What's new
DPR Forum

Welcome to the Friendly Aisles!
DPRF is a spin-off of dpreview. We are 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. From smartphone to Medium Format.

DPRF is a community for everybody, every brand and every sensor format. Digital and film.
Enjoy this modern, easy to use software. Look also at our Reviews & Gallery!

Zeiss Distagon 25mm vs Zeiss 28mm

L

leong

Active Member
Its probably a question that has been asked a thousand times before.

I currently have an Aria without any lenses whatsoever. For a start, I am looking at getting a wide angled lens and have narrowed this down to the 25m and the 28mm. Problem is that I can't figure out which to get. Short of the obvious reasons like cost and sharpness which favours the 28mm and controlled distortion and wider field of view which favours the 25mm, are there any other reasons for getting either lens? Is there a fallacy with regards to the statement I made above?

I would like to hear about your experiences about both lenses, if you have tried both of just either one of them. Share with us what you like or dislike about the lenses.
 
According to Zeiss charts, the 25mm is actually 25.9mm and the 28 is 28.5. I have tried to see how significant the difference in field of view is comparing the 25 to my 28 f:2 (which is actually 28.8) and, just looking through the viewfinder) the images are very, very close. (I mean I did not "notice" a difference). I cannot comment on differences in optical quality between the 25 and the 28 2.8, but (according to Zeiss charts) the 28 mm 2.8 seems superior on every account.
Of course this may be the reason the 25mm has been discontinued...
Juan
 
> I am very happy with the 2.8/28 which is a really great lens ! I'm using Pentax- and Canon-lenses too but the Zeiss Distagon is far better than any other 28mm I tried ! Sharpness, colours, contrast... just everything is really great ! This was the lens that made me a Contax-/Zeiss-user ! The difference to other brands with the 50/135mm-lenses are not that abvious as with the 28 Distagon.

Paul
 
I am very happy with the 2.8/28 which is a really great lens ! I'm using Pentax- and Canon-lenses too but the Zeiss Distagon is far better than any other 28mm I tried ! Sharpness, colours, contrast... just everything is really great !

woould be nice if somebody could compare the best nikon or even leica 28 with the zeiss.
 
I have been looking at the MTF charts for both lens for quite some time now, and it seems to tell me to get the 28/2.8 instead of the 25/2.8.

Does the 3mm difference make a lot of difference your pictures? In terms of framing something maybe about 5 metres away, how many steps back do I need to take to match the field of view of the 25/2.8?
 
I have been very happy with my 28/2.8 MM. I have compared it with friends Nikon and Tokina, and they are in now way close as far as I'm concerned.

As for the 3mm difference, I have compared 21, 24, and 28. The 24 is only marginally different than the 28, so 25 will be even less. I only have to take 3 steps back instead of paying for 25mm CZ. The 28 is also a bargain as far as 28's go.

Regards, Gary
 
Many thanks for the helpful replies. Is there something about the 25/2.8 that you get that cannot be replicated with the 28/2.8 and vice versa? It seems that there are a lot of good comments about the 25/2.8, but nothing that is specific when I did more research on the internet.

Also, does anybody know if there is a difference in the performance between the German made and Japan made 25/2.8?
 
>I chose the 25/2.8 over the 28/2.0 because of it's size for travel. Mine has been all around the world and the images are exc. I uellentse my 35/1.4 as my "normal lens" so there is a good break between them and my 18/4 which is my wide angle. Hope that
 
Gary, forget the MTF stuff and get the 28. It is much cheaper, a little bit= lighter and better, and the field of view is almost the same for all pract= ical purposes. Most of us would not be able to tell the difference in the q= uality of the output. That actually goes for the angle of view too. If you = really want a difference get the 21.
 
my 35/1.4 as my "normal lens" so there is a good break between them and my 18/4 which is my wide angle. i started also with the 35/1.4 25 years ago and did a lot of work without having an other lens. at 2.0 it is already excellent, high resolution/sharpness, low light fall off(compaired to other brands). later i bought the 85/1.4. for travelling the 85/2.8 is a better choice.

i have also 18mm and 28 and 45mm. 45mm, 85 and 28 would be a good choice for travelling, maybe with two bodies(3 lenses). >
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top