-
UPDATE
The forum will be moving to a new domain in the near future (canonrumorsforum.com). I have turned off "read-only", but I will only leave the two forum nodes you see active for the time being. I don't know at this time how quickly the change will happen, but that will move at a good pace I am sure. ------------------------------------------------------------
Zeiss to Announce ZE 85 f/1.4 Otus for Photokina
- Thread starter Canon Rumors
- Start date
dilbert said:
Although I agree that Live View helps a lot for manual focusing, Live View is really annoying to use handheld. If I were shooting a landscape, no problem. But I do much more environmental portrait work (which is what an 85mm lens is great for)...live view is not really a viable option.
Upvote
0
What I find funny is, Zeiss said something to the effect of 'these lenses are named after an owl, renowned for its night vision'. And indeed Asio otus is an owl. But the otus part derives from the (originally Greek) word for ear. Because these owls have prominent ear tufts. So the whole premise of the name is flawed.
No doubt they're great lenses, but if they'd spent a few minutes online they could have found a better name, or a better rationale for the name.
No doubt they're great lenses, but if they'd spent a few minutes online they could have found a better name, or a better rationale for the name.
Upvote
0
RGF said:
I think it will be priced similar to the 50mm OTUS because some effects might cancel others:
(1) less lens elements and
(2) smaller curvatures and
(3) less special glass diversity BUT
(4) larger lens elements/more glass/more housing
Just my 2 ct.
Upvote
0
Good autofocus would not hurt image quality or performance. Good autofocus would widen the appeal of the lens to include the many customers who are reluctant to buy a MF-only lens. Autofocus is not terribly expensive, as most lenses manage to feature it and still make a profit (at a much, much lower retail price!). It leads one to think Zeiss has taken a good honest look at what they are capable of doing exceptionally well (optics) and what they are not (autofocus) and made a decision to not do it they are unable to do it as superbly as they do the optics.
Upvote
0
ScottyP said:
Autofocus tends to go with short adjustement paths, often only a 45° turn on the focus ring for example. For manual focus , esp with a fast lens, you want the opposite to increase precision. The second lens would have a glacially slow AF, the first a focus-by-wire like the EF85/1,2.
Not that AF works that reliably when you mix shallow DOF and threedimensional subjects - playing with the focus confirmation for MF can be enlighting in that regard. If I were Zeiss I wouldn't want to have to deal with countless people confusing the limits of lens and body...
Upvote
0
This lens has to be beyond amazing to be worth the price. i have the 55mm and as a photography lens if one is looking for sheer image quality I can see there are better alternatives to this lens.
As a hybrid lens, nothing beats it though with its quality build, long focus throw and beautiful rendition.
As a hybrid lens, nothing beats it though with its quality build, long focus throw and beautiful rendition.
Upvote
0
RGF said:
Do I want to cut a couple of vacations or a few month's rent or a year's grocery. Nope, not me.
The reference was to a statement attributed to JP Morgan by the way- "if you have to ask, you can't afford it."
Upvote
0
RLPhoto
Gear doesn't matter, Just a Matter of Convenience.
Zeiss probably knows better to not put AF in so reviewers can't say "the otus is the sharpest lenses ever made but it's AF sucks." AF would add an extra set of problems and they understand that if your buying a lens this sharp, you need to use Manual focus and confirm your frames as you work. Any tiny mistake by the user means a less sharp photo and Zeiss pulled the AF out to focus on solely the optics.
My guess on no AF anyway.
My guess on no AF anyway.
Upvote
0
RLPhoto said:
I agree, AF is probably just an extra thing that could break or go wrong and diminish their reputation.
I think it's ok that Zeiss doesn't include AF. Their lenses have always seemed to be for a certain kind of shooting, where manual focus is not only acceptable, but often preferred. Their lenses tend to be sharp enough that seeing when your subject is in focus in the viewfinder is pretty easy, too.
Upvote
0
leGreve said:
Are you saying there are better alternatives to the Otus 55 f/1.4 when considering just Image Quality ?? If there's something out there that produces better Image Quality than the Zeiss Otus 55 f/1.4 I'de be very interested to know what, I'm not being critical here, just interested to know, what ??.
If your looking in the +/- 50mm range, f/1.2 through f/2.8, Canon mount, there are a multitude of alternatives to the Zeiss Otus 55, better ?? Not in my view, close ?? maybe.
If your looking for something though with AF then the Zeiss Lenses aren't what your looking for.
Currently I have & use the Zeiss 15f/2.8, 21f/2.8, Otus 55 f/1.4 & 135 f/2 all are amazing Lenses (I also own & use the Canon 8-15f/4, 24f/1.4, 50f/1.2, 85f/1.2 & 135 f/2), at least in the Canon Range nothing comes close to the Image Quality of the Zeiss Lenses, nothing, maybe the Canon 135f/2 gets as close as any, but close isn't the same as "as good" or "better", I honestly wish Canon would produce an AF Lens as good as any of these, but they don't & aren't likely to anytime soon, there's always hope though.
And where Canon is concerned they've pretty well screwed ease of use of the better Body they produce, the 5DMK III for using any Manual Lenses, by making the Focus Screen almost impossible to change out (as against the 5DMK II, 1DMK IV, 1Dx etc), one of the more obvious decisions of Canon Management & Engineering that they seem to have lost some of the plot.
And use of "Live View" isn't a replacement for a split screen focussing screen, maybe in video work, not my area, but in walk around photography, trying to Manually Focus with "Live View" is at least for me almost a waste of time, "Live View" on a Tripod different story & no problem, makes sense.
