Review: Zeiss 55mm f/1.4 Otus Distagon T*

[Canon Rumors]

Discuss our review of the Zeiss 55mm f/1.4 Otus Distagon T* here.

 

[mskrystalmeth]

OP..of the Review....You would get a better result of The Otus 55mm on a Camera that has High MP...ie Nikon's D810. This is where major flaws come in...when Reviewers test a high end lens on Old Dusty S 8)ensors, Canon's 6d and so on. What would of been the results if Canon Produced a Quality Sensor?

 

[gdanmitchell]

• It is difficult to make a rational judgement about a 50mm lens that costs $4000. Who knows? It might actually be the very best optical tool ever made. Or not — perhaps it is just another very fine lens that costs a lot.
  
  When it comes to such a thing there are several factors to keep in mind:
  
  [list type=decimal]
• There is a sizable group of photo gear fans who are perhaps more enthusiastic about owning the Very Best Shiny Thing than about producing the very best photographs. This sort of urge is not unique to photography, though camera gear acquisition is one of the more obvious playgrounds for such inclinations. For these people, while the test scores (and the brand name, and the cost) matter, the real world photographic effects — beyond the theoretical — may not so much.
• Beyond the stupendous cost, the venerable name of Zeiss conjures up wonderful specialness, too — like Bentley, Bulgari, and others.
• Put these together and there is a serious danger of confirmation bias. Unless you are willing to begin by actually asking what, if anything, the emperor is actually wearing, it is all to easy to begin with assumption that having the nMe Zeiss and the price of $4k, in just must be The Very Best Thing and Worth Every Penny.
• Finally, the correlation between the greatest photographs we see and the use of stratospherically expensive optics like the Zeiss — no matter how good the test results — is pretty close to random.

[/list]

 

[TWI by Dustin Abbott]

• It is difficult to make a rational judgement about a 50mm lens that costs $4000. Who knows? It might actually be the very best optical tool ever made. Or not — perhaps it is just another very fine lens that costs a lot.
  
  When it comes to such a thing there are several factors to keep in mind:
  
  [list type=decimal]
• There is a sizable group of photo gear fans who are perhaps more enthusiastic about owning the Very Best Shiny Thing than about producing the very best photographs. This sort of urge is not unique to photography, though camera gear acquisition is one of the more obvious playgrounds for such inclinations. For these people, while the test scores (and the brand name, and the cost) matter, the real world photographic effects — beyond the theoretical — may not so much.
• Beyond the stupendous cost, the venerable name of Zeiss conjures up wonderful specialness, too — like Bentley, Bulgari, and others.
• Put these together and there is a serious danger of confirmation bias. Unless you are willing to begin by actually asking what, if anything, the emperor is actually wearing, it is all to easy to begin with assumption that having the nMe Zeiss and the price of $4k, in just must be The Very Best Thing and Worth Every Penny.
• Finally, the correlation between the greatest photographs we see and the use of stratospherically expensive optics like the Zeiss — no matter how good the test results — is pretty close to random.

[/list]

This may all be true, but as someone who has used and reviewed about 17 50mm lenses, I can tell you that the Otus 55 optics are unrivaled in both resolution and drawing in a 50mm lens. Whether or not it is worth its stupendous price is another argument altogether, but the lens is unquestionably special.

 

[TWI by Dustin Abbott]

OP..of the Review....You would get a better result of The Otus 55mm on a Camera that has High MP...ie Nikon's D810. This is where major flaws come in...when Reviewers test a high end lens on Old Dusty S 8)ensors, Canon's 6d and so on. What would of been the results if Canon Produced a Quality Sensor?

http://www.dpreview.com/articles/3211770916/lens-reviews-update-test-data-for-the-zeiss-otus-1-4-55

There's some feedback on a Nikon sensor. BTW, while the 6D is far from being a high-megapixel sensor, it is also perhaps Canon's best other than the one in the 1Dx.

You can definitely see a difference with the Otus compared to other lenses (I directly compared it with the 50L, for example) on a 6D or a 5DIII. You don't buy an Otus just for the sensor/body you have right now, though, you buy it to pretty much use it the rest of your life on whatever bodies are yet to come. The Otus 85 is at the top of my personal wish list.

