuff (Technikardan 23!!) for my ND outfit - hey, it was a Contax, you couldn't go wrong, right?
lol.gif
 
OK, Marc, I am holding in my hands the very W-1 hood on that lens, 82mm! But I may need to use it, so no, you can't have it!

I was going to bid on a particular CZ 35-135, but then I noticed you are after it, so I won't! I think it's going to get bloody later in the morning
biggrin.gif
. And it comes with the hood anyway.

Good luck!
 
No DJ, I didn't get it right. I thought that was a 28-85 on your RTS. But it's a 35-135 huh?

Yep, I'm after the 35-135 on e-bay, but there's a limit which is based on a couple of retail places have one for sale also. So why bid beyond what they're selling for retail with a guarantee?

I'm looking for the necessary hood for a 28-85/3.3-4. A rubber type will do. I just have to figure out what mm it is.

Anyone that decides to sell their 28/2 please let me know first.

IDEA !!!

LET'S START A CLUB OF CONTAX USERS defiant of Kyocera's decision to abandon Contax. Those of us that have found a way to keep getting that Contax/Zeiss look with an unholy marriage
between Canon and Contax. Something like C to the second power....

367844.jpg
 
Are there any adapters for n1 lenses to the canon EOS cameras?
I recently bought the canon d20 and am very impressed with its speed and handling.

Or, if there are no adapters, would anyone have advice on the relative trading value of n1 lenses for c/y mounts?
 
Back
Top