Otus 85mm, everything is wrong

[sven]

This is a specialised lens that will be purchased, find limited use due to weight, focusing difficulties and passed on. I am in the market for a telephoto lens, so was waiting for the 85 Otus but sort of expected the weight/focus issues. The size and weight are disappointment, more than what I expected. I do not care about the price, since at this size and weight, I still would not buy even for half the price. It has limited usability.

The images I see do not make me want to run to buy it either. There is absolutely nothing to suggest they are better than with medium format. There is much more than lens in MF images. I was a Diglloyd subscriber but never renewed it as I found his technique and biases do not correlate with my style of photography.

Build quality of the lens is also questioned by Ming Thein. At this price and weight, where is the tripod mount? Having tried other f/1.4 manual focus lenses on the Nikon D800E/810, focus is going to be hit or miss.

The point of such a lens is also questionable. Does anyone believe that Nikon, Sony, sigma or Leica cannot produce a similar quality lens if the size, weight, price constraints and uasability factors are removed? I did not mean to bash this lens but may be it came off that way. Enough rant, now off to work :salute:

 

[mjr]

You guys have no imagination (or maxed out credit cards). With the size and weight of this thing, let alone cost, you would also need to buy an Arca Swiss Cube to put it on. Then probably need to upgrade to a new pair of RRS carbon fiber legs. Which, in turn, would require a new bag. This is the ultimate in retail therapy. (Just make sure you can afford the divorce.)

Shop or go home!

Will, you forgot something important, you can't go out with this lens without buying some smart new slacks and maybe a hat, these things mount up!

 

[Shashin]

Will, you forgot something important, you can't go out with this lens without buying some smart new slacks and maybe a hat, these things mount up!

Mat, no, you just want a pair of old jeans a T-shirt--you don't want to show off.

 

[Guy Mancuso]

The point of such a lens is also questionable. Does anyone believe that Nikon, Sony, sigma or Leica cannot produce a similar quality lens if the size, weight, price constraints and uasability factors are removed? I did not mean to bash this lens but may be it came off that way. Enough rant, now off to work


No question absolutely not a problem to do. These are guided by cost restraints, retail pricing, size and weight issues that many in the Camera OEM business think its far to limited in sales. That's the bottom line, the technology is there.

 

[mjr]

Not even a trilby? Spoilsport.

 

[Guy Mancuso]

Folks this may be the best analogy yet. Many of us went and bought a Nikon 200 F2, Canon 200 1.8 or a Leica R 180 F2 as I wave my arm I bought all three several times over. But here is the crux of it absolutely gorgeous lenses but 95 percent of us sold it for mostly size/ weight and simply a freaking hassle to go even out your door . Guess what we found alternates to it and are happy. Same here. Just too many good less expensive 85 1.4 in every color out here and than Sigma is coming with a Art 85 and we all seen how good the 35 and 50 are but guess what there big too but they are stellar at a fourth the price if not more.

No question this lens will sell and people don't care about the money and just want the best they can buy. I get that but I'm a mere mortal on a budget. LOL

I'll wait for the Sigma but honestly my Sony 85 ZA is very good just need to correct in post for wide open shots

 

[Shashin]

This lens is obviously not meant to be a general-purpose lens. Probably the price reflects that Zeiss will not sell many. But there are technical applications where a lens like this could excel--reproduction photography, for example. It really does not both me that Zeiss made this. Actually, I think it is great as it is a great example of the excellence in optical engineering. It is also one more choice for photographers. A win-win...

 

[Jack]

I know and like Lloyd, he is a friend. However, I also know he's never met a fast Leica or Zeiss lens he didn't like

As for MT's images, they look nice, you can see the Zeiss design come though, but honestly I am not seeing enough extra anything over my Nikkor 85/1.4G to make me want to jump on it even if it were the same size and weight as my Nikkor. But at the size and cost of the 200/2, forgetaboutit!

The lone exception is if I were an astro photographer, I might do some added research to see if it really does outshine competition in that department. Here weight means nothing and it's all about optical performance on infinity pinpoint light sources.

