The GetDPI Photography Forum

Great to see you here. Join our insightful photographic forum today and start tapping into a huge wealth of photographic knowledge. Completing our simple registration process will allow you to gain access to exclusive content, add your own topics and posts, share your work and connect with other members through your own private inbox! And don’t forget to say hi!

Zeiss Batis 25/2 and 85/1.8 Coming

Annna T

Active member
I agree that the best strategy is to wait if you need a complete lens lineup and solution but I've been down this road with Micro 4/3 as I was an early adopter there as well. Regarding the lines I think only the basic zooms are "complete." The primes are a bit different in that they are for different groups. Some will never go for the 35 Distagon, some will never buy manual only Loxia's, and some will find the small Sony Zeiss 35 too slow. Same can be said of the 50's. Same can be said of the BATIS'. All lines aren't for everyone. Choice is good though and I think we will see family resemblance is the Zeiss branded glass.

I jumped from a Canon system to a building Micro 4/3 that only had the kit zoom or the cheap 90-400 equivalent zoom for the first 6 months until the 40mm equivalent prime and 90mm macro were released close to the time a second more compact body was introduced.

The cameras performed well for what they were but they didn't build the system out anywhere near as fast as what Sony, Zeiss, Samyang/Rokinon, or Voigtlander are doing... and that was with 2 manufacturers. Eventually everything came together and 7 years later it's the most complete mirrorless system. The Fuji might provide the most desirable primes today coupled with some optically decent zooms.
Good that you take the example of MFT; I was an early adopter too (and still a user), but I think the lenses development of MFT made much more sense. Apart of the constant reiteration of mediocre standard zooms, you had a good three primes kit quite early if you combined the Panasonic 20mm with the Olympus 12mm and 45mm. The issuing sequence of the primes made much more sense, first fast standard, then a wide plus a short tele, one Macro and the other for portraits, then more specialized lenses : the 60mm macro and the wonderful 75mm F1.8. Then some faster 35mm. And then only Olympus issued focals already available from Panasonic (17mm and 25mm). When the consumers zooms were done, as well as the main primes one should have, they started with the series of pro zooms; the lens road map was also better announced. I wish Zeiis and Sony would offer a better coordination.
 

JMaher

New member
There is no doubt that both of these lenses are tempting. Actually I would like both. I love 24MM (and 25 should satisfy) and 85 is almost a must.

HOWEVER, if I let GAS subside for just a moment the 85 2.8 "A" lens I have is very sharp and very small and I seem to remember great praise around here for the FE 16-35 that seems to cover the 25 range.

Decisions - decisions.
Rational thought - keep the 85 I have and buy the 16-35. Maybe sell my 14 2.8.
GAS - buy the new 85, buy the 25

Has GAS taken over the forum:) Should I be rational or be like everyone else here:)

Jim
 

Guy Mancuso

Administrator, Instructor
I have the 16-35 and it's very good to 24mm so even though I want the 25 I could continue with the zoom reason being is I lose the 16mm in a lateral trade. The one big issue right now is very few ultra wides so I may still get the 25 but hold onto the zoom until the ultra wide develops. A 21 won't do it for me since the gapping from 35 wider is not good a 24 and or 16/18 prime would be a better gapping tool. The 85 is a no brainier for me. I sold my 85 1.4 and my reason there was simple it had a hard time With AF. It was just to slow and not accurate enough although killer nice it was problematic . A native 85 will just AF far better and with the expanded focus points. Back to the 25 I really don't need AF with this lens but I'll most likely get the Batis 25 and try to hold on to the zoom for a bit. Will see what happens next. But a 16/18, 25, 35, 50 , 85 is my ultimate goal kit.
 

JMaher

New member
Guy,
from your post above....But a 16/18, 25, 35, 50 , 85 is my ultimate goal kit.

Aren't you the guy whose photos and praise finally drove me to buy the Minolta 200 2.8? :facesmack: (A fantastic lens by the way.)

I too would take a 16 and 25 over the 16-35 but it doesn't exist.

