Does it worth to upgrade to Zeiss Distagon?

[JazzBox]

Dear all,

I use mostly a GH4 for music videos and little narrative things. 
In the last years I collected some nice vintage lenses  such as Carl Zeiss Jena M42 (that I sold) and now I own a Canon FD set (24 f/2.8, 35 f/2, 50 f/1.4, 85 f/1.8) among some native m43 lenses: Olympus 12-40 f/2.8, Panasonic Leica 25 f/1.4 and Olympus 45 f/1.8.

Today I had a call from a friend (owner of a shop), he sells some used Zeiss ZE (Canon Mount) lenses:
Distagon 18 f/3.5
Distagon28 f/2
Distagon 35 f/2
Makro Planar 50 f/2 
Planar 85 f/1.4

I don't have the money to buy them all... and I'm thinking to pick one or two lenses that I will use beside my 12-40 (that I find really impressive, even if I prefer full manual primes).

Do you think that it worth to give back all my lenses except the 12-40 (so all the Canon FD lenses, the Panasonic 25 f/1.4 and the Olympus 45 f/18) in order to buy the Distagon 35 f/2 or the 28 and the 50?

Are those lenses really better then the old Zeiss Jena M42 or then my FD? 

Are they in some way comparable with Compact Primes in terms of final results? 

Wich lens would you suggest to pick? 

When people say "Zeiss Hollywood 28 Distagon", talk about this one? http://www.bhphotovideo.com/c/product/655186-REG/Zeiss_1762_849_28mm_f_2_0_Distagon_T.html

Excuse me for all the questions, but the shop is 2 hours from my hometown and I'd love to have some distinguished opinion before to take my car and go

Thank you very much for your suggestions!
 

[Nikkor]

Totally depends on the price. The 28 2 is the same design as the hollywood as far as I know. 

[JazzBox]

Totally depends on the price. The 28 2 is the same design as the hollywood as far as I know. 

He sells every lens (used) in the 750 - 850 euro ballpark.
If I give back all my lenses (except the 12-40) he gives me about 1000/1100, so I could take just one or invest some money for 2.... 

[Nikkor]

Personally I don't think that's a good plan, they are good lenses but the ones you already have aren't bad either and having a single one of those on the gh4 crop is totally pointless.

[JazzBox]

Personally I don't think that's a good plan, they are good lenses but the ones you already have aren't bad either and having a single one of those on the gh4 crop is totally pointless.

I'm not giving back the Olympus 12-40 f/2.8 Pro. 
He also sells the Olympus 40-150 f/2.8 Pro, but I think 12-40 and some primes would serve me better then 2 zoom

[mercer]

I just bought the Contax Carl Zeiss Planar 50mm 1.7. I haven't received it yet but the prices are relatively cheap for that lens. I think the Hollywood runs about $800 for a decent copy.  Not sure if the ZE is equivalent, but it probably is close. 

Hmm, that's a tough call. I probably would do it and then slowly build a nice collection of Zeiss. But, as araucaria said, you do have a decent set of lenses already.

Good luck with it. 

[TheRenaissanceMan]

Personally I don't think that's a good plan, they are good lenses but the ones you already have aren't bad either and having a single one of those on the gh4 crop is totally pointless.

Not with a speedbooster.

That said, you're better off looking at Contax Zeiss than ZE.

[richg101]

Personally I'd always go for the contax versions.  Made in DE or Japan.  The ZE/ZF lenses suffer from modernisation of manufacturing processes - open one up and there aint brass mechanical parts in a ZE.  I expect the glass will also not be German / Japanese.

 

IMO the 28mm/2 is one of the most over rated lenses ever.  way too expensive for what it actually does.  28mm lenses I find boring in general, and paying premium for an f2 where dof is so deep anyway it'd a waste of big bucks - particularly since at f2 it looks like crap.  I'd sooner get a contax 25mm/2.8 and a 35mm/2.8 for the same price as the single 28mm.  Or plump for the 35/1.4 for the extra £100.  Now THAT IS A LENS 

 

On the flip side I think all of the faster zeiss dslr lenses should be avoided.  You pay a premium for the bigger apertures but when used wide open or even 2 stops closed they really fringe in a nasty way.    

 

 

[JazzBox]

Not with a speedbooster.

That said, you're better off looking at Contax Zeiss than ZE.

Thank you very much! 
Why is Contax Zeiss better?

 

Good luck with it. 

Thank you! 

[Andrew Reid]

I would get shot of the 12-40mm actually, put the 28mm f2 and 85mm f1.4 on a speed booster instead.

Forget the 18,35 and 50, the 28 and 85 are the unique ones.

750 is a 'just ok' price, try and get him down to 700 at most.

By the way... I have the modern ZE 28 and 85, plus the old Contax Zeiss equivalents (well... my vintage Zeiss 28 F2 is actually in Pentax housing!!)

Although the images are pretty much identical between them, I do find having a native Canon mount handy and build quality is superb on the new ones. My Contax Zeiss 85mm F1.4 is a bit wonky now after a lot of use and ageing!

The 28mm is fine wide open... the 85mm is quite soft at F1.4, best at F2.0. Neither are 'perfect', they still look very vintage.