 

[meywd]

OP..of the Review....You would get a better result of The Otus 55mm on a Camera that has High MP...ie Nikon's D810. This is where major flaws come in...when Reviewers test a high end lens on Old Dusty S 8)ensors, Canon's 6d and so on. What would of been the results if Canon Produced a Quality Sensor?

http://www.dpreview.com/articles/3211770916/lens-reviews-update-test-data-for-the-zeiss-otus-1-4-55

There's some feedback on a Nikon sensor. BTW, while the 6D is far from being a high-megapixel sensor, it is also perhaps Canon's best other than the one in the 1Dx.

You can definitely see a difference with the Otus compared to other lenses (I directly compared it with the 50L, for example) on a 6D or a 5DIII. You don't buy an Otus just for the sensor/body you have right now, though, you buy it to pretty much use it the rest of your life on whatever bodies are yet to come. The Otus 85 is at the top of my personal wish list.

Is there a way to get a comparison between the two (85 and 55), I know the focal length difference, but I would like to know the bokeh difference between the two, just incase someday I lose my mind and decide to buy one ;D, thanks for another great review Dustin

 

[TWI by Dustin Abbott]

OP..of the Review....You would get a better result of The Otus 55mm on a Camera that has High MP...ie Nikon's D810. This is where major flaws come in...when Reviewers test a high end lens on Old Dusty S 8)ensors, Canon's 6d and so on. What would of been the results if Canon Produced a Quality Sensor?

http://www.dpreview.com/articles/3211770916/lens-reviews-update-test-data-for-the-zeiss-otus-1-4-55

There's some feedback on a Nikon sensor. BTW, while the 6D is far from being a high-megapixel sensor, it is also perhaps Canon's best other than the one in the 1Dx.

You can definitely see a difference with the Otus compared to other lenses (I directly compared it with the 50L, for example) on a 6D or a 5DIII. You don't buy an Otus just for the sensor/body you have right now, though, you buy it to pretty much use it the rest of your life on whatever bodies are yet to come. The Otus 85 is at the top of my personal wish list.

Is there a way to get a comparison between the two (85 and 55), I know the focal length difference, but I would like to know the bokeh difference between the two, just incase someday I lose my mind and decide to buy one ;D, thanks for another great review Dustin

I need to compare them side by side someday, because I don't know if it was the focal length or the attributes of the lens that made me lean that direction. I was just more "wowed" overall by the Otus 85. It impressed me (optically) more than anything I've ever used before. The APO Sonnar 2/135mm is another amazing lens. If these lenses had AF...

 

[Eldar]

Thanks for another good review Dustin. Not easy to find much negative to say about this one, but I agree with the ones you listed. Many judge lenses based on DxO measurements and pure sharpness comparisons. But if you include the other aspects, like contrast, colour, CA, flare etc., nothing gets close.

I am one of the lucky/spoiled/idiot/... (you pick what suits you) owners of this lens and it´s 85mm brother (and a few other Zeiss lenses). I am totally hooked on the quality these lenses produce. When the next one is announced, rumoured to be a 24mm f1.4, i´ll be first in line. I think your point about these being life long investments is very true. I expect to get my 5DSR this week and I really look forward to see what it will produce with these lenses.

To those who believe we have them for their status value, I can tell you that not once have anyone looked at any of these lenses and said "Gosh, It´s an Otus". If you want status confirmation with your camera, this is not the way to go. Instead, you must be willing to carry the largest and heaviest 50mm on the market, with no AF.

 

[deleteme]

No doubt it is wonderful. My problem is I always get distracted by the content of the image when lenses are used in the real world.

 

[zlatko]

OP..of the Review....You would get a better result of The Otus 55mm on a Camera that has High MP...ie Nikon's D810. This is where major flaws come in...when Reviewers test a high end lens on Old Dusty S 8)ensors, Canon's 6d and so on. What would of been the results if Canon Produced a Quality Sensor?

There is a major flaw in your comment. Canon produces high quality sensors and has for a long time.

