New Zeiss Batis for Sony FE

[BernardLanguillier]

They appear to be very appealing offerings for the FE mount!

AF and VR for the 85mm f1.8 in a reasonnably light and small package.

http://www.dpreview.com/articles/9964081584/zeiss-offers-full-frame-e-mount-batis-2-25-and-1-8-85-lenses

Good timing since Sony is rumored to announce their next aX camera today.

You've got to wonder why Zeiss is investing so much in the FE mount. It wouldn't surprise me that much if Nikon and/or Canon announced FE mount cameras in the coming months. Future will tell.

Cheers,
Bernard

[robdickinson]

Nikon and canon making FE mount cameras?

lol you have to be kidding. Why the hell would they do that?

As to the lenses, I'll wait for reviews but certainly good to have other options.

[BernardLanguillier]

Nikon and canon making FE mount cameras?

lol you have to be kidding. Why the hell would they do that?

As to the lenses, I'll wait for reviews but certainly good to have other options.

Well, what are the alternatives?
- recreate their own little mirrorless niche with a set of new lenses?
- use existing long flange lenses with an adapter?
- let Samsung eat them alive in 3-5 years?

Both Canon and Nikon think they are the best lens designers in the world and they are mostly right when you look at their latest releases. Each lens is typically the best in its segment (11-24 Canon, 400 f2.8 Nikon,...).

So using a common mount will enable them to make new mirrorless bodies immediately appealing even if they don't have yet a full lenses line-up available without adapters.

The FX version of 4/3 if you will. Someone will do it, it might as well be the 3 main Japanese manufacturers.

It's their best bet IMHO.

Cheers,
Bernard

[robdickinson]

Nikon 400/2.8 better than canons??

Anyhow if they choose to go into the mirrorless market with FF bodies they will design their own mount. Like canon did with the eos M. And make adaptors.

[BernardLanguillier]

Nikon 400/2.8 better than canons??

Yes.

http://www.lenscore.org/

I am speaking about the new Nikon AF-S Nikkor 400mm f/2.8E FL ED VR.

Cheers,
Bernard

[David Anderson]

Hmm, a Batis version of the Zeiss 135 f2...
That could be cool...

[LKaven]

There is a rumor of a Nikon FX mirrorless at nikonrumors.  About the size of an OM-D.  Made for F-mount lenses.

There's a gulf between rumor and reality of course, and only time will tell.  I don't know why they would use the F-mount when they could use a shorter registration distance.  [Plausibly, they believe an adapter is not a solid enough platform for the precision required.]  But I'd be very -- very -- surprised if Nikon adopted anyone else's lens mount at any time. 

[BernardLanguillier]

But I'd be very -- very -- surprised if Nikon adopted anyone else's lens mount at any time. 

Yet, it may be their best bet to survive.

In fact it would be a win-win for all parties thanks to the strengthening of the eco-system.

Olympus and Panasonic camera divisions would IMHO already have closed down had they not built a common credible long term platform called micro 4/3 in which people can believe and for which they are willing to invest in lenses.

Let's face it, most people are using a7x cameras with Canon lenses these days and few people have invested much in lenses. Partially becuase there are few great lenses for FE mount and partially because they are relictant to sell their existing lenses.

My belief is that the same problem would happen to Canon and Nikon if they were to launch a new FX mirrorless line up.

Cheers,
Bernard

[ErikKaffehr]

Hi,

I am somewhat skeptical about any single figure of merit. Lenscore doesn't give any info on how they weight between apertures, on axis vs. of axis etc.

I definitively prefer som MTF data compared with a single lens score.

Best regards
Erik

Yes.

http://www.lenscore.org/

I am speaking about the new Nikon AF-S Nikkor 400mm f/2.8E FL ED VR.

Cheers,
Bernard

[ErikKaffehr]

Hi,

This may be the lens I am waiting for. The Otus 85/1.4 is a bit to heavy and expensive, the 135/2.0 is attractive but 135 is not my cup of tea.

This Batis seems to a quite complex optical construction for an 85/1.8, which may indicate that Zeiss did a real effort to make a first rate lens.

I am seriously interested in that lens.

Best regards
Erik

[AlterEgo]

Olympus and Panasonic camera divisions would IMHO already have closed down had they not built a common credible long term platform called micro 4/3 in which people can believe and for which they are willing to invest in lenses.

both C & N each are bigger then S, O, P together... then do you expect C & N to redo their flash systems for FE protocol/hot shoe too ? do you expect them instead of competition in AF lenses just from Sigma and Tamron to face onslaught from Sigma, Tamron, Sony, Canon for Nikon and Nikon for Canon - are they both have the same mount suddnely, and Zeiss now too with AF lenses (absent in AF versions for C & N mounts)... suddenly market does not sound too good but rather challenging ?

[Paulo Bizarro]

You've got to wonder why Zeiss is investing so much in the FE mount.
Cheers,
Bernard

Well, they have been partners with Sony for quite some time now. Similar to Leica and Panasonic. And 4 lenses so far (2 Loxias and 2 Batis) are really not a big investment.