[JazzBox]

I would get shot of the 12-40mm actually, put the 28mm f2 and 85mm f1.4 on a speed booster instead.

Forget the 18,35 and 50, the 28 and 85 are the unique ones.

750 is a 'just ok' price, try and get him down to 700 at most.

By the way... I have the modern ZE 28 and 85, plus the old Contax Zeiss equivalents (well... my vintage Zeiss 28 F2 is actually in Pentax housing!!)

Although the images are pretty much identical between them, I do find having a native Canon mount handy and build quality is superb on the new ones. My Contax Zeiss 85mm F1.4 is a bit wonky now after a lot of use and ageing!

The 28mm is fine wide open... the 85mm is quite soft at F1.4, best at F2.0. Neither are 'perfect', they still look very vintage.

Thank you very much!!

For sure I'm going to sell the 25 f/1.4 and the 45 f/1.8 since I barely used them 3 times in 1 year while I use the 12-40 also for personal photo.

If the FD are better (or not so worser) then Zeiss ZE I could also remain with those lenses... I could make an effort just in case those Zeiss looks like the CP.2 or if they are at least a lot better then my humble FD... otherwise I could give back all and take the Olympus 40-150 f/2.8 Pro, in order to have 2 zoom and call it a day.

It sound a little crazy to me, since I do love to shoot with manual primes, but... do you think it could be a possibility or it is just stupid?

(the shop also sell a mint A7s for 1600... but at that point I have to give back all my gear and buy some other lenses... He also sells Samyang video lenses but I had not great experience with a 10mm)

Anyway I shot 99% of the "prison" part of this video with the Olympus 12-40 and it does not looks that bad to me, for that reason I don't exclude a priori the 40-150.

 

 

Personally I'd always go for the contax versions.  Made in DE or Japan.  The ZE/ZF lenses suffer from modernisation of manufacturing processes - open one up and there aint brass mechanical parts in a ZE.  I expect the glass will also not be German / Japanese.

 

IMO the 28mm/2 is one of the most over rated lenses ever.  way too expensive for what it actually does.  28mm lenses I find boring in general, and paying premium for an f2 where dof is so deep anyway it'd a waste of big bucks - particularly since at f2 it looks like crap.  I'd sooner get a contax 25mm/2.8 and a 35mm/2.8 for the same price as the single 28mm.  Or plump for the 35/1.4 for the extra £100.  Now THAT IS A LENS 

 

On the flip side I think all of the faster zeiss dslr lenses should be avoided.  You pay a premium for the bigger apertures but when used wide open or even 2 stops closed they really fringe in a nasty way.    

 

 

Thanks richg101! 

Other then Zeiss, what you would suggest for GH4?

[DevonChris]

Other then Zeiss, what you would suggest for GH4?

Nikon AiS lenses are excellent, but do focus the other way, which might be an issue for you. 

[richg101]

IMO 1980's Olympus, Canon and Nikon lenses are up the the standard of the Zeiss Contax's.  A Olympus 24mm/2, 35mm/2 and 50mm/1.8 can be had for the same price as a single zeiss 28mm/2 and perform just was well. IMO.  the 35mm/2 is a very very good value lens.  i think adapted to EOS mount with cheap adaptors and with a speed booster 0.64x these will be a wonderful lens set for gh4

[DBounce]

I have the FE mount 35mm 1.4 Zeiss Distagon, and can tell you it is a truly awesome lens. But at $1600, it should be.

[Nick Hughes]

IMO 1980's Olympus, Canon and Nikon lenses are up the the standard of the Zeiss Contax's.  A Olympus 24mm/2, 35mm/2 and 50mm/1.8 can be had for the same price as a single zeiss 28mm/2 and perform just was well. IMO.  the 35mm/2 is a very very good value lens.  i think adapted to EOS mount with cheap adaptors and with a speed booster 0.64x these will be a wonderful lens set for gh4

Love me some OM lenses. I have the 24mm/2.8, 35mm/2, 50mm/1.4 and 1.8, and 135mm/2.8. I've probably spent under $700 for the whole set so far.

[richg101]

I have the FE mount 35mm 1.4 Zeiss Distagon, and can tell you it is a truly awesome lens. But at $1600, it should be.

The FE 35/1.4 is a different beast all together.  a true high end lens and one that marked the point where the E-mount system became serious.  I'd love one of these lenses.

[JazzBox]

Thank you guys! I went to the shop with a friend that had to buy a lens and finally I gave back the Panasonic 25 and the Olympus 45 in trade for his lens and had the money, because I did not understand that ZE need a speedboster in order to change aperture.

I tried the 40-150, really awesome, but maybe too long for handheld shooting. So I return home with my 12-40, the FD lenses and some money.

I hope I'll find some Contax Zeiss lenses to trade with my FD one day

[IronFilm]

I'd avoid the ZE lenses in preference for the ZF instead, waaaay easier to adapt.

 

[Nikkor]

I'd avoid the ZE lenses in preference for the ZF instead, waaaay easier to adapt.

 

But they focus "the other way" around.

[IronFilm]

I'm a Nikon shooter, they focus the right way round! ;-)