Zeiss Otus 85f/1.4 ?? Love it already.
Having said that, it's likely to be the last Zeiss Lens I feel I need to own, unless they produce a Zeiss Otus 35f/1.4
Upvote
0
I have the same Zeiss lineup as you have Edward and, as you say, from an optical perspective, Canon does not have anything that match them. And leGreve, I do not know which lens(es) you are referring to as a match for the Otus, if you disregard AF.
When I read about the 85mm Otus, my first reaction was to skip it and stay with my 85/1.2LII, which I have been very happy with. But in all honesty, it does have some issues I would be happy to get rid of also. I have now practiced quite a bit with the Zeiss lenses mounted on the 1DX, with the Ec-S focusing screen. And I do get high keeper rates, even at t f1.4 on the 55 Otus and f2.0 on the 135mm.
I have other alternatives for action, so it may be that this 85mm will be too tempting. I wonder what the price will be though. A Sigma 85mm Art will definitely not tempt me. Their AF is totally unacceptable.
When I read about the 85mm Otus, my first reaction was to skip it and stay with my 85/1.2LII, which I have been very happy with. But in all honesty, it does have some issues I would be happy to get rid of also. I have now practiced quite a bit with the Zeiss lenses mounted on the 1DX, with the Ec-S focusing screen. And I do get high keeper rates, even at t f1.4 on the 55 Otus and f2.0 on the 135mm.
I have other alternatives for action, so it may be that this 85mm will be too tempting. I wonder what the price will be though. A Sigma 85mm Art will definitely not tempt me. Their AF is totally unacceptable.
Upvote
0
For photo.... The Sigma would be a better buy imo.... Im sticking to this lens because Im mainly a videographer and the long focus throw of the zeiss lenses are indespensible along with the tank like build.
But for pure quality the Sigma 50 art is pretty much just as good....
Wether or not this will stick after the huge mp bodies arrive after Photokina is the question.
But for pure quality the Sigma 50 art is pretty much just as good....
Wether or not this will stick after the huge mp bodies arrive after Photokina is the question.
Upvote
0
If the Sigma 50 Art had a decent AF, I agree that it would be competitor. But it is so inconsistent that I found it useless. So, after having tried 2 copies, I returned it and will not buy another Sigma until it is documented that they have AF that works and a quality control to rely on.leGreve said:
Upvote
0
Eldar said:
I tend to agree, although I do have the Sigma 35 Art & I'm relatively happy with this Lens, I passed on the 50 Art due to the large amount of complaints there seemed to be regards the AF inconsistency, and like yourself Eldar I've set up one of my 1Dx bodies permanently with the Ec-S screen and have just adapted to the Zeiss manual focus to the degree that I pretty well only use the Zeiss Lenses now, except for situations where the subject is likely to move quickly, gives you an appreciation of how just how good the "old" school Photographers were getting the Images they did with only MF lenses.
I agree also your comments re the Canon 85f/1.2 L is a wonderful Lens, and on the 1Dx reasonable AF, but it is slow and I feel the Zeiss Otus 85f/1.4 will be a step forward, we'll see once it hits the Shops.
Upvote
0
D
Deleted member 20471
Guest
The Swedish forum fotosidan.se have tested the new Otus. You can read it at http://www.fotosidan.se/cldoc/zeiss-otus-85-1-4-vi.htm. If your Swedish is not up to date, try this google-translate, https://translate.google.com/translate?sl=auto&tl=en&js=y&prev=_t&hl=en&ie=UTF-8&u=http%3A%2F%2Fwww.fotosidan.se%2Fcldoc%2Fzeiss-otus-85-1-4-vi.htm&edit-text=.
Upvote
0
Eldar & Edward, thank you both for reminding me to pick up a Ec-S screen for my 1D X. For some reason I forgot to order one long ago and I hate the stock screen for my fast lenses.
I think the 85 f/1.2 II isn't going anywhere, but for full-time portrait photographers, the 85 Otus could be quite a lens. I think that's especially true for people doing posed shots in a studio where they want to capture the nth degree of detail without any CA. The 85L is very sharp and will be tough to beat in the center, but it does have a hint of CA, isn't consistently sharp across the frame wide open, and have a fair amount of vignetting wide open, and it's distortion isn't high, but isn't perfect.
The interesting thing this time is that there is a closer competitor that is priced closer as well, not to mention that Zeiss is pricing the lens lower than the 50. It looks like Brian over at the-digital-picture has a copy so I'm sure we'll get to see his results soon...
I think the 85 f/1.2 II isn't going anywhere, but for full-time portrait photographers, the 85 Otus could be quite a lens. I think that's especially true for people doing posed shots in a studio where they want to capture the nth degree of detail without any CA. The 85L is very sharp and will be tough to beat in the center, but it does have a hint of CA, isn't consistently sharp across the frame wide open, and have a fair amount of vignetting wide open, and it's distortion isn't high, but isn't perfect.
The interesting thing this time is that there is a closer competitor that is priced closer as well, not to mention that Zeiss is pricing the lens lower than the 50. It looks like Brian over at the-digital-picture has a copy so I'm sure we'll get to see his results soon...
Upvote
0
mackguyver said:
I've owned the 85L and it is definitely one of my all time favourites however I would say it has significant CA on high contrast subject matter. Still love it though nonetheless.
Upvote
0
Similar threads
