Luminous Landscape Forum
Equipment & Techniques => Cameras, Lenses and Shooting gear => Topic started by: alexluuphoto on March 04, 2015, 07:55:02 pm
-
Hey guys what are your thoughts on zeiss 55,85 otus lenses? Do you think it's reasonable to shell out 4k for these lenses. here are the options you can get a zeiss otus lens or a h3d-ii 31 with a 80mm ls or a Pentax 645d and some old lenses. Which one would you guys opt for?
-
Hi,
That depends. Which camera would you put it on? Do you need AF? Are you shooting a lot at full aperture?
The Otuses have excellent optical correction, they will outshine almost any lens at f/1.4. But stopping down to f/8 they will be limited by diffraction as any other high quality lens.
The Sigma Art 50/1.4 would not match the Otus at f/1.4, nothing does, but it would put ut a good fight at most other apertures.
Depends a lot what camera you put the lens on.
Let's put it this way. At f/1.4 I am pretty sure no other lens can match the Otus on a high res DSLR. You can put the Otus on Nikon D810 or Canon's forthcoming 5Ds. On the Canon it will beat the Nikon and both will beat the MFD lenses at full aperture. Stopped down to f/8 it will be much more even. On Nikon and Canon you would be able to focus using live view, you would not have that option on the Pentax 645D or the old Hasselblad.
Technically, you could put the Otus on a Sony A7r, but vibrations may rob a lot of sharpness in the 1/5 - 1/250 s shutter speed range.
This is based on tests I have seen. I don't have the Otus.
Just to mention, if you don't need the f/1.4 aperture and can live with the focal length the Zeiss 135/2.0 APO is an excellent lens. Would Zeiss make an 85/2.0 APO of the same quality it would be on my buying list. In my case I am speculating on Sony and Nikon coming around with 50 MP pretty soon, even if it seems they are not in any great hurry.
Best regards
Erik
-
I shoot mainly fashion and portrait work so usually outdoor I'll use about 2.8-5.6 and indoor studio depending 4.0-8.0. So I'm thinking this lens wouldn't be needed since I don't shoot at 1.4 that much only small occasions. When I had my canon 85mm 1.2 I rarely shot at 1.2. I like the idea that you get good depth of field even at 5.6 because of the size of the medium format sensor.
-
Hey guys what are your thoughts on zeiss 55,85 otus lenses? Do you think it's reasonable to shell out 4k for these lenses. here are the options you can get a zeiss otus lens or a h3d-ii 31 with a 80mm ls or a Pentax 645d and some old lenses. Which one would you guys opt for?
Certainly not IF it causes you to forgo other equipment/opportunities. They are spectacular, but really the advantages are wide open. And the real world differences you would see will depend a lot on what and how you use your equipment. If you need to tweak every last bit out of image then it can be the key to making the image work, but the difference is so minimal from some other options that it is hard to justify the cost unless you have already figured out that it is 'required'.
-
Technical brilliance aside, I think the Otus 55mm has a wonderful look. The way it renders is superb.
Many well corrected lens can look slightly harsh however the Otus certainly doesn't. It's kinda best of both worlds.
-
Hey guys what are your thoughts on zeiss 55,85 otus lenses? Do you think it's reasonable to shell out 4k for these lenses.
Depends on (as Erik said) if you're going to shoot at wide f-stops.
Also depends on how large you're gonna print:
http://blog.kasson.com/?p=8876
And also what you're comparing it to. Compared to the 90mm 'cron, the Otus 85 is about the same price and a better (if larger) performer.
As in hi-fi, the last few increments in quality often come at great price. Compare the Otus 55 with the Sigma ART 50, for example.
Jim
-
I have been trying to answer this very same question for months myself. ;)
My Nikkor 85mm f1.4 AF-S is excellent, but it doesn't have the same magic qualities I find in my Otus 55mm f1.4, still it's a lot of money and weight might just be a bit too heavy as well...
This one was shot with the Otus 55mm, the look, rendition of challenging background, lack of CA gives the image a very pleasant look in my book.
