DXOMark Reviews Zeiss Otus 85mm f/1.4

[Canon Rumors]

<p>DXOMark has completed their review of the Zeiss Otus 85mm f/1.4 Apo Planar T* for both Canon and Nikon. As you would expect, this lens is an absolute gem when it comes to image quality. It easily outperforms all the 85mm lenses from both Canon & Nikon in optical tests. How that all translates in the field is up to the photographer.</p>
<div id="attachment_17207" style="width: 585px" class="wp-caption alignnone"><a href="http://www.canonrumors.com/wp-content/uploads/2014/09/dxocanon85compare.jpg"><img class="size-medium wp-image-17207" src="http://www.canonrumors.com/wp-content/uploads/2014/09/dxocanon85compare-575x494.jpg" alt="Click for larger" width="575" height="494" /></a><p class="wp-caption-text">Click for larger</p></div>
<p><strong>DXOMark says:</strong>

<em>“The new Otus 85mm is without question the most desirable and best performing 85mm portrait lens available but at $4,490 it’s not for those without deep pockets. It’s also rather large and bulky (although it’s remarkably well balanced on the D800 models), and it lacks the convenience of autofocus. While that may not be an issue for most enthusiasts or professionals (particularly as AF is at best difficult with f1.4 models) it’s likely to further limit its appeal, even if the real reason is obvious.”</em></p>
<p><strong><a href="http://www.dxomark.com/Reviews/Zeiss-Otus-85mm-f1.4-Apo-Planar-T-Canon-ZE-and-Nikon-ZF.2-mount-lens-reviews-World-s-best-performing-85mm-portrait-lens" target="_blank">Read the full review</a> | <strong><a style="color: #900000;" href="http://www.bhphotovideo.com/c/product/1077281-REG/zeiss_2040_292_otus_apo_planar_85mm.html/bi/2466/kbid/3296" target="_blank">Zeiss Otus 85mm f/1.4 Apo Planar T* $4490</a></strong></strong></p>
<p><strong><span style="color: #ff0000;">c</span>r</strong></p>

 

[Maximilian]

Again fascinating that a lens with better "metric scores" (better sharpness, vignetting, and CA) is getting a lower overall DxOMark Score than the Otus 55/1.4.

DxO scores mean nothing to me.

Edit: I was referring to the comparison picture displayed here at first with the D800 Body and Otus 55/1.4 and Zeiss Apo Sonnar 135/2.0 as opponents. See here:
http://www.dxomark.com/Reviews/Zeiss-Otus-85mm-f1.4-Apo-Planar-T-Canon-ZE-and-Nikon-ZF.2-mount-lens-reviews-World-s-best-performing-85mm-portrait-lens/Zeiss-Apo-Planar-T-Otus-85mm-F1.4-ZE-Canon-versus-competition

 

[AcutancePhotography]

For the price of that lens, I would expect it would have some outstanding properties.

Don't think I am going to fork over that much dough for an 85 though.

 

[sdsr]

Again fascinating that a lens with better "metric scores" (better sharpness, vignetting, and CA) is getting a lower overall DxOMark Score than the Otus 55/1.4.

DxO scores mean nothing to me.

Edit: I was referring to the comparison picture displayed here at first with the D800 Body and Otus 55/1.4 and Zeiss Apo Sonnar 135/2.0 as opponents. See here:
http://www.dxomark.com/Reviews/Zeiss-Otus-85mm-f1.4-Apo-Planar-T-Canon-ZE-and-Nikon-ZF.2-mount-lens-reviews-World-s-best-performing-85mm-portrait-lens/Zeiss-Apo-Planar-T-Otus-85mm-F1.4-ZE-Canon-versus-competition

There's a rather different sort of review, by someone who actually took photos with one, here:

http://blog.mingthein.com/2014/09/09/lens-review-zeiss-zf-2-1-4-85-otus-apo-planar/

 

[poias]

Why are we giving credence to DXO? They always rank Canon as second rate, so why give them more ammo against our gear and our company!

 

[jebrady03]

Why are we giving credence to DXO? They always rank Canon as second rate, so why give them more ammo against our gear and our company!

That's probably not the best philosophy. You can take issue with their methods, comparisons, etc, but don't disparage solely because they rank "your brand" lower than others.

It's kind of like saying "you can't break up with me because I'm breaking up with you" or "you can't fire me because I quit".

 

[mackguyver]

Why are we giving credence to DXO? They always rank Canon as second rate, so why give them more ammo against our gear and our company!

That's probably not the best philosophy. You can take issue with their methods, comparisons, etc, but don't disparage solely because they rank "your brand" lower than others.

Agreed and there's been very little debate over the years in regards to their measurements. It's their "scores" that are calculated from those measurements that has caused signification consternation among the [Canon] faithful. Putting the word scores in quotes might be generous.

