Zeiss 18mm vs. Canon 20-35mm f/2.8 L vs. Canon 24-105mm f/4 L

I recently rented a Zeiss 18mm super wide angle, and wanted to do a quick informal 'field test' too see how it compared to my current collection of Canon L series wide angle zooms. I wanted to see for myself if the legendary Zeiss optics we're indeed superior to Canon's top of the line pro glass. If so, it might be time to unload the zooms and pick up one of these legendary manual focus primes. I will be posting sample shots shortly, but in the meantime, I wanted to share the results of my informal shootout.

The Contenders

• An older Canon 20-35mm f/2.8 L (Discontuned, replaced by later Canon 16-35 II f/2.8 L?)
• Zeiss 18mm f/3.5
• Canon 24-105mm f/4 L

Methodology

As I said, this was just a quick informal test, and is by no mean scientific — but I did follow the format of reviewers by Ken Rockwell and 16:9. All images shot on a tripod mounted Canon 5D Mark II using mirror lockup and remote trigger to avoid any extraneous vibration. Camera was set to ISO 100, using Aperture Priority, and captured in RAW format. The RAW images were opened in Photoshop CS5 Camera Raw using default settings with no additional sharpening. 100% crops were sampled from the Center, Lower Right, and Upper Left, and saved as uncompress PNG files.

This grouping of crops illustrates the center sharpness comparisons, while the lower right compares the more challenging corner sharpness. The upper left crop is included to compare how each lens handles chromatic abrasion. 

Center Crop — Wide Open

Zeiss is the clear winner here. The big surprise here was how bad the 24-105mm performed, considering it's an 'L series' lens.

Center crop — f/8

Stopped down the 20-35mm performs well in the center, and I might have to call this a subjective tie with the Zeiss 18mm. The 24-105mm is still quite soft. I'm wondering now if I might have a bum copy? I might have to do another shootout to compare the 24-105mm with one of my older non-L zooms.

Lower Right — Wide open

The corners are where the rubber meets the road when comparing wide angles. The Canon 20-35mm falls apart here, while the 24-105mm does ok. (Almost better in the corners than the center if that's even possible?) The Zeiss is the clear winner for sharpness in wide open corners, but there is noticeable vignetting.

Lower Right — f/8

Stopped down, sharpness improves across the board as expected. The Zeiss still edges out the zooms for sharpness and clarity.

Upper Left — Wide open

The 20-35mm shows the same problems with corner sharpness wide open, as well as considerable chromatic abrasion. The Zeiss performed remarkably well, with good sharpness and very little color fringing. The big surprise again was how well the 24-105mm performed in the corners. Remarkable sharp for shooting wide open with reasonable chromatic abrasion.

Upper Left — f/8

Stopped down, the 20-35mm was better, but still quite soft by comparison with considerable chromatic abrasion. Both the Zeiss and the 24-105mm showed more pronounced color fringing when stopped down.

Conclusion

Overall I would have to say that the Zeiss lived up to my image quality expectations. Compared to my current wide angles, I was very pleased with the sharpness across the image both wide open and stopped down.

Having spent the weekend in the field shooting with the Zeiss, I noticed;

• The build quality is amazing. This truly is a precision instrument and has the absolute smoothest focus touch I've ever experienced.
• Manual focus is not a big deal for what I shoot. In fact it was a very refreshing and welcome change that made me feel more actively engaged in the creative process. I also liked how the Zeiss EF mount allows for focus confirmation via audible beep and viewfinder visual indicator.
• The 18mm fixed focal length is also no big deal for me. No surprise really, since I currently shoot 99% of my shots at the 20mm end of my 20-35mm lens. I think having to physically move around the scene to compose your shot is the same a manual focus — it gets you more actively engaged in creating your image.
• I absolutely LOVE the old school depth of field scale. Not only is this extremely functional in quickly finding hyperfocal distance — but it was also very nostalgically reminiscent of my earliest photography experiences with my first camera (my grandfathers Asahi Pentax).
• The overall size and weight was another refreshing change. The Zeiss was lighter and more balanced than my Canon zooms, and much more compact.

Bottom line...the Zeiss is just in a different league altogether in terms of image quality and build craftsmanship. I think I will be selling my Canon L zooms and moving to Zeiss primes. Now the only question is the Zeiss 18mm or the 21mm? Why do they offer two super wide primes so similar? Sound like I might need to do another test before making my decision. Any Zeiss owners out there, please feel free to chime in on the comments, or shoot me an email with your thoughts.

Comments

[Cheap Supra Shoes]

<a href="http://www.cheap-supras-sale.com/">Supra Shoes</a>
<a href="http://www.cheap-supras-sale.com/">Supra Skytop</a>
<a href="http://www.cheap-supras-sale.com/">Supra Footwear</a>
<a href="http://www.cheap-supras-sale.com/">Cheap Supra Shoes</a>