(https://farm9.staticflickr.com/8595/16665960842_fcc773aa13_o.jpg)
Cheers,
Bernard
-
Another option would be to get a Sony A7 series camera with the ZEISS FE 55 f1.8 lens, which is referred to often as a "mini-Otus"...
Or a Zeiss C Sonnar 50 in ZM mount, for a truly classical look. I take the liberty of posting a couple of portraits from my daughter, as examples of what this lens can do.
Kind regards.
-
Compared to the 90mm 'cron, the Otus 85 is about the same price and a better (if larger) performer.
The Leica is about $650 cheaper now (with the promotion), and especially much lighter, 498g versus 1.14kg...
Would you happen to have any side by side Cron versus Otus comparisons on your blog?
Thanks, Joris.
-
I shoot mainly fashion and portrait work so usually outdoor I'll use about 2.8-5.6 and indoor studio depending 4.0-8.0. So I'm thinking this lens wouldn't be needed since I don't shoot at 1.4 that much only small occasions. When I had my canon 85mm 1.2 I rarely shot at 1.2. I like the idea that you get good depth of field even at 5.6 because of the size of the medium format sensor.
For outdoor fashion, one critical element is the ability to sync flashes at higher shutter speeds. This is something the Hassleblad 80mm can do for you and 35mm format lenses won't.
Make the choice based on your personal shooting style.
-
For outdoor fashion, one critical element is the ability to sync flashes at higher shutter speeds. This is something the Hassleblad 80mm can do for you and 35mm format lenses won't.
Unless you own Profoto B1 with the latest firmware of course.
Cheers,
Bernard
-
Unless you own Profoto B1 with the latest firmware of course.
Cheers,
Bernard
I take it that you don't do too much strobe lit photography.
High speed sync and true shutterspeed sync are not the same thing. Canikon have had HSS/ Auto FP for ages now. The B1 offers it in a bigger package, but none of them are doing the same thing as a leaf shutter syncing at 1/800s or so. You will never be able to freeze motion with HSS like you do with a true shutter sync and you'll be using a lot more power per exposure as well.
-
I take it that you don't do too much strobe lit photography.
High speed sync and true shutterspeed sync are not the same thing. Canikon have had HSS/ Auto FP for ages now. The B1 offers it in a bigger package, but none of them are doing the same thing as a leaf shutter syncing at 1/800s or so. You will never be able to freeze motion with HSS like you do with a true shutter sync and you'll be using a lot more power per exposure as well.
interesting : i would like to SEE the difference. I understand that it is a different way of giving light to the subject.
I can imagine with fast motion you would be able to have a kind of rolling shutter effect with the canikon method. But that effect would be the same without flash.
I never saw this effect in photography. ( but in the early photographs of Lartique- http://www.largeformatphotography.info/forum/showthread.php?31903-Jacques-Henri-Lartigue-and-his-camera)
I have used a 1/8000 second flash on my Nikon and it worked very well- did not see any side effects other than you need a lot of flashpower.
-
... This one was shot with the Otus 55mm, the look, rendition of challenging background, lack of CA gives the image a very pleasant look in my book.
Sorry, but the technicalities totally drowned here in too much cutieness! ;D
-
interesting : i would like to SEE the difference. I understand that it is a different way of giving light to the subject.
I can imagine with fast motion you would be able to have a kind of rolling shutter effect with the canikon method. But that effect would be the same without flash.
I never saw this effect in photography. ( but in the early photographs of Lartique- http://www.largeformatphotography.info/forum/showthread.php?31903-Jacques-Henri-Lartigue-and-his-camera)
I have used a 1/8000 second flash on my Nikon and it worked very well- did not see any side effects other than you need a lot of flashpower.
Do any type of dance photography and you will see the difference between the two very quickly.
In fact, if you are happy with the results you get with HSS, you are better off with continuous light. Past x-sync, a flash with HSS and continuous light affect exposure exactly the same way.
-
The Leica is about $650 cheaper now (with the promotion), and especially much lighter, 498g versus 1.14kg...
The fact that it's a stop slower might explain some of the weight difference.
Would you happen to have any side by side Cron versus Otus comparisons on your blog?
I will be doing a Otus 85/90 'cron/Nikkor G 85 f/1.4/Zeiss 85 f/4 Tele-Tessar comparison in a few days. Natural subjects, not test charts. Maybe I'll throw in the Zeiss 100 f/2 Makro.
