CZ 21mm f2.8 / Nikon 14-24 f2.8

Nikon 14-24 f2.8 @ f5.6 Download a hi-res jpeg file and compare the images yourself in Photoshop.

CZ 21mm f2.8 @ f5.6 Download a hi-res jpeg file and compare the images yourself in Photoshop.

Intro

The Dream Team - 1DsIII and CZ 21mm f2.8, as good as it gets?

If you have had a chance to read my last article about the Nikon 14-24 and the 16-9.net adapter, you will be correct in assuming that I am somewhat over the moon about the lens combination on the 1DsIII. Not only has it already pushed the boundaries of what I can imagine creatively with my photography, but the working method (which some doubt they will ever feel comfortable with) has become almost second nature. All this in just a few months. The honeymoon period is certainly not over, but one question has been nagging me since I bought it - would my money have been better spent on the legendary Carl Zeiss 21mm f2.8? Well here's my answer, a resounding no, which I concluded before I bought the Nikon. I would have never felt particularly comfortable spending up to £1500 on one focal length for my line of photography. 21mm just isn't wide enough when I am at the coast, where I shoot mostly wide angle imagery. It would be put back in the bag yet again, like a beautiful classic car kept in the garage. But just like you, oh boy am I curious. Does this lens wipe the floor with the 14-24? Is it a comfortable win or do they struggle for supremisy? Fortunately I didn't have to buy one to find out...

Size and Handling

At the Weigh In - Which one is your money on?

As you can see the 14-24 is a monster, overshadowing everything in the same focal length. The 'All Seeing Eye' is a much larger in comparison with an enormous front element. Teired barrels of metal rings stack wider and wider like a the floors of a period tudor house. The 21mm on the other hand is much smaller, denser and only half the weight. The large front element takes 82mm filters and is fluted, rather ugly in some peoples opinion, but intruiging in mine.

The CZ21mm has such a wondeful and precise feel about it that the Nikon sadly lacks. The focus barrel is weighted and smooth, the aperture ring clicks into the notches with confidence. All Zeiss lenses are just a joy to use and like Mark Welsh said to me once on the phone, you feel you are going to take a good photo before you have even looked throught viewfinder.

The Nikon feels like all modern wide angle zooms, like it could do with some extra dampening in the zoom and focus rings to give a more confident operation. Movement feels a little lacking in comparison. The adapter and its operation is discussed at length in my first article so I wont go into that again.

The Test

What a landscape! Perfect for the job; busy, lots of fine detail in ever area of the frame.

The biggest problem with finding a test shot for a 21mm focal length is getting a picture that contains lots of detail, edge to edge, but without a foreground. As the lenses need to be tested at all apertures, any hint of a foreground can confuse image softness in the lower half of the frame with simply being out of focus. It is this misconception that I see inaccurately reported on forums all too regularly.

Setting up the tripod as high as possible still won't combat this problem at wide apertures (f2.8 has a greatly reduced depth of field even at 21mm) so I found a view from a bridge that was just about perfect. Lots of fine detail edge to edge, no shadows and bright sunlight.

The tripod I use is the heaviest and most robust Gitzo there is. This ensures all the kit I use from wide angle to super telephoto is perfectly stable and produces the sharpest of shots. Don't compromise the tripod ever!

The next consideration is how the lenses are to be reviewed. Over on 16-9.net, Mark Welsh's lens testing hot house, he uses a Zone system. This is not like the Ansel Adams zone system in the slightest, but a method of splitting the results into image areas. You can read more about this over on 16-9.net on the 'Zones and Image Circles' page but for now examine the diagram below and just go with me here -

Zones A, B and C are concentric circles expanding from the centre of the image

The lenses are going to be examined in areas A, B and C. In case you are unaware, most lenses can resolve great detail in the centre of the image with the aperture set wide open, but as the magnifying glass is cast towards the edges of the frame, problems begin to occur.

Wide angles are notorius for losing sharpness in Zone C in particular and it is this area that really sets super-wide angle lenses apart. Landscape photographers are meticulous about edge to edge sharpness. Having a lens that requires f16 before this criteria is achieved can be terribly limiting and it is for this reason alone that many photographers (like myself) will hunt high and low for alternatives not matter what the working method.

Equipment and Use

Here's a list of camera and computer equipment and how I set it up for the test, so you can perform tests on your own equipment -

With modern high pixel SLRs like the 1DsIII, 5DII and the Nikon D3x on the market, there has never been a greater need for super high quality glass. Testing the lenses methodically with a rock solid tripod is utterly vital. The slightest of camera shake at these resolutions can translate into a flawed image and a flawed test.

Mirror lock up is switched on without question, a cable release rather than a 2sec timer will ensure the tripod and camera are free from any vibration. The lowest ISO without in-camera interpolation (like ISO50) is necessary for maximum detail, necessary for 100% examination.

Both lenses were set to infinity and checked using Live View.

I chose a day with unbroken blue skies, simply to avoid fluctuations in light levels, setting the camera to a Daytime white balance to keep each image consistant with the rest.

The Results are In - you are going to be surprised if you champion the Zeiss 21mm, as there is a new contender for the title.