Zeiss 55mm 1.4... this is going to cost me

[fotografz]

I think you should test it to make your own judgement Rent it and try it. Better having an AF, even if slow in low light (that also depend of the user behind the camera...).

For example, the 85f1.4G is also slow in low light in some situations... I mean, it can't focus at all !! On the D700/D800 I had some problems, less on the D4. Same goes for the 85f1.8G, but better results at the end.

The Sigma can be manually focused if needed so I don't really see any problems after all. Just test the f1.2 canon line in dim conditions

Understood.

Personally, I wouldn't even consider a 35mm DSLR lens unless it is AF. I sometimes shoot for 10 straight hours and about 7 hours into such a shoot the eye fatigue starts making manual focusing lenses pretty damned difficult ... except Leica M rangefinders for some reason.

I know all about the Canon 85/1.2 in both the first version and so called faster MK-II version. Shot for years with both. Turtle slow AF in low contrast, dim light ... mostly solved by using the Canon STE-2 Transmitter which puts out a good focusing pattern target on the subject.

The Zeiss ZA 50/1.4 doesn't seem to suffer from "Turtle Syndrome", so I'll bide my time and wait for a ZA 35/1.4 if it ever comes.

BTW, if I rent anything to try it'll be the new Leica S45 ASPH ... which is the same FOV as a 35mm in the smaller 135 formats.

- Marc

 

[jduncan]

Hi,

Sorry but I have not be able to find a compelling reason on the web. (Warning prosumer question comming)

Why are they manual focus? The Canon AF system is amazing (1DX), and the Nikon system is not bad. Loosing detail due to human errors seems to negate the quality of this lens.

Can someone elaborate?

Thanks,

J. Duncan

 

[RVB]

Hi,

Sorry but I have not be able to find a compelling reason on the web. (Warning prosumer question comming)

Why are they manual focus? The Canon AF system is amazing (1DX), and the Nikon system is not bad. Loosing detail due to human errors seems to negate the quality of this lens.

Can someone elaborate?

Thanks,

J. Duncan

I might be wrong here but I believe it's because you have to reverse engineer the A.F system like Sigma does and Zeiss doesn't want to get involved in that ..

 

[RVB]

Hi,

Sorry but I have not be able to find a compelling reason on the web. (Warning prosumer question comming)

Why are they manual focus? The Canon AF system is amazing (1DX), and the Nikon system is not bad. Loosing detail due to human errors seems to negate the quality of this lens.

Can someone elaborate?

Thanks,

J. Duncan

I'm sure you already know the Zeiss lenses are made in Japan by Cosina,which is fine but I laughed when reading a thread in DPreview where one poster was disparaging Hasselblad glass because it's made by Fujinon while at the same time singing the Praises of the Zeiss glass...:facesmack:

 

[jduncan]

I'm sure you already know the Zeiss lenses are made in Japan by Cosina,which is fine but I laughed when reading a thread in DPreview where one poster was disparaging Hasselblad glass because it's made by Fujinon while at the same time singing the Praises of the Zeiss glass...:facesmack:

That's a lot of fun, but I fail to see how that address the question. They don't even need to add a motor to the lenses.

Thanks,
J. Duncan

 

[Jorgen Udvang]

Here's Zeiss' own explanation:

Manual Focusing | ZEISS International

I do suspect that neither Zeiss nor Cosina have access needed to the technology to make exact enough, fast focusing AF lenses. On Cosinas part, it must also be said that Mr. Kobayashi is rather famous for being conservative. I don't believe in the reverse engineering technology, since they already include electronics that communicate well with Nikon as well as Canon cameras. Another point, which they also mention in their article, is that it's difficult to make AF lenses that is as easy to focus precisely as high quality manual focus lenses.

Zeiss has shown though that they are able to design AF lenses. They did that for Kyocera (Contax) and currently do it for Sony. Those lenses however, are (were) manufactured by those companies.

I'm not sure if this lens will be manufactured by Cosina. The price would indicate that it's made in Germany, like their cine lenses, but I don't know.

 

[RVB]

That's a lot of fun, but I fail to see how that address the question. They don't even need to add a motor to the lenses.

Thanks,
J. Duncan

This answer comes directly from Zeiss..

"Due to international licences, it is not possible at the moment for companies outside Japan to offer AF lenses with EF- or F - mount. So we will concentrate on high-end manual focus lenses with those mounts within the next future.

Best regards

Carl Zeiss Lenses Team "

 

[RVB]

That's a lot of fun, but I fail to see how that address the question. They don't even need to add a motor to the lenses.

Thanks,
J. Duncan

"They don't even need to add a motor to the lenses" ?? How would it AF without motors??Canon use USM and nikon use SWM So what would Zeiss use if they wanted to add A.F.