 

[Swissblad]

Jack, I concur, this lens seems to shine at astrophotography…..

I think it is a superb optical tool - just not for me - no interest - my old AF 85 f1.4 is just fine for my needs.

 

[Lars]

Well, it's apochromatic, so not much competition if that is a priority.

Then again, who shoots newspapers at an oblique angle wide open all day?

 

[sirimiri]

The 55 I couldn't care less about.

But this 85 is very (very) interesting...

 

[Godfrey]

I have no complaint about it, but I know I'll like the Summicron-R 90mm f/2 more. I've always preferred the Leica look to the Zeiss look... ;-)

G

 

[Swissblad]

Well DxO says its the best they ever tested…… so that's all that's to be said….. or not?

 

[Swissblad]

And an echo by Matt Granger

 

[JohnBrew]

Well DxO says its the best they ever tested…… so that's all that's to be said….. or not?

Well, the best 85. The 55 Otus is still listed as the best overall.

 

[doug]

Well DxO says its the best they ever tested…… so that's all that's to be said….. or not?

* for Nikon F mount

 

[dennishuang]

The lack of autofocus is a deal breaker for me.

 

[mjr]

Morning

The whole af thing is interesting, I think people are put off by mf but in reality it isn't quite as hard as most think. I shoot exclusively mf for my personal work and 50/50 af/mf on commercial work, it depends on time constraints and the subject.

For personal stuff, landscapes specifically then I don't see the need for af, there's nothing moving around and most of the time you're stopped down so I honestly don't see the need for it. I do a lot of portraits with the Zeiss 135 f2, mf with this lens on a D800 is definitely useable, I wouldn't say it was easy but not everything in life can be easy! The rewards when it's right are superb images that give you a real sense of pride because you have done it! For me, the Zeiss lenses shine over the Nikkor lenses I own in contrast, I can spot a Zeiss shot every time in my catalogue, the light and dark transitions are just so much smoother. It's entirely possible that it's a figment of my imagination but that doesn't matter to me, i feel they are different and that's all that matters to me!

Whether mf is an issue is a very personal thing but I feel it would be a shame not to experience the beauty in these lenses just for the sake of not wanting to work a bit harder, it doesn't really matter though, we buy what we want and enjoy it!

Mat

 

[mjr]

I'm also a believe in user experiences rather than quoting specs or charts, they just bore me! So here's a very quick shot I grabbed a couple of days ago, i am in no way suggesting that it is a good representation of the Zeiss brand, it's just a shot I like processed in a way I like for me, but it is handheld, Zeiss 135 f2 at 2.8, I shot it at f2 as well but preferred the slightly added dof with this shot. Shooting in to fairly bright sun, I took 4 shots, 3 are just how I wanted them and the 4th just slightly off but as it was windy I was being blown around a bit.

This may not be a brilliant shot but the self satisfaction at getting it right means a lot more to me than the technical aspects. If I could afford it I'd have both Otus lenses, for me they feel like a challenge with huge rewards.

Obviously these are just my views.

 

[glenerrolrd]

This is an interesting discussion regarding MF verse AF . My POV is that you use the gear(lens) that provides you with the best opportunity to create something special . If you believe that a manual focus lens can provide a rendering that is special and you can achieve a decent level of success …..then you go for it .

Zeiss lenses create a signature aesthetic …..a combination of all the elements that effect perceived image quality ..that can make your photographs have a special look . I much prefer the Zeiss “look” to that provided by even the very best Nikon lenses(for example ).

But at the same time …I appreciate the importance of capturing images that are in focus ..so I will use the Nikon lenses in situations where I really need AF to achieve a decent hit ratio or where the effort to use manual focus is just too high .

Each photographer should strive to know their work (and finances ) well enough to decide the right balance between the desired aesthetic and the ability to achieve in focus images . I can appreciate both manual focus and auto focus lenses. But in the end ….its about the photograph rather than the technique or equipment used .