I'm planning on using the a7II body. I'm worried about shutter shock on the a7R, and I can't use all the lenses on the D810.
Jim
-
Do any type of dance photography and you will see the difference between the two very quickly.
In fact, if you are happy with the results you get with HSS, you are better off with continuous light. Past x-sync, a flash with HSS and continuous light affect exposure exactly the same way.
It is indeed slightly different in that the flash duration will be shorter than 1/800 when using a regular flash with a leaf shutter lens while the flash duration is going to be essentially the same as the shutter speed when using HSS, but that's only going to have a slightly visible effect on subjects for which you want to convey some subtle motion, correct?
It seems to me that this is a pretty rare case. Until now the main problem was the lack of power with Nikon flash in HSS, the B1 significantly expands the cases where daily flash photography can be used with non leaf shutter lenses.
And I do own a pair of B1 btw.
Cheers,
Bernard
-
Sorry, but the technicalities totally drowned here in too much cutieness! ;D
It makes it pretty hard to concentrate when taking such photographs! ;)
Cheers,
Bernard
-
I really like what I've seen so far from the Oti. Very high clarity along with a non-harsh transition from in- to out-of focus. If I were a pro specializing in environmental portraiture they'd be no-brainers. For my actual needs, though, they're too big & heavy…so I'll stick with my old 85/2 Sonnars, and maybe add a modern Loxia version for the Sony FE mount should Zeiss decide to make one.
-Dave-
-
I have a Sony A7 with the 55mm 1.8 and love it to death. I'm just curious what choice would you guys make and why. 4k for a system or a lens lol.
-
It is indeed slightly different in that the flash duration will be shorter than 1/800 when using a regular flash with a leaf shutter lens while the flash duration is going to be essentially the same as the shutter speed when using HSS, but that's only going to have a slightly visible effect on subjects for which you want to convey some subtle motion, correct?
It seems to me that this is a pretty rare case. Until now the main problem was the lack of power with Nikon flash in HSS, the B1 significantly expands the cases where daily flash photography can be used with non leaf shutter lenses.
And I do own a pair of B1 btw.
Cheers,
Bernard
I don't think you understand how short a flash pulse is.
It is anywhere between 1/5000 - 1/13000, depending on the power, the brand etc. Some brands have even shorter flash pulses. When you sync with a leaf shutter, you are given the possibility to have a very short exposure for the subject and a much longer one for the background. You can have a frozen subject and a decently exposed background. When you do HSS, you have one exposure for both. If you manage to freeze the subject, you are left with a pitch black background, which defeats the purpose of shooting outdoors.
Anyway, I am not here to teach you the basics of flash photography. As any professional who uses leaf shutter sync for his or her work and they will say the same thing to you. If it doesn't affect your work, good for you. But it does for a lot of people, who do this seriously and no, this is not a rare case to us. Our choice of gear is actually dependent on scenarios like these. This is why leaf shutter technology still had a market.
Not gonna prolong this discussion anymore as it is not relevant to the thread subject. I will just sign off saying that if I wanted stitching advice, I would ask you but flash photography is really not something where I would turn to you for expert advice.
-
Hi,
Here is a test image by 3d-kraft using the Sonnar T* 1.8/55:
http://farm6.staticflickr.com/5524/11689143666_7040b7b03d_o.jpg
And one using the Otus:
http://farm8.staticflickr.com/7373/11687601664_62d4936880_o.jpg
The Otus is clearly the better lens at large apertures. Note that it achieves moiré in the corner at full aperture!
Best regards
Erik
I have a Sony A7 with the 55mm 1.8 and love it to death. I'm just curious what choice would you guys make and why. 4k for a system or a lens lol.
-
Synn,
Thanks for the lecture! The friendly tone is a great addition! ;)
I share your view about the value of leaf shutter lenses, but I am not sure to understand the problem with HSS. If you don't mind extending the lesson another step:
- The value of leaf shutter is in those cases when the high luminosity ambiance dictates a shutter speed faster than 1/400s at base ISO and, typicall f2-f4 apertures, and you want to increase subject illumination with flash light, correct?