Rob

 

[Steen]

Zeiss 55mm 1.4 ... this is going to cost me

"They don't even need to add a motor to the lenses" ?? How would it AF without motors ?? Canon use USM and nikon use SWM So what would Zeiss use if they wanted to add A.F.

Rob

In the old days autofocus lenses were screw-drive lenses driven by an autofocus motor in the camera body, while today's modern lenses usually have their own built-in autofocus motor and are driven by the body electrically instead of mechanically.

 

[Jorgen Udvang]

This answer comes directly from Zeiss..

"Due to international licences, it is not possible at the moment for companies outside Japan to offer AF lenses with EF- or F - mount. So we will concentrate on high-end manual focus lenses with those mounts within the next future.

Best regards

Carl Zeiss Lenses Team "

That actually answers two questions:
The lens is apparently being made in Germany and because they do that, they can't include AF.

About AF without in-lens motor: They could obviously do that for Nikon cameras, but it would have been seen as a bit backwards, I suppose, and D3200 owners wouldn't buy the lens then. I can see the angry posts at dpr before me: "Zeiss is ignoring us D3200 owners. I will never buy a Zeiss lens again! Luckily, I didn't buy any in the past :cussing: "

As for me, I really like the idea of buying one and use it as the only lens on the D800 that I would also buy. It would be just for kicks, but what a kick!. It's expensive, but not more so than the round of golf every weekend that my friends are into. I could try to convince myself that I need it for commercial photography also, but unfortunately, I'm not that easily fooled :loco: A 50mm f/1.8 AF-S for a 20th of the price will do just fine for that.

Let's see what Santa Claus has in store for me

 

[fotografz]

That actually answers two questions:
The lens is apparently being made in Germany and because they do that, they can't include AF.

About AF without in-lens motor: They could obviously do that for Nikon cameras, but it would have been seen as a bit backwards, I suppose, and D3200 owners wouldn't buy the lens then. I can see the angry posts at dpr before me: "Zeiss is ignoring us D3200 owners. I will never buy a Zeiss lens again! Luckily, I didn't buy any in the past :cussing: "

As for me, I really like the idea of buying one and use it as the only lens on the D800 that I would also buy. It would be just for kicks, but what a kick!. It's expensive, but not more so than the round of golf every weekend that my friends are into. I could try to convince myself that I need it for commercial photography also, but unfortunately, I'm not that easily fooled :loco: A 50mm f/1.8 AF-S for a 20th of the price will do just fine for that.

Let's see what Santa Claus has in store for me

Yes, even in the days of CY lenses being made in Japan by Kyocera, some "special" lenses were still made in Germany by Zeiss.

The Contax AF N lenses were made in Japan, but heavily overseen by the Carl Zeiss Institute located there. I recall one focal length being unavailable for some time because Carl Zeiss Japan rejected the production version.

So Jorgen, are you giving up Golf if you get this lens? :ROTFL:

- Marc

 

[fotografz]

Hi,

Sorry but I have not be able to find a compelling reason on the web. (Warning prosumer question comming)

Why are they manual focus? The Canon AF system is amazing (1DX), and the Nikon system is not bad. Loosing detail due to human errors seems to negate the quality of this lens.

Can someone elaborate?

Thanks,

J. Duncan

In addition to all the other answers as to why this lens doesn't feature AF for Canon or Nikon applications ... I believe special lenses such as this are meant to address the more stringent demands of a 35mm DSLR camera in the 24 to 36 meg range ... and the possible 35mm camera sensors that may even exceed that in future.

If you read about medium format users that painstakingly work with high meg backs on technical cameras, they tend to gravitate to Rodenstock and Schneider "super" optics capable of greater acuity than most any reflex lens ... these are all manual focus, and there isn't even a viewfinder.

35mm DSLRs such as the D800 bring a new level of image quality to a much smaller, more convenient form factor, but with that comes a much more demanding need for careful technique. To realize all of what such cameras can deliver usually means a locked down tripod, and meticulous technique ... using things like 10X live view magnification to place super accurate focus exactly where the photographer wants it.

It is to photographers like this that such a lenses will appeal to. If Zeiss made a 100mm 1:1 macro in the same manner as this 55, I could easily see one on a D800 used in studio for tabletop work.

- Marc

 

[Jorgen Udvang]

So Jorgen, are you giving up Golf if you get this lens? :ROTFL:

- Marc

I have no problems giving up golf, but can I give up the caddies?

Fuji S3 with Tamron 24-135mm @ 90mm and f/6.7

 

[mjr]

Maybe some of you guys have been a pro too long and everything must add to the workflow or make life easier or fit with shooting thousands of images a day, what about the simple owning and occasional use of something that gives you real pleasure?

