navilluspm
Well-known
I hope this is on the right forum.
Zeiss lenses are noted to render color pictures in certain way due to micro-contrast and coating, I believer.
But how does Zeiss compare for Black and White photography? On Cameraquest there is a quote about single coated lenses being better for Black and white photography. Do you feel that the T-coating minimizes the contrast - that Zeiss lenses are more suited for color than Black and white compared to a single coated Voigtlander?
Zeiss lenses are noted to render color pictures in certain way due to micro-contrast and coating, I believer.
But how does Zeiss compare for Black and White photography? On Cameraquest there is a quote about single coated lenses being better for Black and white photography. Do you feel that the T-coating minimizes the contrast - that Zeiss lenses are more suited for color than Black and white compared to a single coated Voigtlander?
Avotius
Some guy
It has been my experiance that the modern zeiss lenses I have used in zm and zf mount are not as good for getting the "classic" bw rendering people around here like more. I think they are better and truly excell at color photography and even can lend their characteristics to digital color photography where as leica lenses don't transfer their bw qualities over well to digital bw simply because of the characteristics of digital bw at this time. A few people mentioned that some of my bw photos were too smooth and with that plasticy digitalness to them when in fact they were film shots with zeiss lenses and the digital shots in the same batch were said to look more film like. That said it is possible to get some really nice bw results with zeiss lenses but it takes more work and experimentation to get them unlike with my vintage leica lenses that those classic grey tones and softer contrast transitions are easy to coax out of the negative.
Also I found that a lens does not have to just be single coated to get good results. I have a cv 35mm f2.5 pancake 2 that does great tones with bw and is generally known as a high contrast lens. Really you need to find what you are looking for in your bw shots. My favorite lens for shooting bw is still the 45mm yashinon you get on a yashica gsn, to each his own.
Also I found that a lens does not have to just be single coated to get good results. I have a cv 35mm f2.5 pancake 2 that does great tones with bw and is generally known as a high contrast lens. Really you need to find what you are looking for in your bw shots. My favorite lens for shooting bw is still the 45mm yashinon you get on a yashica gsn, to each his own.
Last edited:
payasam
a.k.a. Mukul Dube
Zeiss (and Nikon) were known for contrast, while Leitz (and Canon) were known for good resolution and micro-contrast. In practice I have found all quite acceptable both for colour and for B&W.
W
wlewisiii
Guest
I also think that modern Zeiss glass is the best available for shooting color. That said, I don't think that there is inherently anything magical about single coating. The real difference comes with coating - you will find the biggest change going from uncoated glass to any coating at all. The difference between, say, an uncoated 1937 Tessar and a 1950 Tessar is greater than the difference between that 1950 Tessar and a 2008 Planar.
None the less, my favorite lens for both black & white or color work is that uncoated 1937 50/2.8 Tessar so what do I know?
William
None the less, my favorite lens for both black & white or color work is that uncoated 1937 50/2.8 Tessar so what do I know?
William