[robdickinson]

Aye they make many more EF mount lenses than that.

[LKaven]

Yet, it may be their best bet to survive.

In fact it would be a win-win for all parties thanks to the strengthening of the eco-system.

Olympus and Panasonic camera divisions would IMHO already have closed down had they not built a common credible long term platform called micro 4/3 in which people can believe and for which they are willing to invest in lenses.

Let's face it, most people are using a7x cameras with Canon lenses these days and few people have invested much in lenses. Partially becuase there are few great lenses for FE mount and partially because they are relictant to sell their existing lenses.

My belief is that the same problem would happen to Canon and Nikon if they were to launch a new FX mirrorless line up.

Interesting approach.  But if Nikon chose to use a common mount for its mirrorless FX, then not only would people not be buying Nikon lenses, where Nikon makes a lot of its profit, but then they would have no loyalty to Nikon's body if they were able to drop Nikon and buy a new body design from another manufacturer that accepted all of their lenses.

I'm not ruling it out entirely.  Nikon does have a dilemma when it comes to mirrorless, since they have no full-frame lens mount with a short registration distance.  If they used the F-mount, they would lose some of the advantages of compactness associated with mirrorless cameras.  On the other hand, full-frame lenses are rather big no matter what lens mount they are packaged in.

That said, many of us Nikon shooters would be interested in a Nikon FX mirrorless with F-mount.  The camera would sell quite well to the millions who have F-mount lenses. 

[Telecaster]

That said, many of us Nikon shooters would be interested in a Nikon FX mirrorless with F-mount.  The camera would sell quite well to the millions who have F-mount lenses. 

I agree, and suspect this is the approach Nikon (and Canon) will take. If they use a sensor-based PD/CD hybrid AF system (the speed folks can have their PD while the accuracy folks like me get their CD) they'll certainly get my attention. If they include the processing smarts to recognize when a fully mechanical lens is being manually focused—and respond to this by magnifying the user's chosen focus region—they'll likely get my money too.

-Dave-

[LKaven]

I agree, and suspect this is the approach Nikon (and Canon) will take. If they use a sensor-based PD/CD hybrid AF system (the speed folks can have their PD while the accuracy folks like me get their CD) they'll certainly get my attention. If they include the processing smarts to recognize when a fully mechanical lens is being manually focused—and respond to this by magnifying the user's chosen focus region—they'll likely get my money too.

As you suggest, the fine points of user interface and user experience factors will make a huge difference in adoption. 

To this day, I still wish I had something that was as fit a tool as the Nikon F with plain prism, in terms of size, weight, shape, handling, finder quality, and ability to oblige.  No MILC I've seen yet approaches that.

[BernardLanguillier]

That said, many of us Nikon shooters would be interested in a Nikon FX mirrorless with F-mount.  The camera would sell quite well to the millions who have F-mount lenses.  

Well, a Nikon mirrorless with a native F mount and the same flange distance would be basically as bulky of the current mirror cameras (just swapping VF for EVF) - not sure I see a huge value - in fact I would personally consider it to be a regression. On the other hand, if they decide to make it more compact, then you would need an adapter to use F lenses. I used the Nikon 1 series and had the adapter enabling me to mount my F lenses on it, it workish ok, but ends up being a pretty poor experience.

Using an FE mount wouldn't prevent mounting F lenses through a adapter either.

Anyway, this is obviously just wild guessing, future will tell.

Cheers,
Bernard

[LKaven]

Well, a Nikon mirrorless with a native F mount and the same flange distance would be basically as bulky of the current mirror cameras (just swapping VF for EVF) - not sure I see a huge value - in fact I would personally consider it to be a regression. On the other hand, if they decide to make it more compact, then you would need an adapter to use F lenses. I used the Nikon 1 series and had the adapter enabling me to mount my F lenses on it, it workish ok, but ends up being a pretty poor experience.

Using an FE mount wouldn't prevent mounting F lenses through a adapter either.

These are more good reasons why the fine details of implementation (including UI/UX) matter so much, and why those details have proven to be so hard to nail down in an optimal combination in any current MILC implementation. 

[telyt]

Well, a Nikon mirrorless with a native F mount and the same flange distance would be basically as bulky of the current mirror cameras (just swapping VF for EVF) - not sure I see a huge value

Getting rid of the mirror box and its calibration issues is a huge value IMHO.  No more AFMA, hybrid PD/CD AF can offer speed and accuracy, no 'left side' wonkiness, alignment of three planes for accurate viewfinder focus and AF focus no longer needed.

[peterv]

For anyone who wants to read more speculation about Nikon mirrorless mount:

http://www.dslrbodies.com/newsviews/from-dslr-to-mirrorless.html

For anyone who wants to read a serious discussion (on topic) about the new Zeiss Batis lenses for Sony FE:

http://www.fredmiranda.com/forum/topic/1361318