Ad
Ad
Ad
Pages: « 1 [2] 3 »   Bottom of Page
Print
Author Topic: Has anyone gotten their Zeiss 55 yet?  (Read 5250 times)
BernardLanguillier
Sr. Member
****
Offline Offline

Posts: 8365



WWW
« Reply #20 on: November 18, 2013, 04:52:01 PM »
ReplyReply

Why not replace both? Wink According to this (Time = 2:22) the 85mm f/1.4 will be released in Q1 2014.

Hum... 85mm is a bit too close to 55mm considering the price of the beast.

I would have preferred something about 110mm f2. Now, that is bit close to the 135mm f2...

Hum...

Cheers,
Bernard
Logged

A few images online here!
BernardLanguillier
Sr. Member
****
Offline Offline

Posts: 8365



WWW
« Reply #21 on: November 21, 2013, 07:28:21 PM »
ReplyReply

For those interested in numbers, DxO Mark has just published their review of the new Zeiss Otus.

Besides for Chromatic Aberations where the Nikkor 58mm f1.4 measures better, it is currently the best lens available for the D800 along most KPIs, sharpness in particular:

http://www.dxomark.com/Reviews/Carl-Zeiss-Distagon-T-Otus-1-4-55-ZF.2-Nikon-lens-review-Peerless-Outstanding-Optical-Performance/New-Zeiss-takes-first-place-in-rankings

The gap with the excellent Nikkor 85mm f1.4 AF-S is in fact not huge except in sharpness where it is significant.

Now, look is not measured and this may be where the Zeiss shines brightest.

The only lens in the same ball park overall appears to be the Nikon 200mm f2.0 VRII... another expensive purchase although not that much more than the Zeiss and probably better value all things considered.  Wink

Cheers,
Bernard
« Last Edit: November 21, 2013, 09:23:35 PM by BernardLanguillier » Logged

A few images online here!
allegretto
Sr. Member
****
Offline Offline

Posts: 638


« Reply #22 on: November 21, 2013, 10:44:15 PM »
ReplyReply

cant help but note that no Canon lenses on DXO site

History there?

BTW; pre-ordered The Otus in Canon mount anyway. Got t use this lens, if just to see the quality and color.

« Last Edit: November 21, 2013, 10:48:49 PM by allegretto » Logged
BernardLanguillier
Sr. Member
****
Offline Offline

Posts: 8365



WWW
« Reply #23 on: November 21, 2013, 11:11:56 PM »
ReplyReply

cant help but note that no Canon lenses on DXO site

History there?

Easy, the resolution is a key contributor to the rating of lenses and that results from the combination of sensor and lens.

The higher resolving power of the D800 explains this.

It only shows that Canon doesn't have any current offering able to deliver the same level of detail at base ISO. It doesn't mean that some Canon lenses are not excellent, they probably are but nobody really knows how much they can resolve since there is no camera body able to tap into their potential. The Sony a7r might change this though.

Cheers,
Bernard
« Last Edit: November 22, 2013, 05:39:31 AM by BernardLanguillier » Logged

A few images online here!
allegretto
Sr. Member
****
Offline Offline

Posts: 638


« Reply #24 on: November 22, 2013, 09:55:50 AM »
ReplyReply

As noted before, quantitative is interesting but not like tasting the pudding.  Thanks for answering. Makes my other post moot.

Poor benighted Canon users... no 50Mpxl to brag about... yet, I suppose.

Guess my images, and those of other Canon users are not as good as we thought.

In any case, after a life of working with very sophisticated equipment I can say that Quants have their way of looking at things and tend to be very rigid. Personally I think both Quant and Qual are important lins to follow...but that's just me.

As always, thanks...


Easy, the resolution is a key contributor to the rating of lenses and that results from the combination of sensor and lens.

The higher resolving power of the D800 explains this.

It only shows that Canon doesn't have any current offering able to deliver the same level of detail at base ISO. It doesn't mean that some Canon lenses are not excellent, they probably are but nobody really knows how much they can resolve since there is no camera body able to tap into their potential. The Sony a7r might change this though.

Cheers,
Bernard

Logged
Telecaster
Sr. Member
****
Offline Offline

Posts: 925



« Reply #25 on: November 22, 2013, 01:47:41 PM »
ReplyReply

In any case, after a life of working with very sophisticated equipment I can say that Quants have their way of looking at things and tend to be very rigid. Personally I think both Quant and Qual are important lins to follow...but that's just me.

Agreed. Yesterday I received my copy of Edward Burtynsky's new book, Water. The printing is very well done and the photos are reasonably large (12 1/2 x 9 3/8"). It's clear Burtynsky is using high-end equipment to make his photos...and many of them are more about tonality than spatial detail. There are a pair of abstracts taken in Iceland that are just stunning. I'd happily put a big print of either on one of my walls. Neither photo contains much fine spatial detail and in this respect could've been taken with just about any camera currently on the market. But tonally both are bursting with information. It's this aspect of the Otus 55mm that I'm most interested in learning about.