- Non leaf shutter lenses synch satisfactory up to 1/320s (officially 1/250), correct?
So what happens with HSS in those circumpstances? Assuming that 1/800 sec is ambiance at ISO100 and f2.8 and that this isn't fast enough to freeze your subject motion, for which you need 1/2000 (close to the real duration of many portable flahses near full power anyway, B1 is 1/1000 at full power). You just need to increase ISO to 320 to still expose the ambiance correctly. The HSS flash output power will be set to overpower ambiance.
What exactly is wrong with this?
Cheers,
Bernard
-
Like i said, Bernard. This thread isn't the place for this discussion.
You may feel free to either PM me/ Google for these answers yourselves/ join a flash photography workshop that will broaden your horizons a bit.
I would suggest reading Fstoppers as a valuable exercise.
Good day.
-
Like i said, Bernard. This thread isn't the place for this discussion.
You may feel free to either PM me/ Google for these answers yourselves/ join a flash photography workshop that will broaden your horizons a bit.
I would suggest reading Fstoppers as a valuable exercise.
He he he... thank you. ;D
I wonder how this guy is doing it? http://neilvn.com/tangents/high-speed-flash-sync-hss-profoto-b1-flash/
Fstoppers seems to love them too: https://fstoppers.com/gear/profoto-adds-high-speed-sync-beloved-b1-strobe-through-firmware-update-49782
Cheers,
Bernard
-
I don't think you understand how short a flash pulse is. It is anywhere between 1/5000 - 1/13000, depending on the power, the brand etc.
It's more like 1/2000 – 1/25,000 and some generators can do that 30x a second.
When you sync with a leaf shutter, you are given the possibility to have a very short exposure for the subject and a much longer one for the background. You can have a frozen subject and a decently exposed background.
As usual you've got your arse back to front.
The value of the leaf shutter is exactly the opposite - you've got the possibility to have a shorter, not a longer exposure, for the background in sync with the f-stop on the subject/cam. That way your background (daylight) doesn't get blown out. Alternatively, it also allows you to use a wider f-stop for shallow DOF.
The f-stop rules both, but the light on the subject is controlled by the flash output , zilch to do with the shutter speed, which serves to 'sync' the two and correctly expose the background. With decent Ws output, a shutter speed of 1/200 or 1/800 ain't going to be relevant. An f/1.4 or f/2 though, is.
Anyway, I am not here to teach you the basics of flash photography.
Quite.
-
Either get better at comprehending English or find someone else to stalk. Preferably both.
-
Either get better at comprehending English or find someone else to stalk. Preferably both.
In my experience, the failure to get an idea across tends to be the fault of the person trying to express that idea. Of course some ideas are so wrong nobody can coherently bring them across.
-
Hi,
I would agree that Synn has a point on leaf shutters having an advantage over focal plane shutters. On the other hand, there is no need to overdramatize those differences.
To begin with, modern focal plane shutters can have pretty short sync speeds. My A99 SLT has 1/300 and the Nikon D800 is a bit faster. That difference between 1/300 and 1/800 the Hasselblad offers is not a world of difference.
If we look at stopping motion, A DSLR doesn't need the help of electronic flash in stopping motion 1/4000 s is going to that just, fine. If you need fill flash, it would preferably one to two stops below nominal, if you want a natural look. High speed sync is wasting a lot of power, but little light would be needed anyway.
There is a trend in some branches of photography to overpower the sun. In that case you want maximum throughput from the flash. Here a central shutter is clearly of advantage, or you can opt for a flash with long duration, they can go up to something like 1/600 s.
I take a liberty to link an image, which both stops motion and has significant fill light. According to the photographer, Hans van Eisden (https://www.hansvaneijsden.com), exposure was 1/3200s at f/1.4. The model's name is Bibi Schouten. Personally, I would suggest that this image would be better with fill light reduced 1-2 stops, but that is just taste and should not be subject to discussion.
(https://www.hansvaneijsden.com/wp-content/uploads/2014/12/HvE-20120724-4839-1050x700.jpg)
So, yes Synn has a good point, at least in theory. Now, good theories hold value also in practice, but that practice may be a very narrow niche.