As for the new lens, the Canon is nearly (and like at f/1.4) just as sharp in the center as the Zeiss, which for portrait uses is what will matter most. For off center compositions and architecture/landscapes, the corner sharpness will be far better on the Zeiss. The lower CA will also help in high contrast situations and likely with the definition in people's pupils.

 

[jdramirez]

How's the bokeh? The 85mm focal length is all about bokeh, because it is sharp enough.

 

[AcutancePhotography]

Why are we giving credence to DXO? They always rank Canon as second rate, so why give them more ammo against our gear and our company!

I really hope this post was intended to be sarcastic.

 

[bellorusso]

This test clearly shows that Canon is the best here. For one, nor Nikon, neigher Zeiss are able to open to 1.2, fo second, actually you don't really need anything more to say. 8)

 

[jdramirez]

The raw data is the raw data... So if you want to draw your own conclusions, you can. Maybe the number they give isn't always expandable, but there is a baby there... So don't throw it out with the bathwater.

 

[Khalai]

Actually, this is quite interesting comparision. It shows, that Canon 85/1.2L clearly does not lag behind, is quite cheaper (relatively ofc), has AF (slow as it may be) and for most of the people, it will do the job nicely enough. From a standpoint of avid amateur photographer, I have to but ask for whom is 85mm Otus meant? I mean, where is the significant difference (when there is significant PRICE difference) in optical perfomance to its peers?

(honest question, I'm really curious, can't really wrap my head around this one...)

 

[jdramirez]

Actually, this is quite interesting comparision. It shows, that Canon 85/1.2L clearly does not lag behind, is quite cheaper (relatively ofc), has AF (slow as it may be) and for most of the people, it will do the job nicely enough. From a standpoint of avid amateur photographer, I have to but ask for whom is 85mm Otus meant? I mean, where is the significant difference (when there is significant PRICE difference) in optical perfomance to its peers?

(honest question, I'm really curious, can't really wrap my head around this one...)

It is like the pokemon, gotta catch them all.

 

[Mt Spokane Photography]

I'd like to see Rodger Cicala run it thru his new test machine. While I'm sure that the lens is absolutely a gem, there are always weak spots in a product due to tradeoffs involved in design and manufacturing. Knowing what they are would be mostly out of my curiosity, since I won't buy one in any event.

 

[Eldar]

I paid $1400 for a 3 month old Zeiss 135/2.0. What a bargain

 

[ahsanford]

Everyone seems to have missed the really fun DXO comparison. The CR guy posted all the Canon mount lenses on Canon body data, but look at the side by side with the Otus on a Nikon body.

Effectively, the lens goes from a score of 38 to 49 solely based on the increased resolving power of the Nikon. See attached.

Further: "It’s also rather large and bulky (although it’s remarkably well balanced on the D800 models)" Because the 5D3 (by exclusion) is some sort of ergonomic train wreck, right?

Title of Nikon + Otus review = "Outstanding performance"

Title of Canon + Otus review = "Sharpness limited by sensor"

Though the second statement is potentially fairly made point -- that the lens can outresolve the Canon sensor -- the tone of the words is damning. Nice work, DXO, you have again failed to earn any respect as a neutral review source.

- A

 

[Ivan Muller]

Has anyone noticed that the 'true' max apertures as indicate by the Tstop is nowhere near the manufacturers claim? The Zeis is closer to a f1.8 lens than f1.4 and the rest fare no better....

 

[ahsanford]

Has anyone noticed that the 'true' max apertures as indicate by the Tstop is nowhere near the manufacturers claim? The Zeis is closer to a f1.8 lens than f1.4 and the rest fare no better....

Effectively, focal length is 'sort of' right and the Tstop is usually slightly off. Pricier cinema lenses are more on-point for these metrics, I believe.

Roger Cicala comments on this at times, as he did here:
http://www.lensrentals.com/blog/2013/04/first-look-zeiss-cz-2-70-200mm-t2-9

- A

 

[privatebydesign]

Has anyone noticed that the 'true' max apertures as indicate by the Tstop is nowhere near the manufacturers claim? The Zeis is closer to a f1.8 lens than f1.4 and the rest fare no better....

T value is not aperture value, an f1.4 lens is a "true" f1.4 if the apparent aperture diameter is focal length divided by 1.4. The T value relates to actual light transmission and is pretty much irrelevant with TTL metering stills cameras.

Aperture value is always lower than T (transmission) value because however good the glass is you always lose some.

 

[rs]

Has anyone noticed that the 'true' max apertures as indicate by the Tstop is nowhere near the manufacturers claim? The Zeis is closer to a f1.8 lens than f1.4 and the rest fare no better....

T value is not aperture value, an f1.4 lens is a "true" f1.4 if the apparent aperture diameter is focal length divided by 1.4. The T value relates to actual light transmission and is pretty much irrelevant with TTL metering stills cameras.

Aperture value is always lower than T (transmission) value because however good the glass is you always lose some.

+1

Nothing is completely transparent - even the air inside the lens. And if you can see any reflections on any of the elements within the lens when peering through the end, that's light which hasn't made it through.