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 N70-200 vs. Zeiss N70-300

G

Guest

Dirk

I am sure Contax would be amazed at your view that the 20-80 and 70-200 are optically superior than the 24-85mm and 70-300mm. I hope you are not basing this view on MTF's etc. As someone who has used them all, they are most definitely not optically superior, the latter lenses producing consistently sharper images across the whole field.

Simon
 
Oh, one last point. Talking to Contax, they regard the 24-84mm and 70-300mm as the opticaly superior lenses, in the construction, glass used and end results. Hence the price premium.

Simon
 
Hi Simon,

actually I wanted to write down a week ago already a comparison between these lenses, but have not had the time yet. I will probably move this conversation to the Zeiss lens section later this week.

Yes, the N70-200 is optically superior vs. the N70-300 and the same is valid for the N28-80 vs. the N24-85. The differences are in certain areas bigger then in others. I was discussing this last December with Zeiss in Oberkochen before I bought my lenses, and I guess they know what they are talking about. But you can see it also in the MTF charts and in real life photography, if you use both side by side. But I have to aknowledge, that the differences are only slightly - but visible.

Before I go into detail, one comment on the different prices and glasses. The use of certain modern glasses does not guarantee by itself to achieve optical improvements. Depending on the zoom-range of the lenses, the more complicated and more expensive lens design is already needed to be on par in image quality with other zooms, which has a narrower zoom-range. BUT The major reason for the more expensive lenses N24-85 and N70-300 is according to Zeiss Germany the implementation of the Dual Focus mechanismen, what produces a lot more problems in design and production of these lenses, therefore the higher price.

I made testshots (handheld, fuji velvia, Nx&N1) side by side with all 4 zooms and saw differences with a 4x loup on the light table. But to be more objective let us look at the MTF data (see the download section), which are giving a quiet good impression where is what better. The differences, that I am referring to are visible, if you compare both lenses to each other directly side by side, which is not really how people make pictures in general
happy.gif
You will never regret to use a N70-300 or N24-85, the optics are just great.

1. N70-200 vs. N70-300.

Every lens design follows certain task which shall be achieved with this lens. The N70-200 was designed for the best results in the center of the image. The N70-300 was designed with a more consistent performance til the corners of the image, above all til 15mm. The N70-200 outperforms the N70-300 in the center of the image til ca. 8-10mm, depending on the Zoom range significantly. Not at 10 lp/mm, but at 20 lp/mm and at 40 lp/mm.

If you look at the different curves, the higher is not always the better. As stated in the Zeiss article available in this Forum, there are some "rule of thumbs" at what point you can really see the difference in image quality. Depending on the lp/mm there are different percentages to look at. For the 10 lp/mm you only need an improvement by 5% and you will see the quality improvement in the final picture, for the 20 lp/mm you need more differences (10%) so that it is visible for the human eye in your picture and for the 40 lp/mm you even need 20% improvement to be able to detect it in in the picture.

As described above you can sse in the center of the image the differences. After 15mm from the image center the 70-300 is better then the N70-200. This is because of the different aim in this lens-design. Distortion and Vignetting is with both zooms more or less the same. I find the quality of the N70-300 outstanding if you think at the wider zoom range and the implementation of the Dual Focus mechanism. It just weights to much (1070g) for the aperture 4.0-5.6, compared to 620g for aperture 3.5-4.5 of the N70-200.

2. N28-80 vs. N24-85

This is more complicated. Depending on what is important to you, there can be different "winners". Additionall we do not have the MTF data at the exact same zoom-range, which makes it actually unfair to compare only by this. The N24-85 has at 24mm an outstanding correction of the distortion. The N28-80 has a bigger distortion by numbers (!) at 28mm then the other at 24mm. As you can read in my other article about common pitfalls in interpreting MTF data, you will see, that this is not comparable in reality like this.

At 50mm distortion is almost at zero with the 28-80, with the 24-85 slightly more then +1 at 20mm height, which is totally o.k. At 80mm/85mm the 28-80 has again an advantage with same center image quality but a more consistent line towards the corners. In general the height of the curves is almost the same throughout the picture with both lenses. The main difference is the gap between sag. and tan. lines for each lp/mm. To describe it very basic the closer they are, the better the image quality.

For vignetting there is basically no difference between the two lenses. So both lenses are excellent and again for the wider zoom range of the 24-85 and the dual focus mechanism an outstanding result.

I know this sound all very technical, but this is the only way to compare in a objective way the differences.

Dirk
 
This thread started originally in the Nx folder. I think it is worthwile to move it here, so that othere members find this comparison easier...

"Hi Michaela,

welcome to the Contax User Site!

You choose excellent lenses with your NX. These are not "just" kit lenses. The 28-80 is actually optically better then the 24-85, same counts for the 70-200 vs. the 70-300. This is due to the narrower zooming range and the easier task therefore to design it.

I switched from my 70-300 to the 70-200 mainly because of the weight and aperture advantage. I used to have the 28-80, but I absolutely need the 24mm, so even it is optically inferior (on a Zeiss level), I sold the 28-80 and use the 24-85 instead."

Dirk
 
Is the manual focusing smooth for the VS 28-80 and VS 70-200 compared to the VS 24-85, VS 70-300? I own the two latter lenses and the manual focusing is absolutely smooth and has the right feel.
 
Hi Patrick,

The convenience in manual focus with the 24-85 and 70-300 is the best I have experienced yet. You have almost the same feling like with the C/Y-mount lenses which is already very difficult to achieve for AF lenses.

The two "low cost" zooms 28-80 and 70-200 can not keep up here. It is just a different construction. That does not mean that it is uncomfortable with the two latter ones, but not as "perfect" as it is with the Dual Focus lenses.

There you can "feel" the price difference.

Dirk
 
Not to add fuel to the fire, but I thought I'd post my test shot with with 28-80mm for amateurs like me on a budget or don't want/can't afford the 24-85mm. This is a bit more than 1/2 of the original picture. It was shot with NX, 28-80mm, Superia 400, and a Vivitar 285HV flash. I am quite satisfied with it. The dust on some parts of the figure (top left and bottom left of the helmet) is even visible.

board-post.cgi
 
Hi,

I'm an owner of N1 and 28-80mm lens. I plan to upgrade my lens to 24-85, and here comes my question: Is that lens worth so much money? I don't care about the difference between 24/28 and 80/84 (4mm), it's not as important for me as sharpness is. I know that generally, more expensive is better, but maybe not as better as more expensive is? So regarding to sharpness, would you spend about $650 more for that lens or not?

Thank you,
Kris.
 
BOTTOM LINE, Dirk and Simon. With the 70 - 200mm and the 70 - 300mm zooms ... USING THE RANGE OF 70 TO 200MM AND AN APERATURE OF5.6 or F8, which lens is SHARPER. I don't care about charts and graphs ... just the sharpness of the photographs printed on a sharp printer such as a Fuji Frontier minilab. Rick
 
Isn't this comparison one of apples to oranges? There is a huge difference between
24mm and 28mm. Add in the dual focus ability
and you have the key reasons to spring for the functionally superior lens: 24-85. Unless my finances absolutely dictated the less expensive lens, the dual focus feature alone would be enough to sway me. I say that because the Ns focusing is less than that of a Canon EOS 1 or Nikon F-100, and I find the manual "touch-up" an absolute necessity with
the N1 and N-Digital.
 
Back
Top