Otus 28mm ƒ1.4 announced

[MikeEvangelist]

I want this in e-mount!

[url]http://www.zeiss.co.in/camera-lenses/en_in/camera_lenses/otus/otus1428.html[/URL]

 

[Vivek]

I don't want it in ANY mount. Too big.:thumbdown:

 

[anGy]

3,5kg for the Otii 28, 55, 85 whew, the same Leica S lens set is 2,6kg, and autofocus.
(Ok, not the same apertures but the sensor size compensates for bokeh).

 

[MikeEvangelist]

The Batis 25mm comes pretty darn close at a fraction of the price.

Totally agree. But I do love fast lenses.

(on the other hand, I'm not likely to ever pay that much for a lens again. I left that craziness behind me when I sold my Leicas. )

 

[Guy Mancuso]

No way. Not paying for the extra 5 percent here. I'll stick with my Batis 25

 

[MikeEvangelist]

No way. Not paying for the extra 5 percent here. I'll stick with my Batis 25

5%? I think it's more like 1%.

 

[CSP]

great times we get more and more high quality lens options nikon and canon try really hard to become total obsolete ! just read that sigma will announce a 20 mm 1.4 art lens .

 

[turtle]

I honestly do not know what the thinking was here. It weighs nearly 1.4Kg in Canon mount! I've got a jaw droppingly good 28-45mm lens for the Pentax 645Z that people think is very heavy at 1.5Kgs and that's a zoom covering 33x44mm...

Who needs a massive 28mm f1.4 lens that lacks AF? Seems a strange design choice. I would have thought absolutely perfect f2 or f2.8 optics would be much more likely to sell to perfectionist landscape shooters. Maybe they expect to sell this new 28mm to studio photographers who will shoot with live view?

 

[eleanorbrown]

I sold my Leica M digital but held onto my lenses. I have to say I have been testing my Leica 75 f2 and 50 f1.4 asph lenses last couple of days on my A7rII and I really am blown away by the "look". I'm going to compare to my Otis 55 and see what differences I see just out of curiosity. Otus is HUGE on my Sony with adaptor but leicas are tiny comparatively speaking. Eleanor

Totally agree. But I do love fast lenses.

(on the other hand, I'm not likely to ever pay that much for a lens again. I left that craziness behind me when I sold my Leicas. )

 

[Pradeep]

Not for me either. The Batis 25 is so good you hardly need anything else at that FL.

Now, what would really make a difference would be the AF version of the Loxia 21mm, and a really fast 14 or 16mm (which does not have to be AF). My needs for both day and night landscapes would be well met then.

 

[ggibson]

Who needs a massive 28mm f1.4 lens that lacks AF? Seems a strange design choice. I would have thought absolutely perfect f2 or f2.8 optics would be much more likely to sell to perfectionist landscape shooters. Maybe they expect to sell this new 28mm to studio photographers who will shoot with live view?

Maybe astrophotograpy?

But the rumored Sigma 20/1.4 would be even better!

 

[Zlatko Batistich]

This lens is too big, too heavy and too pricey for me. And then there's that smooth rubber grip. That seems to be a poor design, a case of form over function. I haven't tried the Otus lenses, but experienced a similar smooth grip on the Touits. In Ming Thein's review of the Otus 85mm, he writes: "Focusing and aperture rings are made of grippy rubber; my 55 Otus has become not so grippy after six months of heavy use; Zeiss is looking into the issue." No wonder it becomes not so grippy when it's so smooth to begin with.

And the Loxia lenses have grips that are hard to tell apart from the aperture rings: Review: The Zeiss Loxia 21mm f/2.8 Has Great Quality But a Grip That Grates

How is it that these great lenses have such obvious ergonomic issues?

 

[rjp85]

It's easy to bash the Otus lenses for their large size and huge price tag, but these lenses, mounted on Canon or Nikon, and Sony if you're careful not to damage the mount, really give you a lot of freedom to shoot in a variety of situations.

Directly at f/1.4, you have corner to corner sharpness, and center performance like f/5.6 on other lenses, with little to no CA, Lateral and Longitudal. Stopped down to f/4, they're mind-blowing.

Unfortunately, they're actually easier to focus on Sony than they are on Canon and Nikon. An E mount version would require a completely new design.

I believe Ming Thein and Lloyd Chambers told Zeiss during their visit that smaller and lighter f/2.8 Otus lenses would be a really great thing to have, so I wouldn't be surprised if we actually see those in the future.

 

[CSP]

This lens is too big, too heavy and too pricey for me. And then there's that smooth rubber grip. That seems to be a poor design, a case of form over function. I haven't tried the Otus lenses, but experienced a similar smooth grip on the Touits. In Ming Thein's review of the Otus 85mm, he writes: "Focusing and aperture rings are made of grippy rubber; my 55 Otus has become not so grippy after six months of heavy use; Zeiss is looking into the issue." No wonder it becomes not so grippy when it's so smooth to begin with.

And the Loxia lenses have grips that are hard to tell apart from the aperture rings: Review: The Zeiss Loxia 21mm f/2.8 Has Great Quality But a Grip That Grates

How is it that these great lenses have such obvious ergonomic issues?

maybe ming should instruct his workshop attendees not to touch his otus with greasy fingers the otus has no ergonomic issue this is simple BS but it is the best corrected lens i have ever used whether mf, 35 or view camera lenses.

