Zeiss to Announce Milvus 35mm f/1.4 Very Shortly

[Canon Rumors]

<p>It appears that Zeiss will be announcing a Milvus 35mm f/1.4 very soon. The new lens will come in both the Canon EF mount and Nikon F mount.</p>

		<style type='text/css'>
			#gallery-1 {
				margin: auto;
			}
			#gallery-1 .gallery-item {
				float: left;
				margin-top: 10px;
				text-align: center;
				width: 25%;
			}
			#gallery-1 img {
				border: 2px solid #cfcfcf;
			}
			#gallery-1 .gallery-caption {
				margin-left: 0;
			}
			/* see gallery_shortcode() in wp-includes/media.php */
		</style>
		<div id='gallery-1' class='gallery galleryid-29791 gallery-columns-4 gallery-size-thumbnail'><dl class='gallery-item'>
			<dt class='gallery-icon landscape'>
				<a href='http://www.canonrumors.com/wp-content/uploads/2017/06/zeiss.jpg'><img width="168" height="168" src="http://www.canonrumors.com/wp-content/uploads/2017/06/zeiss-168x168.jpg" class="attachment-thumbnail size-thumbnail" alt="" srcset="http://www.canonrumors.com/wp-content/uploads/2017/06/zeiss-168x168.jpg 168w, http://www.canonrumors.com/wp-content/uploads/2017/06/zeiss-144x144.jpg 144w" sizes="(max-width: 168px) 100vw, 168px" /></a>
			</dt></dl><dl class='gallery-item'>
			<dt class='gallery-icon landscape'>
				<a href='http://www.canonrumors.com/wp-content/uploads/2017/06/zeiss_1.jpg'><img width="168" height="168" src="http://www.canonrumors.com/wp-content/uploads/2017/06/zeiss_1-168x168.jpg" class="attachment-thumbnail size-thumbnail" alt="" srcset="http://www.canonrumors.com/wp-content/uploads/2017/06/zeiss_1-168x168.jpg 168w, http://www.canonrumors.com/wp-content/uploads/2017/06/zeiss_1-144x144.jpg 144w" sizes="(max-width: 168px) 100vw, 168px" /></a>
			</dt></dl><dl class='gallery-item'>
			<dt class='gallery-icon portrait'>
				<a href='http://www.canonrumors.com/wp-content/uploads/2017/06/zeiss_3.jpg'><img width="168" height="168" src="http://www.canonrumors.com/wp-content/uploads/2017/06/zeiss_3-168x168.jpg" class="attachment-thumbnail size-thumbnail" alt="" srcset="http://www.canonrumors.com/wp-content/uploads/2017/06/zeiss_3-168x168.jpg 168w, http://www.canonrumors.com/wp-content/uploads/2017/06/zeiss_3-144x144.jpg 144w" sizes="(max-width: 168px) 100vw, 168px" /></a>
			</dt></dl><dl class='gallery-item'>
			<dt class='gallery-icon portrait'>
				<a href='http://www.canonrumors.com/wp-content/uploads/2017/06/zeiss_2.jpg'><img width="168" height="168" src="http://www.canonrumors.com/wp-content/uploads/2017/06/zeiss_2-168x168.jpg" class="attachment-thumbnail size-thumbnail" alt="" srcset="http://www.canonrumors.com/wp-content/uploads/2017/06/zeiss_2-168x168.jpg 168w, http://www.canonrumors.com/wp-content/uploads/2017/06/zeiss_2-144x144.jpg 144w" sizes="(max-width: 168px) 100vw, 168px" /></a>
			</dt></dl><br style="clear: both" />
		</div>

<span id="pty_trigger"></span>

 

[BeenThere]

It will be tough to beat the Canon 35mm f1.4 II with AF. Price probably will be comparable without AF. Maybe the non-Canon body users will be interested.

 

[padam]

The focus throw of the Zeiss is much better for video. It is not a direct competitor.

 

[Chaitanya]

The focus throw of the Zeiss is much better for video. It is not a direct competitor.

Problem with new Zeiss lenses is that focus ring is not easiest to adopt to focus gears on video rigs. And zeiss lens gears are quite expensive as well.

 

[padam]

Problem with new Zeiss lenses is that focus ring is not easiest to adopt to focus gears on video rigs. And zeiss lens gears are quite expensive as well.

Probably that's the exact reason why they designed them like that, to make their expensive product sell better. But usually it gets copied sooner or later.

 

[ahsanford]

+1 on not really offering anything above Canon's 35L II for the stills camp.

But it's declickable for the video camp, so someone will buy it.

- A

 

[TWI by Dustin Abbott]

+1 on not really offering anything above Canon's 35L II for the stills camp.

But it's declickable for the video camp, so someone will buy it.

- A

Historically it is actually only the Nikon mount lenses that are declickable. I love Milvus glass, but the 35L II is so good that this lens would have to be utterly exceptional to even make me vaguely consider it for my own kit.

 

[ahsanford]

+1 on not really offering anything above Canon's 35L II for the stills camp.

