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 Otus--I guess I've gone truly insane...

jeffreybehr

Member
...or maybe GAS has overwhelmed me, but, after never falling in love with my Sony 24-105/4 midlength lens, this week I bought a couple Zeiss Otus lenses, a 55- and 85/1.4, for use with my 'R4.. The 55 is here, while the 85 is supposed to be here, but even FedEx's 1-day-by-10:30AM service in NOT working well this week.. Bought both from B&H, used, so I didn't have to spend TOO TOO much, just TOO much*.. The 55 works very well with my Metabones-5 smart adapter except that the manual-focus magnification doesn't turn on automatically when the focus ring is moved.. I have a couple Sigma MC-11s coming; maybe they'll work better.

All the pics I shot last nite coming home from FedEx were at F1.4, ISO800, and handheld; except that I was using my default full-electronic shutter which produced some banding in some shots, all pics looked far better than I thought they would.. (I found no difficulty manually focusing this 4.5-pound combination while handholding, something mentioned in at least one review I read.) :D The lens is heavy and large, but I never felt that the body and lens were too heavy, as I did with my 4.8-pound Panasonic S1R and Leica 24-90..

The images have more of the Zeiss aliveness than I expected.

Still waiting for the 85. :mad:

* but I'm NOT spending the rent or mortgage money!
 

Attachments

glenerrolrd

Workshop Member
Peter Coulson ,fashion photographer ,uses those two OTUS lenses with his Sony A7R 3 . You can definitely see the image quality . I ve not seen anyone complain about the OTUS not being all that good . Its always the size and weight issue .
 

PeterA

Well-known member
Peter Coulson ,fashion photographer ,uses those two OTUS lenses with his Sony A7R 3 . You can definitely see the image quality . I ve not seen anyone complain about the OTUS not being all that good . Its always the size and weight issue .
Pete shoots mainly with Hasselblad ...
 
Last edited:

vjbelle

Well-known member
You should be aware that the 55mm does have some curvature so if you need flat field then shooting at f5.6 or beyond is a must and focusing about a quarter in from one of the edges is helpful.

Victor
 
Last edited:

pegelli

Well-known member
Congrats on the two lenses, I'm sure they're in good hands and am looking forward to the results here.

Just a question for interest, did you ever test the Sony 55/1.8 "CZ"? When it was just released some people called it a "mini-Otus" so I would be interested if you can make a real-life comparison.
 
Last edited:

glenerrolrd

Workshop Member
Pete shoots mainly with Hasselblad ...
Not any more . I was with him in NYC in OCT and he was shooting the Sony A7R 3 and the OTUS 55/85 . He told me it was his go to system now. I know he has been a HB spokesperson and still uses them in his studio. He used to specify which system he was using on his instagram posts .
 

jeffreybehr

Member
Victor, congrats on the two lenses, I'm sure they're in good hands and am looking forward to the results here.

Just a question for interest, did you ever test the Sony 55/1.8 "CZ"? When it was just released some people called it a "mini-Otus" so I would be interested if you can make a real-life comparison.
If this was intended for the OP, that's me.
1. TYVM; I'll try to create some good results.
2. Never tried the Sony 55/1.8 CZ.

These two clearly indicate the rez this 85/'R4 system has.. The first is the full frame resized to 1504* pixels wide; second is a 100% crop...handheld, F5.6; the 'R4's IBIS really works. :)

* 1504 is 9504 with the 9 changed to 1; it's my new, lazy way of downsizing images to '1500' pixels wide.
 

Attachments

Last edited:

pegelli

Well-known member
If this was intended for the OP, that's me.
I'm sorry, didn't look far enough up :eek:

Anyway, from what youy're posting these lenses really shine on the Riv :thumbup:

In case anybody else has any real world data (not urban legends) of the Sony 55 vs. the Otus 55 I'd be interested.
 

iiiNelson

Well-known member
I'm sorry, didn't look far enough up :eek:

Anyway, from what youy're posting these lenses really shine on the Riv :thumbup:

In case anybody else has any real world data (not urban legends) of the Sony 55 vs. the Otus 55 I'd be interested.
The Otus is better is the short answer but the 55/1.8 is still great optically and less than 1/4 the price new. Like most premium items in life, there’s a point where one can weigh cost to performance to see the potential value of going in a different direction (and getting similar but not quite the same performance) but objectively speaking the Otus is optically superior.
 

glenerrolrd

Workshop Member
The Sony 55/1.8 isn t remotely comparable in image quality to the Otus 55/1.4 . Last month a friend an I went to Old Car City near Atlanta ..to test the new Sony 7R 4 and a few Zeiss Batis and Sony lenses . I have plenty of OTUS and Leica files to compare . The OTUS is still the reference lens for best image quality . The Leica SL primes are just as good but with a different aesthetic .