 

[Zlatko Batistich]

maybe ming should instruct his workshop attendees not to touch his otus with greasy fingers the otus has no ergonomic issue this is simple BS but it is the best corrected lens i have ever used whether mf, 35 or view camera lenses.

One can make up funny theories about Ming's workshop attendees, or one can take him at his word that the lens has had 6 months of heavy use. You say it's "simple BS" but the fact remains that it has a smooth rubber grip. Smooth rubber is more appropriate for condoms than for lenses. :grin: Not only is it smooth, but it is flush with the lens barrel. :banghead: No other manufacturer does this, and for good reason. Human fingers work better with some ribbing or other differentiation to grip on to. Look at just about every other lens on the market (other than Otus, Touit & Batis) and ever other lens of the past 80 years or so. Look at the old Zeiss lenses for Hasselblad or Contax. Look at Canon, Nikon, Leica, etc. Look at camera dials too. The Otus smooth grip seems to be a design statement rather than a functional choice. That smooth rubber might be ok on an autofocus lens, but this is a manual focus lens where one actually has to use that smooth grip constantly.

 

[Uaiomex]

I haven't used any of these new Zeiss lenses that seem to have been designed as fashion statements. They look completely unergonomic tho elegant. Since per se fashion desgins are often timely, I think Zeiss will deeply regret this decision.

Eduardo

One can make up funny theories about Ming's workshop attendees, or one can take him at his word that the lens has had 6 months of heavy use. You say it's "simple BS" but the fact remains that it has a smooth rubber grip. Smooth rubber is more appropriate for condoms than for lenses. :grin: Not only is it smooth, but it is flush with the lens barrel. :banghead: No other manufacturer does this, and for good reason. Human fingers work better with some ribbing or other differentiation to grip on to. Look at just about every other lens on the market (other than Otus, Touit & Batis) and ever other lens of the past 80 years or so. Look at the old Zeiss lenses for Hasselblad or Contax. Look at Canon, Nikon, Leica, etc. Look at camera dials too. The Otus smooth grip seems to be a design statement rather than a functional choice. That smooth rubber might be ok on an autofocus lens, but this is a manual focus lens where one actually has to use that smooth grip constantly.

 

[eleanorbrown]

Ok...after a huge amount of testing which I won't go into to save time and space I have to report, unfortunately, I am not going to use my Leica lenses on my Sony A7rII. Center 1/3 of images is gorgeous but outer 2/3 image file is lousy even at higher f stops. Just won't do...unusable unless you want blurred edges. Leica lenses go back on the closet...sigh...Eleanor

I sold my Leica M digital but held onto my lenses. I have to say I have been testing my Leica 75 f2 and 50 f1.4 asph lenses last couple of days on my A7rII and I really am blown away by the "look". I'm going to compare to my Otis 55 and see what differences I see just out of curiosity. Otus is HUGE on my Sony with adaptor but leicas are tiny comparatively speaking. Eleanor

 

[hiepphotog]

Ok...after a huge amount of testing which I won't go into to save time and space I have to report, unfortunately, I am not going to use my Leica lenses on my Sony A7rII. Center 1/3 of images is gorgeous but outer 2/3 image file is lousy even at higher f stops. Just won't do...unusable unless you want blurred edges. Leica lenses go back on the closet...sigh...Eleanor

Perhaps you should check out Kolari mod for your cam. I assume what you are describing here is with the Lux 50 ASPH. Please check this thread I compiled on FredMiranda:

http://www.fredmiranda.com/forum/topic/1392833

 

[k-hawinkler]

Ok...after a huge amount of testing which I won't go into to save time and space I have to report, unfortunately, I am not going to use my Leica lenses on my Sony A7rII. Center 1/3 of images is gorgeous but outer 2/3 image file is lousy even at higher f stops. Just won't do...unusable unless you want blurred edges. Leica lenses go back on the closet...sigh...Eleanor

I am surprised to find the AA 75/2 on your list.
What's wrong with it on the A7r2? TIA.

 

[ErikKaffehr]

Hi Eleanor,

I don't know which lenses you have been testing, but many Leica lenses have problems astigmatism, caused by large beam angles. That problem can be reduced/solved by changing the cover glass to Leica M9 specifications. I can't recall the name of the company doing it, but I can dig it up.

The other thing that comes to my mind is that Tim Ashley have been writing about the Leica lenses, and some of them were quite tricky with a wavy plane of best focus.

Personally, I am shooting with a Sony 24-70/2.8ZA A mount lens mostly and it seems quite OK to me at 24-60 mm but at 70 mm edges/corners are very bad. That lens had been trough a pretty hard drop. My 70-400/4-5.6 works greatly. I have also a Canon 24/3.5 TS LII which is not even close to the 24-70/2.8 when unshifted but can deliver the goods on it's own.

The Sony 90/2.8 G macro I have also seems to deliver. It may be much sharper than the 70-400/4-5.6 G at 90 mm.

Best regards
Erik

Ok...after a huge amount of testing which I won't go into to save time and space I have to report, unfortunately, I am not going to use my Leica lenses on my Sony A7rII. Center 1/3 of images is gorgeous but outer 2/3 image file is lousy even at higher f stops. Just won't do...unusable unless you want blurred edges. Leica lenses go back on the closet...sigh...Eleanor