Are Zeiss ZF lenses for Nikon worth getting?

[narsuitus]

Why do people put the AR-1 soft release on motor equipped F2s,. where the camera release button is almost never used?

In my case, there are times when I need to use the camera's shutter release without using the attached motor drive. There are also times when I need to remove the attached motor drive and use the camera's shutter release.

 

[DREW WILEY]

Yes, they're well worth it if they give the look you want. Yesterday I was speaking to a friend absolutely thrilled with the color rendering and detail he's getting. I recommended he go with Zeiss. But shoot color in bigger formats, and use the Nikon almost exclusively for b&w. So for my personal use I prefer the classic 85/1.4Ais. It's superbly color-corrected too, but cooler color balance. Back when I did print 35mm color, I trended toward less-contrast older single-coated lenses. So you need to distinguish mechanical quality and durability from personal preference per look and handling properties.

 

[RalphLambrecht]

Ken Rockwell says some are better, some worse, than the equivalent Nikkors. He also says the Zeiss ones are built like cheap 1970"s lenses.

he also has a line-up of the best and worst lenses to get. I took his advice and wasn't disappointed.

 

[marcmarc]

I have the first generation Zeiss 35mm f/2 and the first generation Zeiss 50 f/1.4. Both lenses are superb and I think they are very good bargains for the quality you get compared to say maybe Leica glass. Having said that earlier this year I succumbed to GAS and bought on impulse a Nikkor 28mm f/2. I'm not sure what generation this is, it might be an Ai-s. Anyway, it's an amazing lens! Super sharp with great detail. I'm so happy with it I decided to keep this one rather then sell it and pick up a Zeiss. I read up on some reviews and if I'm using the same lens, then it's probably one of the most favorites of Nikon shooters; reviews were almost across the board favorable. Then again, the same can be said for the 35mm Zeiss f/2which also seems to get unanimous stellar reviews. The Zeiss lenses I should point out are pretty heavy especially the 35mm which apparently is larger then most other lenses in it's focal length. Focusing is a bit stiffer and slower with the Zeiss lenses compared to Nikon lenses which focus faster and have more "throw."

 

[Ai Print]

Absolutely worth it, just a spectacular look in terms of color, contrast and unreal sharpness. And the new Milvus line is an amazing build, smoothest focus I have ever used in a lens with just the right amount of resistance.

A colleague of mine is a Zeiss ambassador and has let me try out several of them but the one I could not live without is the 50 F2 Makro Planar. I use it for food, portraits, lifestyle and it is simply in a league of it's own, put my now gone 50mm 1.4G to shame.

Build quality is amazing, my AIS Nikkors usually have to go in for a CLA every 5-6 years but not the Zeiss, they hold together really well.

If I we're given an assignment to travel the world and do a series of portraits in black and white, I could take just my FM3A or F3 with the 50mm F2 Milvus and just knock it put out of the park.

 

[Montaggio]

I had the 50/1.4 ZF.2 and really liked it. Build quality was beautiful. I used it on both my F4S and D2H (now gone). Worked well for both film and digital, but I preferred the look on film. Nice contrast and very sharp at f2. In the end I actually swapped it out for the 58mm Voigtlander. My Nikkors always lived on the F4S, so the Zeiss was usually used for digital. With the ~ 1.5 crop factor on the D2H, the focal length was just a bit better for me with the CV.

 

[benveniste]

He also says the Zeiss ones are built like cheap 1970"s lenses.

I haven't verified this quote, but the current Zeiss lenses take what's good out of the "cheap 1970's" lenses such as metal barrels, helicoids, mounts, filter rings, and barrels, and leave behind what was "vintage," such as balsam optical cement and minimal lens coatings, limited glass choice, and pre-computer optical designs. Nor am I going to try to speak to "better-or-worse," because I've tried an "apples-to-apples" comparison.

Nor can I say they are "worth getting." Value is subjective as is price sensitivity. If you are reading this, chances are pretty good you aren't looking to maximize "sharpness" or so-called "IQ" -- analog 35mm photography is simply the wrong platform for that. So "better or worse" than "equivalent Nikkors" (when they exist) also becomes subjective. If you can't take a world-class photo with any of the Zeiss ZF.2, Milvus, or Otus lenses, chances are very good it ain't the fault of the lens.

I don't own any Zeiss ZF.2 lenses because I'm pretty sure I wouldn't use them enough for warrant the cost. I only use manual focus gear about 15-20% of the time, and that includes medium format "stuff." What I can say is that in today's world these lenses are aimed at a niche market. Niche products come at a premium, as does quality control and yes, the Zeiss name. If you want a prime lens, are comfortable focusing manually, love the feel of a traditional metal helicoid, but prefer the predictability of a more recently produced product, the Zeiss lenses will deliver.

 

[mshchem]

In my case, there are times when I need to use the camera's shutter release without using the attached motor drive. There are also times when I need to remove the attached motor drive and use the camera's shutter release.

I have an AR-1 on all my F's and F2's . Mainly so I can find the button with my old fingers. I have had really good results with Nikkors. I don't have any of the new plastic wonder lenses. If it doesn't have an aperture ring on it I don't buy it. I have a Nikkor 85 1.4 AF-D , If there's a better 85 prime, I would like to see it, and it works on every Nikon SLR ever made.
Mike

 

[Sirius Glass]

If the lenses are as good as my Hasselblad Zeiss lenses and you can afford them, then buy them.

 

[narsuitus]

I don't have any of the new plastic wonder lenses. If it doesn't have an aperture ring on it I don't buy it. I have a Nikkor 85 1.4 AF-D , If there's a better 85 prime, I would like to see it, and it works on every Nikon SLR ever made.

I totally agree with you. I also avoid Nikon G and E lenses without aperture rings. I also have the Nikkor 85 1.4 AF-D and think it is a great lens.


85mm f/1.4 by Narsuitus, on Flickr