Sony Zeiss 85mm f/1.4 SAL-85f14Z Experiences

[drcommercialization]

I am considering the purchase of the Sony Zeiss 85mm f/1.4 SAL-85f14z.  I am a Sony a900 owner.  I have read the online test results (8 or so, see the list on http://www.dyxum.com/lenses/detail.asp?IDLens=317), but thought I would ask the readers and members of this forum to share their impressions of the lens on a full-frame, 24 MP camera - the Sony a900 or Sony a850.  I would like to use the lens for landscape photography.   If you have used the lens, please share your experiences and viewpoint on it.  I'm particularly interested in:

•   Sharpness - in general and especially in the corners.  Any comparisons to other lenses (e.g. the Sony Zeiss 135mm f/1.8 or the 24-70 mm f2. would be especially helpful.  My most common f-stops are 5.6, 8, and 11.  I will shoot at f4 once in a while.  
•   Chromatic aberration
•   Coma and astigmatism
•   Autofocus.  I've read that the autofocus of this lens can be problematic

If you have any lenses for Sony alpha cameras between 70-120 mm that you prefer over the SAL-85f14Z please let me know.

Much appreciated.  Thank you.

[Theresa]

Why use a special purpose lens for something "standard" such as landscape?

I believe it is an exceptionally good lens at any f/ stop.  Go ahead and use it and see for yourself what you can and cannot do.  I have read nothing that says its bad at higher apertures or at infinity.

[PLLove]

I purchased the 24-70, 85, and 135 f1.8 all at the same time.  Each lens is very impressive, but I returned the 85mm.  Why?  I don't shoot at wider apertures that often, and when I do, the 135 suits me much better.  At similar apertures, I could not see a huge difference between the 24-70 and the 85--esp btwn f5.6-11, where the zoom really really shines!!

If you find yourself shooting a wider aperatures a lot, the 85 may come in handy.  If not, the 24-70 CZ and the 70-200 G will be a phenomenal two lens set up!

Pat

[drcommercialization]

Thank you for all of your comments.

So, here is what I did: I purchased multiple lenses, tested them inside (Imatest) and outside.  The lenses purchased and tested were:

Zeiss 85mm f1.4 for Sony, SAL-85F14Z, 2 copies
Sony 70-300mm f4-5.6 G, 2 copies, SAL-70300G
Sony 100mm f21.8 macro, SAL-100M28
Sony 70-400mm, f4-5.6, SAL-70400G

The hands-down winner for sharpness and overall IQ was the Sony 70-400mm, f4-5.6, SAL-70400G.  The SAL-70400G was extraordinarily sharp between 70-200mm - I could not tell the difference pixel-peeping between that and the Zeiss 135mm f1.8 that I own.  A very distant 2nd place went to the SAL-703000G, which was consistent copy to copy.  3rd place was the Sony 100mm f2.8, with the Zeiss 85mm f1.4 in dead last place.  Both Zeiss copies were very soft in all 4 borders and corners beyond about 60% of the distance from center to the edge of the frame.  They were most disappointing lenses.

I took the Sony 70-400 f4-5.6 to Death Valley for the wildflower show, where it performed extraordinarily well, and was on my a900 80% of the time.

[douglasf13]

Thank you for all of your comments.

So, here is what I did: I purchased multiple lenses, tested them inside (Imatest) and outside.  The lenses purchased and tested were:

Zeiss 85mm f1.4 for Sony, SAL-85F14Z, 2 copies
Sony 70-300mm f4-5.6 G, 2 copies, SAL-70300G
Sony 100mm f21.8 macro, SAL-100M28
Sony 70-400mm, f4-5.6, SAL-70400G

The hands-down winner for sharpness and overall IQ was the Sony 70-400mm, f4-5.6, SAL-70400G.  The SAL-70400G was extraordinarily sharp between 70-200mm - I could not tell the difference pixel-peeping between that and the Zeiss 135mm f1.8 that I own.  A very distant 2nd place went to the SAL-703000G, which was consistent copy to copy.  3rd place was the Sony 100mm f2.8, with the Zeiss 85mm f1.4 in dead last place.  Both Zeiss copies were very soft in all 4 borders and corners beyond about 60% of the distance from center to the edge of the frame.  They were most disappointing lenses.

I took the Sony 70-400 f4-5.6 to Death Valley for the wildflower show, where it performed extraordinarily well, and was on my a900 80% of the time.

  What exactly were your testing parameters?  I have a hard time buying into your results, as the ZA 85 is among the sharper lenses I've ever used.  Focusing method?  Focusing distance?  Aperture used?  Shutter speed? MLU?

[ziocan]

What exactly were your testing parameters?  I have a hard time buying into your results, as the ZA 85 is among the sharper lenses I've ever used.  Focusing method?  Focusing distance?  Aperture used?  Shutter speed? MLU?

I'm also wondering what he did with those lenses.
My 85mm is sharp across the frame and it is tangibly sharper than the 70-300 and 100mm.
The 85mm is definitively sharper between f2.8 and f5.6, but at the others apertures it is still sharper than majority of lenses on that class.
It is not as sharp as the 135mm 1.8, but it deliver a 3d effect that is more tangible than with the 135mm.

The only complain I have with it, is that I had to service it twice in 2 years, because the internal focus ring came loose.

[aaykay]

Thank you for all of your comments.

So, here is what I did: I purchased multiple lenses, tested them inside (Imatest) and outside.  The lenses purchased and tested were:

Zeiss 85mm f1.4 for Sony, SAL-85F14Z, 2 copies
Sony 70-300mm f4-5.6 G, 2 copies, SAL-70300G
Sony 100mm f21.8 macro, SAL-100M28
Sony 70-400mm, f4-5.6, SAL-70400G

The hands-down winner for sharpness and overall IQ was the Sony 70-400mm, f4-5.6, SAL-70400G.  The SAL-70400G was extraordinarily sharp between 70-200mm - I could not tell the difference pixel-peeping between that and the Zeiss 135mm f1.8 that I own.  A very distant 2nd place went to the SAL-703000G, which was consistent copy to copy.  3rd place was the Sony 100mm f2.8, with the Zeiss 85mm f1.4 in dead last place.  Both Zeiss copies were very soft in all 4 borders and corners beyond about 60% of the distance from center to the edge of the frame.  They were most disappointing lenses.

I took the Sony 70-400 f4-5.6 to Death Valley for the wildflower show, where it performed extraordinarily well, and was on my a900 80% of the time.

I don't have the 70-400G in particular but do have the 70-300G, the CZ85, the CZ135, the CZ24-70 and the CZ1635.  Based on my experience, the zooms are VERY good lenses and provide a lot of flexibility but for maximum image quality, I find myself always reaching for the primes.  They have NEVER failed to deliver (on the A900) and I have gone upto 24"x36" prints with those images.