Decisions - decisions :)

Jim
 

iiiNelson

Well-known member
Good that you take the example of MFT; I was an early adopter too (and still a user), but I think the lenses development of MFT made much more sense. Apart of the constant reiteration of mediocre standard zooms, you had a good three primes kit quite early if you combined the Panasonic 20mm with the Olympus 12mm and 45mm. The issuing sequence of the primes made much more sense, first fast standard, then a wide plus a short tele, one Macro and the other for portraits, then more specialized lenses : the 60mm macro and the wonderful 75mm F1.8. Then some faster 35mm. And then only Olympus issued focals already available from Panasonic (17mm and 25mm). When the consumers zooms were done, as well as the main primes one should have, they started with the series of pro zooms; the lens road map was also better announced. I wish Zeiis and Sony would offer a better coordination.
Yeah the Panasonic G1 is the only other kit I own now beside Sony FE. The Olympus lenses came to the party late. Originally they only released the 17/2.8 and a 14-42 kit zoom. Eventually Olympus released the 9-18 a short while after Panasonic released the 7-14 again which came well after the kit zoom and basic telephoto lens. Let's not mention the multiple bodies between the G1, GH1, and GF1.

The Olympus primes like the 12/2, 45/1.8, and 25/1.8 came a well over a year after the G1 was released. I remember people were wondering how much support Olympus was going to give as the DSLR 4/3 bodies (like the E620, E3, or E5) were still doing well for them. The Panasonic 25/1.4 was out at least a year before Olympus released their 25/1.8 version - not to mention the fact that the Panasonic lenses and bodies didn't work as well on the other brand early on.

I don't know the status of that now though. Point is there were plenty of growing pains and fragmentation there too before they "got it together" and got it all right. We can look back 7 years later and say they have the most complete mirrorless system but it was pretty shaky early on because the adapted lens craze didn't really set in for about a good 6-12 months after the first mirrorless cameras were around... but most weren't wild about the 2X crop factor.
 

Guy Mancuso

Administrator, Instructor
Guy,
from your post above....But a 16/18, 25, 35, 50 , 85 is my ultimate goal kit.

Aren't you the guy whose photos and praise finally drove me to buy the Minolta 200 2.8? :facesmack: (A fantastic lens by the way.)

I too would take a 16 and 25 over the 16-35 but it doesn't exist.

Decisions - decisions :)

Jim
I still have that in the kit. I just forgot to add that in that post but yes love the thing.

Actually we have a few options today for ultra wide. We have the Zeiss 18mm ZE or ZF which is a very nice performer. New Voightlander 15 Version III , samyang 14mm. Of course there is the Zeiss 15mm ZE or ZF too. So there are some options right now until a native Batis or Loxia comes out. This is one reason I like This Sony system we have a ton of options. But ultimately yes I would prefer the Batis or Loxia 24/25 and a Batis or Loxia 16/18 . Something will come out hopefully soon. I just don't want to see a 21 come out as its to close to the 25. I had the Zeiss 25mm F2 ZE and ZF.2 and I'm really hoping the Batis is that lens. I'm all over it if it is.
 

iiiNelson

Well-known member
Well there is room for a 21 as the only way to get there is with the zoom or 28/2 + UWC. I would prefer an 18mm though since I'll get the 25mm. I rarely go wider than 21mm though although I do have the Rokinon 14/2.8 Cine that I forget about pretty often. Good lens for the price (paid ~$230 for it) but I hate clickless apertures.
 
Last edited:

turtle

New member
I agree that if they are releasing a 25mm, an 18 makes sense for the next widest option.

These lens look very interesting!
 

Annna T

Active member
Yeah the Panasonic G1 is the only other kit I own now beside Sony FE. The Olympus lenses came to the party late. Originally they only released the 17/2.8 and a 14-42 kit zoom. Eventually Olympus released the 9-18 a short while after Panasonic released the 7-14 again which came well after the kit zoom and basic telephoto lens. Let's not mention the multiple bodies between the G1, GH1, and GF1.

The Olympus primes like the 12/2, 45/1.8, and 25/1.8 came a well over a year after the G1 was released. I remember people were wondering how much support Olympus was going to give as the DSLR 4/3 bodies (like the E620, E3, or E5) were still doing well for them. The Panasonic 25/1.4 was out at least a year before Olympus released their 25/1.8 version - not to mention the fact that the Panasonic lenses and bodies didn't work as well on the other brand early on.

I don't know the status of that now though. Point is there were plenty of growing pains and fragmentation there too before they "got it together" and got it all right. We can look back 7 years later and say they have the most complete mirrorless system but it was pretty shaky early on because the adapted lens craze didn't really set in for about a good 6-12 months after the first mirrorless cameras were around... but most weren't wild about the 2X crop factor.
Well may be that we have a different appreciation of the MFT situation since I started with the E-P1, one year after the G1 and since Panasonic lenses were perfectly compatible with the stabilized Olympus bodies. I got the Panasonic 7-14mm and the 20mm almost at the same time as the E-P1 in July 2009; the 12mm and 45mm were available just a few months later. It was a long wait until the E-M5 came out and we got a better sensor however. Nowadays given all the partners of MFT, there are more than 40/50 lenses available. The only thing missing in MFT is a shift lens for architecture.