What about strapping it to the front of your camera a few times a month to just wallow in the joy of seeing images made for yourself using the "best" piece of equipment you can find to do it with? Not everything needs to be quicker or faster or easier, sometimes just better is enough!

I have a house and garage full of things I take pleasure from but that offer me nothing by way of ease or financial reward and I love all those things for that very reason! After a stressful week or a stint in Afghanistan or Iraq or I just get up and it's lovely out, taking the fastest focusing or using the most time saving thing is at the bottom of my list, this is where being an enthusiastic amateur gives me all the benefit, to my mind anyway.

There will be many who desire this lens I'm sure, some will be like me and will get far more than financial reward from owning and using the best that they can afford, I bet my Mother will still say, "that's nice dear" regardless of whether I use the £300 50 1.8 or the £3000 55 1.4 but I'll know, and the pleasure will be all mine!

Just saying, no offence intended!

Mat

 

[fotografz]

Maybe some of you guys have been a pro too long and everything must add to the workflow or make life easier or fit with shooting thousands of images a day, what about the simple owning and occasional use of something that gives you real pleasure?

What about strapping it to the front of your camera a few times a month to just wallow in the joy of seeing images made for yourself using the "best" piece of equipment you can find to do it with? Not everything needs to be quicker or faster or easier, sometimes just better is enough!

I have a house and garage full of things I take pleasure from but that offer me nothing by way of ease or financial reward and I love all those things for that very reason! After a stressful week or a stint in Afghanistan or Iraq or I just get up and it's lovely out, taking the fastest focusing or using the most time saving thing is at the bottom of my list, this is where being an enthusiastic amateur gives me all the benefit, to my mind anyway.

There will be many who desire this lens I'm sure, some will be like me and will get far more than financial reward from owning and using the best that they can afford, I bet my Mother will still say, "that's nice dear" regardless of whether I use the £300 50 1.8 or the £3000 55 1.4 but I'll know, and the pleasure will be all mine!

Just saying, no offence intended!

Mat

Yep, nothing wrong with just enjoying the best if you can afford it ... or even not afford it, and making sacrifices to get it :thumbup:

I use a S2 for that reason. Practically speaking, a Pentax 645D would do the job ... but I just LOVE those Leica S optics ... even just for the feel of them.

If I had to justify the S2 in a court of law, I'd be in jail right now :ROTFL:

- Marc

 

[RVB]

Yep, nothing wrong with just enjoying the best if you can afford it ... or even not afford it, and making sacrifices to get it :thumbup:

I use a S2 for that reason. Practically speaking, a Pentax 645D would do the job ... but I just LOVE those Leica S optics ... even just for the feel of them.

If I had to justify the S2 in a court of law, I'd be in jail right now :ROTFL:

- Marc

Marc,I completely understand how you feel about the S glass,right now I'm considering selling the family silver to get the 30-90 ..

 

[AreBee]

Jorgen,

This answer comes directly from Zeiss..

The lens is apparently being made in Germany...

Unfortunately the following blog comment by zeiss on their camera lens blog contradicts the information - also by zeiss - noted by Rob:

"For the manufacture of ZEISS lenses, we use a global production network of trusted partners in the optical industry that has been built up over many years. Otus lenses are made in Japan."

 

[RVB]

Jorgen,





Unfortunately the following blog comment by zeiss on their camera lens blog contradicts the information - also by zeiss - noted by Rob:

"For the manufacture of ZEISS lenses, we use a global production network of trusted partners in the optical industry that has been built up over many years. Otus lenses are made in Japan."

Even though Zeiss lenses are manufactured in Japan,they are still a foreign manufacturer and the Cosina deal is an oem deal...

 

[AreBee]

I stand corrected. Thank you.

 

[Jorgen Udvang]

Jorgen,





Unfortunately the following blog comment by zeiss on their camera lens blog contradicts the information - also by zeiss - noted by Rob:

"For the manufacture of ZEISS lenses, we use a global production network of trusted partners in the optical industry that has been built up over many years. Otus lenses are made in Japan."

So that's settled then. I've always found it a bit puzzling that, while some of the world's best lens makers are based in Japan, once a European lens is manufactured there, it's in many people's opinion not as good as if it were made in Germany. That, obviously, cannot be true, particularly not when the design of the lens is German and considering that Japan has industrial standard as good as, and sometimes better than, Germany.

But I guess it gives a lens an extra, exotic flair if it has been assembled by some ageing German Professor Doctor Ingenieur with inch thick glasses, speaking English with a strong German accent at his candle lit laboratory and with Der Ring des Nibelungen thundering in the background