Best regards
Erik
Ps. In my view, it is quite OK to link to a published image. After all, the image is published with the intention to be shown and the photographer has been clearly attributed.
This photographer has gained my attention as he published a link to this article (https://www.hansvaneijsden.com/colorchecker-perfect-skin-colors/) here on lula: https://www.hansvaneijsden.com/colorchecker-perfect-skin-colors/ .
I don't think you understand how short a flash pulse is.
It is anywhere between 1/5000 - 1/13000, depending on the power, the brand etc. Some brands have even shorter flash pulses. When you sync with a leaf shutter, you are given the possibility to have a very short exposure for the subject and a much longer one for the background. You can have a frozen subject and a decently exposed background. When you do HSS, you have one exposure for both. If you manage to freeze the subject, you are left with a pitch black background, which defeats the purpose of shooting outdoors.
Anyway, I am not here to teach you the basics of flash photography. As any professional who uses leaf shutter sync for his or her work and they will say the same thing to you. If it doesn't affect your work, good for you. But it does for a lot of people, who do this seriously and no, this is not a rare case to us. Our choice of gear is actually dependent on scenarios like these. This is why leaf shutter technology still had a market.
Not gonna prolong this discussion anymore as it is not relevant to the thread subject. I will just sign off saying that if I wanted stitching advice, I would ask you but flash photography is really not something where I would turn to you for expert advice.
-
I wonder if one of the posters recently enjoying the cut and thrust of debate would enlighten me as to what this has to do with the thread title :Topic: Opinion of zeiss otus lenses ?
And we are only on page 2 ::)
-
I wonder if one of the posters recently enjoying the cut and thrust of debate would enlighten me as to what this has to do with the thread title :Topic: Opinion of zeiss otus lenses ?
And we are only on page 2 ::)
The original post mentioned a Hasselblad as one potential option. I made a remark that there is one advantage to the hasselblad setup that even the sharpest lens on a focal plane shutter setup cannot match and gave one of the few use cases where the advantage is seen. Of course, certain experts who have an axe to grind jumped right on to derail the discussion. It's especially amusing when the parties have next to nothing to show for their experience in flash photography, yet insist on arguing just to oppose me.
I have better things to do than this. If the OP is serious about strobe lit portraiture, maybe he got my point. Couldn't care less what the keyboard warriors think.
Carry on.
-
The original post mentioned a Hasselblad as one potential option. I made a remark that there is one advantage to the hasselblad setup that even the sharpest lens on a focal plane shutter setup cannot match and gave one of the few use cases where the advantage is seen. Of course, certain experts who have an axe to grind jumped right on to derail the discussion. It's especially amusing when the parties have next to nothing to show for their experience in flash photography, yet insist on arguing just to oppose me.
No axe to grind here, just followed up on your statements with perfectly reasonnable questions that you declined to answer.
The purpose of my answers was simply to clarify what can be done with a DSLR/Otus using the latest flash technologies of which I appear to have more first hand experience than you do. Everybody knows the value of leaf shutter lenses (I do own 3 Hassy V lens shutter lenses, used to own H ones too), so I am not sure why you act as if you were threatened by the proposition that newly improved technologies such as the HSS implementation of the Profoto B1 are increasing very significantly the flash applications that can be adressed without leaf shutter lenses.
As far as having no flash images to share (I don't see why you need to try to discredit me instead of answering the questions), that's because they are mostly used in private projects that involve people that don't want these images to be shared. But here is one for you.
(https://farm9.staticflickr.com/8065/8164009760_9f0f037939_o.jpg)
Cheers,
Bernard
-
Well,
Just to say, electronic flash can be used to really stop motion, but it is usually done in darkened rooms so camera exposure time matters little.
(http://hititlonger.com/images/uploads/blog/EdgertonBullet.jpg)
Getting back to the Otus I have some interest in that lens, as I am interested in a lens around 85 mm that can be used fully open for shallow depth. The Otus 85/1.4 fills that bill perfectly. But, it is a lot of money, which I normally regard to be a finite resource. I guess I wait to see what the Sigma 85/1.4 Art will look like.