Anyway, contrary to the FE mount, MFT is now a mature system. But that wasn't the point. The point is that their start was more coherent and there were road maps as to what we could expect. At least it made more sense for someone who was used to take pictures since the film days. But we are going too far OT now, apologies to the others.
 

iiiNelson

Well-known member
Well may be that we have a different appreciation of the MFT situation since I started with the E-P1, one year after the G1 and since Panasonic lenses were perfectly compatible with the stabilized Olympus bodies. I got the Panasonic 7-14mm and the 20mm almost at the same time as the E-P1 in July 2009; the 12mm and 45mm were available just a few months later. It was a long wait until the E-M5 came out and we got a better sensor however. Nowadays given all the partners of MFT, there are more than 40/50 lenses available. The only thing missing in MFT is a shift lens for architecture.

Anyway, contrary to the FE mount, MFT is now a mature system. But that wasn't the point. The point is that their start was more coherent and there were road maps as to what we could expect. At least it made more sense for someone who was used to take pictures since the film days. But we are going too far OT now, apologies to the others.
Ahhhh that makes sense then. In either case though I think I've been able to work around my "issues" with the lack of native lenses and the future is looking up for me.
 

Guy Mancuso

Administrator, Instructor
None needed Annna. Basically I do agree with you this FE mount is all over the map. I think I know why that is , the A7 was a test bed camera to see if the market would bite. What happens is companies like Sony, Zeiss, Sigma and others do is see how much market there really is before committing all there R&D to it. I understand that and I know full well we are beta testers. The good news is the market bought into it and now we are starting to see everyone jumping in but they are all going after the most popular focal lengths. We now have 3 35's and no 85 for what maybe 2 years by the time it comes out.

So it's a little bit of grabbing as much market share and or most popular lens sales for each without looking at the other guys offerings. Now I give Zeiss credit here for the Batis because let's face it people like us that will buy a prime 25 are not the major market, we all know the zooms are. So now we are past the zoom trio things will change and this is a good sign. But yes I agree the road map went off course. That will self correct

Now I can sit here and say this since I did it as well. We just bought in to early as now is the time to buy into the Sony FE. Yes we where the guinea pigs but I have zero regrets about it. I bought in for specific feature sets and better files. We all have our reasons and we now all belong to the same group of beta testers. But without us this would have went nowhere so we took one for the team as they say. I'm perfectly fine with that. I like these challenges
 
V

Vivek

Guest
I wish there is program from Zeiss and others to try out anything new instead of relying on hearsays (particularly from Zeiss fanatics). Their use of the MTF (brilliant idea) is quite out of fashion nowadays.
 
V

Vivek

Guest
Just like with Leica, it appears that if you have the right contacts at Zeiss anything is possible. That is the prevailing culture with these. :D
 

davidstock

New member
85-90mm is my most used focal length, so I'm glad to see the Batis lens. I may even buy one. But I have reservations, too. I think it'll be perfect for portraiture, or for anybody who shoots wide open. But I use this focal length mostly for urban landscape, and the Batis' pincushion distortion looks pretty bad.

As Lloyd Chambers says, it seems like that's a trade-off Zeiss intentionally made to keep the lens small and sharp in the corners while building in auto-focus and stabilization. Similar to what Sony seems to have done with the 28/2. But 85mm lenses don't normally have a big issue with distortion.

Correction in post-processing? Hmm, okay, up to a point. Wave of the future and all that. But distortion correction will have some impact on both sharpness and precise cropping. It's hard to know how much impact. For me, it's one thing to depend on a major post-processing solution when using a journeyman $450 wide angle lens like the 28mm. Another whole thing with an $1100 Zeiss 85mm.

Meanwhile, the Sony 90mm G macro is about to come out. It's larger, heavier, and slower. But it's starting to get good reviews. It looks to be very sharp, even stopped down to f11. (Which is common for me.) Very flat field, minimal distortion. All good things for cityscapes.

I really would prefer to go lighter and smaller. Unfortunately, I'm kinda thinking that the 90 macro might be the better lens for my application.

I guess I have to wait for test reports, and for the opportunity to handle the lenses myself.

--d
 
Top