ZEISS "CLASSIC" 100MM F2 MAKRO-PLANAR ZE LENS
Updated March 11, 2017
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
| Announced | December 4th, 2009 (Canon ZE Mount); DPReview |
| Lens Composition | 9 Elements / 8 Groups |
| Aspherical Elements | None |
| Floating Element | Yes |
| Angular Field of View | 25º at Infinity |
| Aperture Blades | 9, Curved (Circular) |
| Focus Type | Manual Focus |
| Minimum Focus | 17.3” / .44 Meters |
| Magnification | 1:2 |
| F-Stop Scale | F2 to F22 in 1/3 Stop Increments |
| Filter Size | 67mm, Front Thread, Non-rotating |
| Metal Lens Hood | Included (63g) |
| Lens Pouch | None Included |
| Weight | 1.50 pounds / 682 Grams without Lens Hood and Caps |
| Size | W 76mm x L 91mm (mounted and focused at infinity) |
| Mounts Available | ZF, ZK and ZE |
BUILD QUALITY
The ZE’s are well built and harken back to yesteryear when manual focus lenses had beautifully dampened focus rings and felt solid as a tank. The Zeiss ZE lenses mount smoothly and the auto aperture works precisely as it should. The lenses feel solid on the Canon 1Ds Mark III, and there is no play or wiggle. The 100ZE’s focus ring is a tad stiff, but it is definitely a lighter touch than my Zeiss "Classic" 50mm F2 Makro-Planar ZE.
The barrel knurlings look nice, but they tend to accumulate finger oil and dust. I prefer the diamond textured rubber grip on the Contax lenses. It was very easy to find the Contax focus rings (without looking) because the difference in feel between textured rubber and smooth metal was easy to sense. The ZE hoods are metal and lock into place like a Canon lens hood, though sometimes they need a bit of force. The Zeiss front lens caps tend to pop off, but giving them a half-twist to lock into the filter threads does wonders.
HANDLING
Like most macro lenses, racking the focus from the minimum focus distance to infinity is a long drive - 349º of rotation to be exact. If shooting outdoors, maybe a mix of portraits and landscapes, then the focus throw is not too long - probably around 90º of rotation. As for macro mode the lens gets considerably longer and there is alot of focus racking. I would have been perfectly happy with a .7 meter minimum focus distance if that had resulted in a smaller lens size.
With the auto aperture, the 100mm ZE gained some girth and weight (compared to the Contax 100mm F2 Planar). The new Zeiss Milvus 100mm F2 Makro-Planar ZE is even heavier. Adding the macro functionality essentially builds in a macro tube extension into the lens. I feel the Zeiss 100mm F2 Makro-Planar ZE lost its nimbleness with the added bulk. I love the Zeiss 100mm F2 Makro-Planar ZE “in the studio” when doing product shots, but when shooting outdoors, the Contax 100mm F2 Planar is still my preferred lens.
PERFORMANCE
The Zeiss 100mm F2 Makro-Planar ZE is widely known as being exceptionally sharp, distortion free, having a flat field and a quick transition to its background blur. The Zeiss 100mm F2 Makro-Planar ZE renders quite similarly to the Contax 100mm F2 Planar, but there are subtle differences -
- The 100mm ZE is slightly sharper at F2 and has a bolder contrast curve. Opening up mid-tones (in the raw editor or Photoshop) results in a very similar look as the Contax 100mm Planar.
- The Contax 100mm's bokeh is slightly more diffused. Likewise, the Contax 100mm's light fall off at F2 is more pronounced. These two characteristics result in a slightly more subdued look at F2-2.8 (for the Contax 100mm F2 Planar).
- Both lenses exhibit color fringing in the bokeh under the right conditions. It is really hard to say if one has more or less than the other. Both do it.
- The 100mm ZE is orders of magnitude better in the studio than the Contax 100mm Planar. The Contax 100mm struggles under strobes and can wash out at times. Also, by F5.6 the Contax 100mm's sharpness begins to drop off at close distances.
The Zeiss 100mm F2 Makro-Planar ZE and the Contax 100mm F2 Planar perform similarly, but the Makro-Planar ZE is the sharper lens. To illustrate how similar the results can be, here is quick comparison of 100mm & 110mm Planars -
| Zeiss 100mm F2 ZE | Contax 100mm F2 MMJ | Hass 110mm F2 FE | ||
|
|
|
||
|
|
|
||
| Tiny bit sharper; has the deepest black; held highlights better; widest FOV of the group. Note the cats eye orbs towards the left edge; this area is rounder in the Hasselblad image. A bit more purple CA - specular highlights on black post. | Bokeh is slightly softer / more diffused, bokeh shows more circles / orbs; a tiny bit less sharp at F2 compared to the Zeiss ZE; colors are slightly warmer than the Zeiss ZE. Note cats eye orbs towards the left edge. | 110mm changes the FOV and bokeh; softest of the group but still sharp; bokeh specular OOF's are more circular; a softer, plusher rendering; less light fall-off due to larger image circle. 110mm bokeh looks like a scaled up version of the Contax 100mm bokeh. |
All images taken at the same distance with a Canon 1Ds Mark III on a tripod.
CONCLUSION
Compared to the Contax 100mm F2 Planar, the Zeiss "Classic" 100mm F2 Makro-Planar ZE paints with a bolder brush. Back in 2010 I would have said the Contax was my favorite, but today I am just as likely to pick the Zeiss 100mm. The Contax 100mm's are now 20 to 40 years old and finding one in mint condition is difficult. Whereas a mint condition Zeiss 100mm F2 Makro-Planar ZE is easy to find and sells for $750. The Zeiss 100mm brings all the modern goodness of auto aperture, EXIF data, no need for adapters and macro functionality.
Optically I have no complaints with the Zeiss "Classic" 100mm F2 Makro-Planar ZE. Its size bugs me. Nowadays I mostly shoot Leica M gear, so the Zeiss 100mm seems ginormous in comparison, but I still love the look from the 100mm Planars. And I still use one with my Leica SL Typ 601 a-la the Novoflex Canon EF / Leica SL lens adapter.