What I want to see is a lens free of longitudinal chromatic aberration.
An 85/2.0 APO from Zeiss at half the price of the Otus, I would put on order immediately!
Best regards
Erik
No axe to grind here, just followed up on your statements with perfectly reasonnable questions that you declined to answer.
The purpose of my answers was simply to clarify what can be done with a DSLR/Otus using the latest flash technologies of which I appear to have more first hand experience than you do. Everybody knows the value of leaf shutter lenses (I do own 3 Hassy V lens shutter lenses, used to own H ones too), so I am not sure why you act as if you were threatened by the proposition that newly improved technologies such as the HSS implementation of the Profoto B1 are increasing very significantly the flash applications that can be adressed without leaf shutter lenses.
As far as having no flash images to share, I don't see why you need to try to discredit me instead of answering the questions, but that's because they are mostly used in private projects that involve people that don't want these images to be shared. But here is one for you. I appologize for the lack of photoshoped tits. ;)
(https://farm9.staticflickr.com/8065/8164009760_9f0f037939_o.jpg)
Cheers,
Bernard
-
The Leica is about $650 cheaper now (with the promotion), and especially much lighter, 498g versus 1.14kg...
Would you happen to have any side by side Cron versus Otus comparisons on your blog?
I do as of a few minutes ago:
http://blog.kasson.com/?p=9042
The following lenses are compared on the a7II:
Zeiss 85mm f/4 ZM (Leica M mount) Tele-Tessar.
Zeiss 85mm f/1.4 Otus.
Leica 90mm f/2 Apo Summicron-M ASPH.
AF-S Nikkor 85mm f/1.4 G.
Tamron SP AF Di 90mm f/2.8 Macro.
Jim
-
That bikini babe shot looks totally artificial, I do not believe one moment it was captured at f/1.4. Too much DOF in places. Also plenty, plenty of photoshop (was this the first wave really, no dampness at all on her belly?).
-
I must say that I find Synn's condescending attitude, technical inaccuracies, and completely off-topic posts (last I checked this is "Opinion of Zeiss Otus Lenses") to be boorishly unpleasant.
In fact, the other day at home I was trying to decide whether to have left-over spaghetti or Thai for lunch, when I suddenly got an anonymous phone call. The caller said something about how spaghetti and Thai food are both lame, medium format is the best, and Hasselblad rocks his socks, then hung up.
I'm not sure how Synn got my number, but damn.
-
I do as of a few minutes ago:
http://blog.kasson.com/?p=9042
The following lenses are compared on the a7II:
Zeiss 85mm f/4 ZM (Leica M mount) Tele-Tessar.
Zeiss 85mm f/1.4 Otus.
Leica 90mm f/2 Apo Summicron-M ASPH.
AF-S Nikkor 85mm f/1.4 G.
Tamron SP AF Di 90mm f/2.8 Macro.
Jim
Thanks Jim!
IMO It is really pixel peeping between the Otus and the Leica. I agree with you though that the first test goes to the Otus and the second one to the Leica.
From a pragmatic practical point of view (no pixel peeping) I would say there's hardly any difference.
Also the other lenses are not trailing far behind, with the Zeiss ZM 85mm being an alternative tot the Leica that is more than four times cheaper....
If you can live without those 2 additional stops it is a pretty easy call...
-
IMO It is really pixel peeping between the Otus and the Leica. I agree with you though that the first test goes to the Otus and the second one to the Leica.
From a pragmatic practical point of view (no pixel peeping) I would say there's hardly any difference.
Also the other lenses are not trailing far behind, with the Zeiss ZM 85mm being an alternative tot the Leica that is more than four times cheaper....
If you can live without those 2 additional stops it is a pretty easy call...
My thoughts exactly.
Jim
-
I must say that I find Synn's condescending attitude, technical inaccuracies, and completely off-topic posts (last I checked this is "Opinion of Zeiss Otus Lenses") to be boorishly unpleasant.
Hey guys what are your thoughts on zeiss 55,85 otus lenses? Do you think it's reasonable to shell out 4k for these lenses. here are the options you can get a zeiss otus lens or a h3d-ii 31 with a 80mm ls or a Pentax 645d and some old lenses. Which one would you guys opt for?
