Needing suggestions about lenses

[wallerwaker]

Hi all,
i´m trying to decide if a will upgrade or charge to the N system from the C/Y i have, but obviously, i have some questions that i couldn´t answer searching in the archives and i hope any of you could help me.
so, here i go:
1- i have the VS 100-300mm, which i love for its performance, and if i upgrade i will buy the 70-200mm N, which i have heard/read very good comments. How do you compare these 2 lenses in terms of performance?
What will i miss or upgrade if i change between these zooms?

2- That bad is the VS17-35 f2,8?? i´m really surprised about the comments i read in this forum about it. This lens is my main reason to make the switch/upgrade! perhaps i will have to see more carefully the 17-40mm f4 from Canon and make a switch of brands?

I hope any of you could help me.
regards,

 

[bluesee]

Alejandro, the 70-200 is a nice compact lens with sharpness & color you'd expect =20=

from Contax. The 17-35 2.8 is a sharp, distortion free, beautiful lens =20=

(my favorite). Wherever you heard those negative stories.... =20 ignore!!!!! Bert

 

[albert4321]

Hi Alejandro,

Looking back to the 17-35mm forum, except for a couple of postings, most "active" members that owned this lens seem to love it. Any forums that you read, including Leica, Hasselblad, you will find positive and negative feed back.

I have recently got the 17-35mm. It is a good as any Ultra wide zoom it can get IMO. In fact, it is one of the reason I stay in the N system. At one point I wanted to switch to the Canon 10D with the 16-35mm L zoom. I played with that combo for a while and felt that the quality on the Contax zoom is so much better, with the exception of the AF speed. Of course, I have not done a reasonable comparison test. To me, it is waste of time. I just use whatever I feel the quality and has the features that I am looking for, and work with any limitation, as all gear has its limiation.

I also have the N24-85 and N70-300 zooms. They deliver what Carl Zeiss promised. I cannot give you a comparion on the c/y lenses since I don't used them long enough to do so.

I guess to be sure, if possible, try it out at your local dealer.

 

[wallerwaker]

Hi Bert and Albert,
thanks for encouraging suggestions! ;o)
I´m planning to make the upgrade in a month or less so i have some time to continue my reserch and decide what will i buy.
I wish to buy a N1 + 17-35 + 50mm + 70-200mm, -but all the negs about the 17-35 and all the ravings about de 24-85mm turned me undecided about which zoom to buy.
best regards,

 

[albert4321]

Hi Alejandro,

IMO,if you buy one lens, I think the N24-85mm is the best choice. It has a nice range for most occasion.Very fast USM, crisp image you can see right away from the viewfinder, and well balance with the N1.

Ultra wide is harder to use unless there is interesting enough fore ground, or if you like the extreme perspective it gives.Keep in mind that the 95mm Pol filter will cost you arround $350.

You wish list has a nice range. But I would suggest to start with the N24-85. I bet you will use this lens 90% of time.

I also find that the 28-80 or 70-200mm are lesser lenses than the 24-85 and 70-300mm. I know some users may not agree with me. But there is a reason why they weight and cost so much more. You may as well bite the bullet get the heavier 70-300mm. There are some good deals in eBay now.

You know what is best for your needs, I just give you my 2 cents after I have used the N system for 2 some yrs.

Good luck,

 

[fotografz]

I totally agree with Albert.

In addition I would add the inexpensive 50/1.4 for lower light work.

 

[dormant]

I'm a happy 28-80 user, but I also agree with Albert that, if you are going to buy one lens, 24-85 is probably the best choice. For me, I bought 100mm Makro with the money saved by going 28-80. And for the wide-angle shots, I use G 21mm Biogon.

 

[edek]

Hi Ale ! I agree 100% that the 24-85 is the best choice, unless you want extreme wide all the time. I have a lot of Nikon lenses but I´m using a sigma 28-70 f 2.8 most of the time. On contax line I own the 16mm 2.8 distagon, is a nice look but not so usable. About the 17-35 or 70-200 quality opinions my personal one is that any discussion about Carl Zeiss lens and optics is a lost time. I had Canon, Olympus and Nikon gear all are excellent but..... May be the autofocus of these brands is faster but you must think about the work you do and ask yourself if is it nessary. OLD MASTERS had not auto-anything and his photos are models for us. Think about !
All best !
<<<<<<Edward>>>>>>>

 

[ras]

Alejandro:

The N1 + 24-85 is an excellent combo, probably unrivaled in SLR land - the Canon 24-70 is also very attractive and is also faster, but is just too damn heavy to hang around your neck (well, mine at least) and also very expensive. This is an important issue if you plan to travel a lot. For the same reason, the 70-200 is a wonderful lens: quite lightweight, and I believe in terms of MTF actually superior than the much heavier 70-300 (Color Photo, I think). People sometimes say that that is not possible because because the latter is more expensive - well, they had to engeneer that lens to extend to 300, it has manual focus override and a more sturdy and heavy build. This does not mean it is better optically, which it is not; it is easier to design a 3x than a 4x zoom because you will have to compromise optically in case of the latter. Thus, if the bulk of your pics does not extend beyond 200 (still doable with 100 speed film without tripod)take the 70-200. If you are planning on doing long tele work, you'd be better of with Canon or Nikon, in my opinion. There are some reviews on epinions and photographyreview.

 

[edek]

HI Contaxians ! Excuseme but I want to be a little clear : I think ( like you all, I supose) that Carl Zeiss optics we use are the best instumens we got. When I said time lost I was talking about QUALITY LEVEL and when some of us have any opinion about sharpnes, contrast an so we must think on the conditions our test.photos were taken ! Usually the fault is not the lens quality but a photographer mistake . I expect not to ofend anybody with this comment !!
thanks !
REGARDS
EDEK<<<<<<<<<<