 

[bchernicoff]

The review makes comparisons to the 50L and the Sigma Art, but offers no comparison images.

"The Sigma 50mm f/1.4 ART series lens is somewhat better competition in terms of sharpness, and (to a lesser extent) contrast, but in overall image quality it falls short of Otus. The Sigma ART is a very nice lens, but, ironically, it isn’t nearly as “artful” as the Otus 55."

Show us. People like to judge for themselves whether the massive cost and lack of AF are worth it.

 

[meywd]

OP..of the Review....You would get a better result of The Otus 55mm on a Camera that has High MP...ie Nikon's D810. This is where major flaws come in...when Reviewers test a high end lens on Old Dusty S 8)ensors, Canon's 6d and so on. What would of been the results if Canon Produced a Quality Sensor?

There is a major flaw in your comment. Canon produces high quality sensors and has for a long time.

If you are going for more detail then the 7D II has it more than d810. And why should everyone test the lens on the same body, there are already people who did that!

 

[Eldar]

The review makes comparisons to the 50L and the Sigma Art, but offers no comparison images.

"The Sigma 50mm f/1.4 ART series lens is somewhat better competition in terms of sharpness, and (to a lesser extent) contrast, but in overall image quality it falls short of Otus. The Sigma ART is a very nice lens, but, ironically, it isn’t nearly as “artful” as the Otus 55."

Show us. People like to judge for themselves whether the massive cost and lack of AF are worth it.

I actually made such a comparison. I made a number of images as equal as possible between the two, ref:
http://www.canonrumors.com/forum/index.php?topic=20716.0
Be aware that all images are 4MB limited in sRGB.

Update! The images are posted in AdobeRGB, so they look like sh.. But if you open them up, they look OK. The differences between the two are rather subtle on these posted images, but are more visible on the full resolution versions. if it had not been for the notoriously unreliable AF on the Sigma, it would be a phenomenal bargain.

 

[bchernicoff]

I actually made such a comparison. I made a number of images as equal as possible between the two, ref:
http://www.canonrumors.com/forum/index.php?topic=20716.0
Be aware that all images are 4MB limited in sRGB.

Update! The images are posted in AdobeRGB, so they look like sh.. But if you open them up, they look OK. The differences between the two are rather subtle on these posted images, but are more visible on the full resolution versions. if it had not been for the notoriously unreliable AF on the Sigma, it would be a phenomenal bargain.

Thanks, Eldar. I knew that comparison images were out there though I had not seen yours. I appreciate the time and effort you spent on this. Now I can see Dustin's point about the Zeiss's drawing style.

 

[mike b]

Hi All
Just joined this interesting site and the 1st thing i came across was this article.I happen to be one of the lucky(some say more money than sense) people who own this lens. Having used this lens extensively ,and be warned it requires careful technique, i can say it really is something special.The sharpness to the edge,lack of any noticeable aberration/ distortion and quality of manufacture/design have been talked about a lot and are superb but the noticeable bonus for me was the colour rendition which is almost unmatched.My hand was shaking as i handed over the cash and although i had tested raw files shot with this lens and a nikon810 i was ready for some big time value for money disapointment! It is always difficult judging anything before living with it for a while but this lens has surpassed ALL my expectations......it really is that good!!
So why should we take any from any advice from this forum newbee, surely a Zeiss troll fanboy or just too intimidated to admit dropping 4000 bucks on the overpriced Zeiss logo.Just the opposite my history is working in the optical/lens industry( non photographic and not zeiss!) most of my life having studied pure optics at uni.I may not take the best images but i do know the best tools and in the dslr world this lens is ,at the moment ,unmatched at 50mmish .Always a few small niggles like watching my lunch disappear into the "open" focus scale but all pales into insignificance when you view the images .

 

[zlatko]

OP..of the Review....You would get a better result of The Otus 55mm on a Camera that has High MP...ie Nikon's D810. This is where major flaws come in...when Reviewers test a high end lens on Old Dusty S 8)ensors, Canon's 6d and so on. What would of been the results if Canon Produced a Quality Sensor?

There is a major flaw in your comment. Canon produces high quality sensors and has for a long time.