But it's declickable for the video camp, so someone will buy it.

- A

Historically it is actually only the Nikon mount lenses that are declickable. I love Milvus glass, but the 35L II is so good that this lens would have to be utterly exceptional to even make me vaguely consider it for my own kit.

...so sayeth the man with more 135mm primes than he owns socks. :

You are totally going to try this lens out, Dustin.

- A

 

[Khalai]

+1 on not really offering anything above Canon's 35L II for the stills camp.

But it's declickable for the video camp, so someone will buy it.

- A

Historically it is actually only the Nikon mount lenses that are declickable. I love Milvus glass, but the 35L II is so good that this lens would have to be utterly exceptional to even make me vaguely consider it for my own kit.

IIRC, the Classic Zeiss 35/1.4 was about as good as original Canon 35/1.4L (maybe slightly better) and also was priced very similarly. If they have not changed the optical formula and just gave the original lens that Milvus treatment, it would not make much sense to be on the same pricing level as Canon 35/1.4L II (which is stellar, AF is lightning fast and build is also superb albeit not heavy duty brass as Zeiss). But I think it will be more expensive than original version as Milvus lenses tend to be (e.g. Zeiss Distagon 2.8/21mm, while optically identical, Milvus version is 20% more in price IIRC.).

 

[TWI by Dustin Abbott]

+1 on not really offering anything above Canon's 35L II for the stills camp.

But it's declickable for the video camp, so someone will buy it.

- A

I suspect I will be hearing from Zeiss shortly

Historically it is actually only the Nikon mount lenses that are declickable. I love Milvus glass, but the 35L II is so good that this lens would have to be utterly exceptional to even make me vaguely consider it for my own kit.

...so sayeth the man with more 135mm primes than he owns socks. :

You are totally going to try this lens out, Dustin.

- A

 

[mjg79]

Does anyone have any info regarding the optical formula?

I understand most Milvus lenses are just updated versions of the ZE/ZF lenses. Back when Zeiss made lenses for Contax and Rollei their 35mm 1.4 lens was very highly regarded, very sharp and with an unusual drop off in focus that gave a look approaching medium format. The ZE/ZF lens was a completely new design that gave very different results - a softer, quite beautiful rendering but without the drama of the old design.

It would be great if Zeiss had resurrected their old design. They did in some areas already - the ZE/ZF 28mm lens uses the old Contax/Rollei formula. The old 35mm 1.4s sell for crazy amounts on eBay so I really am hoping Zeiss might have taken the hint...

 

[mjg79]

I'll add in case anyone here is curious as to why the old Contax/Rollei design is so lusted over and why people pay so much for them, check out the photos in this thread:

http://www.fredmiranda.com/forum/topic/839374/0

I really have never seen another lens on a small format that has that sort of rendering. The out of focus area isn't the creamiest or most beautiful but it drops away so quickly and so dramatically that is just has a unique look to it. Somewhere buried in that thread one photographer actually took some fairly controlled samples with this lens compared to an equivalent medium format camera and lens combination and the old Zeiss was 99% as dramatic in terms of the "3D" look.

 

[Khalai]

I understand most Milvus lenses are just updated versions of the ZE/ZF lenses. ...

Some are original optical design AFAIK (2.8/15, 2.8/21 or 2/35), but some are quite new designs, e.g. new 1.4/50, which was originally Planar design and now is Distagon (also much longer and heavier), probably Otus-ish formula. Same goes with 1.4/85 or 2.8/18 (which is even faster that original 3.5/18 lens)

 

[mjg79]

I understand most Milvus lenses are just updated versions of the ZE/ZF lenses. ...

Some are original optical design AFAIK (2.8/15, 2.8/21 or 2/35), but some are quite new designs, e.g. new 1.4/50, which was originally Planar design and now is Distagon (also much longer and heavier), probably Otus-ish formula. Same goes with 1.4/85 or 2.8/18 (which is even faster that original 3.5/18 lens)

Yes I saw they had updated the 50/1.4 design. The old one (Contax/Rollei/ZF/ZE) had a very unusual bokeh some loved, some hated but was showing its age in areas, especially the chromatic aberrations wide open so I wasn't shocked they went to a new design.

With the 21mm I believe they updated the coating etc but, optically, that was it. The 21mm/2.8 was of course the same optical formula from Contax days to ZE/ZF (like the 28/2 and 50/1.4). It's a wonderful design especially for landscapes - with sharp corners and, curiously the exact opposite qualities of the Contax/Rollei 35mm, the appearance of a deep depth of field, i.e. the drop off in focus is very slow. Perfect for landscapes.

When they announced the ZE/ZF 35mm 1.4 there was much excitement about it and then much confusion as to why, unlike with the 21mm lens, they had radically changed the optical formula. On the FM forums there is a lot of speculation that it's down to certain chemicals they aren't allowed to use any more but nobody outside Zeiss really knows.

I think if they simply copied the old Rollei/Contax optical design for the 35/1.4 they would have a smash hit on their hands