The Sony is a decent but not great lens ...but its small ,light ,with excellent AF and inexpensive (by comparison ) . Its not built particularly well and has reported plenty of sample variation . The OTUS is entirely different ...its huge ,expensive ,manual focus and without compromise ..built like a tank .

In between the OTUS and the Sony 55/1.8 you have many alternatives ....the Zeiss Batus lenses are terrific ,good AF but larger and heavier , the Zeiss Loxia are also excellent ,small and built tough BUT manual focus , and the Sony G lenses are also excellent but larger, heavier and more expensive .

As always it depends on what you shoot , how much you want to spend and how important size /weight are to you .
 

pegelli

Well-known member
Thanks guys, the reason for asking is that on DXO mark "standard prime" list it's in 3rd place (DXO mark score) only behind the Sigma 85/1.4 and the Sony GM 85/1.4 and ahead of the Loxia 50/2 and all the Milvus lenses. Just looking at sharpness it's in 4th place, again ahead of most Zeiss's (except the Sony/Zeiss 50/1.4). But unfortunately the OTUS isn't in their database.

But I realise DXO doesn't tell the full story, any links to some good field test/comparisons that you know of? I've googled a bit but came up empty.
 

iiiNelson

Well-known member
The Sony 55/1.8 isn t remotely comparable in image quality to the Otus 55/1.4 . Last month a friend an I went to Old Car City near Atlanta ..to test the new Sony 7R 4 and a few Zeiss Batis and Sony lenses . I have plenty of OTUS and Leica files to compare . The OTUS is still the reference lens for best image quality . The Leica SL primes are just as good but with a different aesthetic .

The Sony is a decent but not great lens ...but its small ,light ,with excellent AF and inexpensive (by comparison ) . Its not built particularly well and has reported plenty of sample variation . The OTUS is entirely different ...its huge ,expensive ,manual focus and without compromise ..built like a tank .

In between the OTUS and the Sony 55/1.8 you have many alternatives ....the Zeiss Batus lenses are terrific ,good AF but larger and heavier , the Zeiss Loxia are also excellent ,small and built tough BUT manual focus , and the Sony G lenses are also excellent but larger, heavier and more expensive .

As always it depends on what you shoot , how much you want to spend and how important size /weight are to you .
Maybe I have a “good copy” but my 55/1.8 is every bit as good as (and probably better) optically as the Batis lenses. I still own the 85 Batis and owned the excellent 25 until last year. I’ve used both the 18 and the 135 but not the 40. The 55/1.8 is comparable, at minimum, and better (again at least my copy) than all of the Batis lenses I’ve tried. The biggest benefit of the Batis lenses is maybe superior video performance (less focus breathing and smoother AF). The Loxia is an excellent len as well but the 55 can easily resolve more detail when comparing the 50 Loxia to the 55/1.8. I’ll say that my copy of the 55 is good enough that I sold my 50 Lux FLE without ANY reservations. I’m not saying it’s better in every way... but I objectively didn’t see a point to keeping the 50 Lux FLE (and I still believe that it’s an excellent lens in every which way).

So I wouldn’t personally go hyperbolic on descriptions. They’re all great lenses. I can’t speak for sample variation. I’ve owned the same copy since December 2013 and didn’t bother with brick walls. I just used the lens in real world situations.
 

jeffreybehr

Member
After using the Otus 85 for a few days, I'm afraid its weight...

...of 2.95 pounds including Sigma adapter (the way I'd use it) is just too much and makes my 'R4 feel like the excellent-but-too-heavy Panasonic S1R and Leica 24-90 in my hand.. I'll be returning it to B&H and will keep the Batis 85 instead.

So the Sony 24-105/4 will go and be replaced by the Otus 55 and Batis 85.. My keepers then become the Sony 16-35GM, Otus 55, Batis 85, and Canon 70-200/4/L/USM plus 1.4 (III) extender (AKA the Canon 98-280) plus the VERY excellent Canon TS-E 50mm Macro.. Everything fits in my ThinkTank Airport Roller; it now weighs 28 pounds, two more than its recent lightest.
 
Last edited:

glenerrolrd

Workshop Member
I am sure we each evaluate lenses with a great deal of subjective criteria . There are plenty of excellent lens review sites that can provide MTF charts and comments on resolution tests . I look more at the overall aesthetic produced which depends on micro contrast ,color and how a lens renders out of focus areas . The best lenses all create a terrific look and its obvious (at least to me ) .

My conclusions are of course subjective and personal .
 
Top