-Dave-
Logged
ErikKaffehr
Sr. Member
****
Online Online

Posts: 7928


WWW
« Reply #26 on: November 22, 2013, 02:16:29 PM »
ReplyReply

Hi,

I am highly skeptical about lenses affecting tonality. I would thing tonality depends on sensor and post processing.

This is one comparison I made with three lenses on a Sony Alpha 99, Zeiss macro Planar 120, Sony SAL 70-400/4-5.6G and Minolta 100/2.8 macro.

http://www.luminous-landscape.com/forum/index.php?topic=77956.0

From what I have seen the Zeiss 55 is truly excellent in most aspects, but I would say that it's greatest strength is extremely good correction at large apertures. DxO has tested it and it seems that it becomes diffraction limited at f/4, about as good as it gets. A major advantage of the lens is that it said to have no longitudinal chromatic aberration, also know as color bokeh, at large apertures.

Best regards
Erik




Agreed. Yesterday I received my copy of Edward Burtynsky's new book, Water. The printing is very well done and the photos are reasonably large (12 1/2 x 9 3/8"). It's clear Burtynsky is using high-end equipment to make his photos...and many of them are more about tonality than spatial detail. There are a pair of abstracts taken in Iceland that are just stunning. I'd happily put a big print of either on one of my walls. Neither photo contains much fine spatial detail and in this respect could've been taken with just about any camera currently on the market. But tonally both are bursting with information. It's this aspect of the Otus 55mm that I'm most interested in learning about.

-Dave-
« Last Edit: November 22, 2013, 02:23:52 PM by ErikKaffehr » Logged

ErikKaffehr
Sr. Member
****
Online Online

Posts: 7928


WWW
« Reply #27 on: November 22, 2013, 02:41:39 PM »
ReplyReply

Hi,

You posted a question and Bernard answered it, OK?

DxO tests most third party lenses on both Nikon and Canon. Their ranking is based sharpness. As the Nikon has a higher resolution it will normally have a higher rating. If you take the time to learn to use DxO-mark you can compare lenses and find out about their strengths and weaknesses.

It is a bit unfortunate for Canon that Nikon has better sensors, in most respects. Canon's sensors are great at high ISO, that is much depending on the technology used. On the other hand I would say that mostly, both systems are good enough. My best friend has a Canon 5DIII and I have Sony Alpha 99 and also a 39 MP digital back. I don't think my equipment makes better pictures than my friends camera. Even if the Alpha 99 has better DR and the digital back quite a lot more pixels.

But, I would also not buy an Otus, unless I wanted to shoot at f/1.4. I would also expect that Sigma will come out with a 50/1.4 Art lens that almost as good at one fifth the price.

Best regards
Erik


As noted before, quantitative is interesting but not like tasting the pudding.  Thanks for answering. Makes my other post moot.

Poor benighted Canon users... no 50Mpxl to brag about... yet, I suppose.

Guess my images, and those of other Canon users are not as good as we thought.

In any case, after a life of working with very sophisticated equipment I can say that Quants have their way of looking at things and tend to be very rigid. Personally I think both Quant and Qual are important lins to follow...but that's just me.

As always, thanks...


« Last Edit: November 22, 2013, 02:55:05 PM by ErikKaffehr » Logged

AreBee
Full Member
***
Offline Offline

Posts: 138



WWW
« Reply #28 on: November 22, 2013, 03:03:55 PM »
ReplyReply

Erik,

Quote
But, I would also not buy an Otus, unless I wanted to shoot at f/1.4. I would also expect that Sigma will come out with a 50/1.4 Art lens that almost as good at one fifth the price.

Ah, but those who purchase the Otus 55mm f/1.4 have decided for one reason or another that "good enough", in this case isn't. Wink
Logged

ErikKaffehr
Sr. Member
****
Online Online

Posts: 7928


WWW
« Reply #29 on: November 22, 2013, 03:23:35 PM »
ReplyReply

Hi,

Maybee…

Anyway, I'm impressed by the Otus, what I have read. Making a lens that is nearly optimal at f/1.4 is very impressive. Little doubt that the lens works extremely well at smaller apertures.

On the other hand, Sigma started making very high performance lenses at attractive prices. I looked at the DxO figures and found that the Sigma 35/1.4 is a tad weaker in the corners at f/1.4 but at f/5.6 the two lenses are very close. Very obvious that Sigma made a good job on the 35/1.4A.

I presume that we will se more great lenses from Sigma.

Best regards
Erik




Erik,

Ah, but those who purchase the Otus 55mm f/1.4 have decided for one reason or another that "good enough", in this case isn't. Wink
Logged

Telecaster
Sr. Member
****
Offline Offline

Posts: 925



« Reply #30 on: November 22, 2013, 03:50:22 PM »
ReplyReply

A major advantage of the lens is that it said to have no longitudinal chromatic aberration, also know as color bokeh, at large apertures.