A wise master once told me: "to face idiot, you must first become idiot". I have become what I sought to rectify! Forgive me master!
Rest still stands though.
-
Hi Jim,
AFAIK I know, you also own a Zeiss Apo Sonnar 2.0/135, what is your take on that lens?
The reason I ask is that I am looking for a short telephoto lens for short DoF applications and with very good OOF behaviour at maximum aperture. I don't think I need f/1.4 but f/2 would be nice.
Best regards
Erik
My thoughts exactly.
Jim
-
Hi Jim,
AFAIK I know, you also own a Zeiss Apo Sonnar 2.0/135, what is your take on that lens?
The reason I ask is that I am looking for a short telephoto lens for short DoF applications and with very good OOF behaviour at maximum aperture. I don't think I need f/1.4 but f/2 would be nice.
It's a great lens. Quite a bit of light falloff wide open, but that's to be expected, isn't it?
http://blog.kasson.com/?p=5039
http://blog.kasson.com/?p=5073
Jim
-
Jim,
Thanks a lot! The lens is now on the short list albeit on the long side!
Waiting for a camera to put it on.
Best regards
Erik
It's a great lens. Quite a bit of light falloff wide open, but that's to be expected, isn't it?
http://blog.kasson.com/?p=5039
http://blog.kasson.com/?p=5073
Jim
-
Despite my great fondness for Zeiss' 85/2 Sonnar—and variations/derivations thereof, including Nikon's rangefinder & early SLR version of the 105/2.5—the Zeiss 85mm I find works best with my A7r is the Y/C mount f/2.8. It and the Y/C 35/2.8 are near-identical in size & weight. Crisp & consistent performance throughout the frame. And you could fit about four of 'em inside an Otus 85mm. Maybe this is the one Zeiss should consider updating for the Loxia line…
-Dave-
-
Thanks for info!
Best regards
Erik
Despite my great fondness for Zeiss' 85/2 Sonnar—and variations/derivations thereof, including Nikon's rangefinder & early SLR version of the 105/2.5—the Zeiss 85mm I find works best with my A7r is the Y/C mount f/2.8. It and the Y/C 35/2.8 are near-identical in size & weight. Crisp & consistent performance throughout the frame. And you could fit about four of 'em inside an Otus 85mm. Maybe this is the one Zeiss should consider updating for the Loxia line…
-Dave-
-
Despite my great fondness for Zeiss' 85/2 Sonnar—and variations/derivations thereof, including Nikon's rangefinder & early SLR version of the 105/2.5—the Zeiss 85mm I find works best with my A7r is the Y/C mount f/2.8. It and the Y/C 35/2.8 are near-identical in size & weight. Crisp & consistent performance throughout the frame. And you could fit about four of 'em inside an Otus 85mm. Maybe this is the one Zeiss should consider updating for the Loxia line…
-Dave-
Dave,
Which Zeiss ZM lenses do you have? Any favorites? Do you have the 28mm?
Thanks, Joris.
-
Despite my great fondness for Zeiss' 85/2 Sonnar—and variations/derivations thereof, including Nikon's rangefinder & early SLR version of the 105/2.5—the Zeiss 85mm I find works best with my A7r is the Y/C mount f/2.8. It and the Y/C 35/2.8 are near-identical in size & weight. Crisp & consistent performance throughout the frame. And you could fit about four of 'em inside an Otus 85mm. Maybe this is the one Zeiss should consider updating for the Loxia line…
I love the 85mm f/4 Tele-Tessar ZM.
http://blog.kasson.com/?p=9132
Jim
-
Dave,
Which Zeiss ZM lenses do you have? Any favorites? Do you have the 28mm?
I have the ZM 21/2.8, 28/2.8, 35/2 & 50/2. In Contax RF mount I also have a 1950s 3-element version of the 85/4 Jim Kasson is fond of. On Leicas I like all four ZMs, the 35mm the most. The 28mm gets lots of use on my M8.2s. On the A7r only the 50mm ZM works well. The others exhibit the well-documented corner blurring & smearing. (The CRF 85/4 Triotar works fine on the A7r too, just to be clear.)
-Dave-