If you are going for more detail then the 7D II has it more than d810. And why should everyone test the lens on the same body, there are already people who did that!

I agree. And it's also about the beauty of the rendering, not just the detail. It seems to me that testing this lens on a Canon camera seems appropriate for a review posted on a Canon rumors site, but sensor critics are determined to push some Nikon or Sony, even on a Canon rumors forum.

 

[m]

@Justin the Noctilux is next, yes? ;D

 

[TWI by Dustin Abbott]

The review makes comparisons to the 50L and the Sigma Art, but offers no comparison images.

"The Sigma 50mm f/1.4 ART series lens is somewhat better competition in terms of sharpness, and (to a lesser extent) contrast, but in overall image quality it falls short of Otus. The Sigma ART is a very nice lens, but, ironically, it isn’t nearly as “artful” as the Otus 55."

Show us. People like to judge for themselves whether the massive cost and lack of AF are worth it.

Thanks to Eldar for stepping in.

Here are some higher resolution shots in a controlled environment (mirror lock-up, steady tripod, timer used, etc...) of my own. Ask and ye shall receive...

Otus wide open, Canon 50L @ f/1.2 and then f/1.4.

 

[TWI by Dustin Abbott]

The review makes comparisons to the 50L and the Sigma Art, but offers no comparison images.

"The Sigma 50mm f/1.4 ART series lens is somewhat better competition in terms of sharpness, and (to a lesser extent) contrast, but in overall image quality it falls short of Otus. The Sigma ART is a very nice lens, but, ironically, it isn’t nearly as “artful” as the Otus 55."

Show us. People like to judge for themselves whether the massive cost and lack of AF are worth it.

I actually made such a comparison. I made a number of images as equal as possible between the two, ref:
http://www.canonrumors.com/forum/index.php?topic=20716.0
Be aware that all images are 4MB limited in sRGB.

Update! The images are posted in AdobeRGB, so they look like sh.. But if you open them up, they look OK. The differences between the two are rather subtle on these posted images, but are more visible on the full resolution versions. if it had not been for the notoriously unreliable AF on the Sigma, it would be a phenomenal bargain.

Thanks for sharing, Eldar

 

[Andyx01]

• It is difficult to make a rational judgement about a 50mm lens that costs $4000. Who knows? It might actually be the very best optical tool ever made. Or not — perhaps it is just another very fine lens that costs a lot.
  
  When it comes to such a thing there are several factors to keep in mind:
  
  [list type=decimal]
• There is a sizable group of photo gear fans who are perhaps more enthusiastic about owning the Very Best Shiny Thing than about producing the very best photographs. This sort of urge is not unique to photography, though camera gear acquisition is one of the more obvious playgrounds for such inclinations. For these people, while the test scores (and the brand name, and the cost) matter, the real world photographic effects — beyond the theoretical — may not so much.
• Beyond the stupendous cost, the venerable name of Zeiss conjures up wonderful specialness, too — like Bentley, Bulgari, and others.
• Put these together and there is a serious danger of confirmation bias. Unless you are willing to begin by actually asking what, if anything, the emperor is actually wearing, it is all to easy to begin with assumption that having the nMe Zeiss and the price of $4k, in just must be The Very Best Thing and Worth Every Penny.
• Finally, the correlation between the greatest photographs we see and the use of stratospherically expensive optics like the Zeiss — no matter how good the test results — is pretty close to random.

[/list]

Well put.

I find it somewhat humors to read: "It is a superlative instrument in every detail, and manages the rare feat of combining extraordinary resolution with beautifully artful drawing and rendering"

In 'every detail' ... Except atrocious vignetting? I mean... It's desired, I like the vignetting yeah it's perfect, just the amount I would expect for $4000 not too little, not too much.

How does one quantify that this lens produces "beautifully artful drawing and rendering" - does the plastic fantastic 50 do this too, or does it have to have to be stamped with 'ziess' to produce 'artful drawing'. I'm confused.

It didn't front of back focus - because - well it doesn't auto focus. And uhm.. yeah.. That's good too, becuase... You should manual focus yeah.... A+ for not having a feature.