That's the very sort of thing that does have a tonal impact!

I enjoy using uncoated 1930s-era Leitz and Zeiss rangefinder lenses. In many situations they deliver a compressed tonal range, with film or sensor, compared to later coated versions of essentially the same designs. The difference is not subtle. You can expand the tonal range in post–this applies to reflex lenses too–but the compression is what I like about those lenses.

Granted, nowadays lenses are quite homogeneous tonally. But I'm hoping the Otus line will offer something a bit extra in this area. Not compression, mind you, but expansion.

-Dave-
Logged
BernardLanguillier
Sr. Member
****
Offline Offline

Posts: 8365



WWW
« Reply #31 on: November 22, 2013, 03:59:57 PM »
ReplyReply

As noted before, quantitative is interesting but not like tasting the pudding.  Thanks for answering. Makes my other post moot.

Poor benighted Canon users... no 50Mpxl to brag about... yet, I suppose.

Guess my images, and those of other Canon users are not as good as we thought.

In any case, after a life of working with very sophisticated equipment I can say that Quants have their way of looking at things and tend to be very rigid. Personally I think both Quant and Qual are important lins to follow...but that's just me.

As always, thanks...

I understand your frustration, but I only answered your question about the reason why there is no a Canon lens in the top 20 of DxO Mark.

But if you wish to stop talking about technical aspects, how could anyone sensible not agree that those technical aspects are only part of the equation?

What I don't fully understand is why you bother challenging the fairness of DxOMark results considering your views on the lack of relevance of technical data?

Cheers,
Bernard
« Last Edit: November 22, 2013, 04:02:55 PM by BernardLanguillier » Logged

A few images online here!
AreBee
Full Member
***
Offline Offline

Posts: 138



WWW
« Reply #32 on: November 22, 2013, 05:15:35 PM »
ReplyReply

Erik,

Quote
On the other hand, Sigma started making very high performance lenses at attractive prices. I looked at the DxO figures and found that the Sigma 35/1.4 is a tad weaker in the corners at f/1.4 but at f/5.6 the two lenses are very close. Very obvious that Sigma made a good job on the 35/1.4A.

Yes, everyone agrees that the Sigma 35mm f/1.4 is not only a great performer, but also great value for money. Having said that, it should go without saying that a future Otus 35mm f/1.4 will outperform the Sigma 35mm f/1.4, even if the latter is "almost as good" as the former - it should, given the price differential. Hence, those seeking that additional step up in performance are again likely to opt for an Otus.

Quote
I presume that we will see more great lenses from Sigma.

And equally from other manufacturers.

I confess that besides the 35mm f/1.4 I have not kept abreast of other Sigma lenses that have been released. Which lenses has Sigma released of the calibre of the 35mm f/1.4?

Regards,
Logged

ErikKaffehr
Sr. Member
****
Online Online

Posts: 7928


WWW
« Reply #33 on: November 22, 2013, 10:55:33 PM »
ReplyReply

Hi,

If you check the DxO-mark the Sigma stopped down to f/5.6 will outperform the Otus at f/8. So you can waste all advantage of the Otus by using f/8 instead of f/5.6.

Sigma has a new series of lenses, called the Art series, the 35/1.4A is being the first of them. There is also a 24-120/4. But more lenses will be coming.

Myself, I never use large apertures, as I am shooting stopped down the Otus would have little benefit to me. On the other hand, if you need short DoF it would be important to have good at full aperture. Almost any large aperture lens has axial CA (color fringing) at full aperture.

The reason I took the Sigma for comparison because it seems to be the lens that it closest to Otus in performance.

Best regards
Erik

Erik,

Yes, everyone agrees that the Sigma 35mm f/1.4 is not only a great performer, but also great value for money. Having said that, it should go without saying that a future Otus 35mm f/1.4 will outperform the Sigma 35mm f/1.4, even if the latter is "almost as good" as the former - it should, given the price differential. Hence, those seeking that additional step up in performance are again likely to opt for an Otus.

And equally from other manufacturers.

I confess that besides the 35mm f/1.4 I have not kept abreast of other Sigma lenses that have been released. Which lenses has Sigma released of the calibre of the 35mm f/1.4?

Regards,
Logged

AreBee
Full Member
***
Offline Offline

Posts: 138



WWW
« Reply #34 on: November 23, 2013, 04:03:02 AM »
ReplyReply

Erik,

Quote
If you check the DxO-mark the Sigma stopped down to f/5.6 will outperform the Otus at f/8. So you can waste all advantage of the Otus by using f/8 instead of f/5.6.

If a photographer adopted f/8 for a composition when using an Otus 55mm f/1.4 then they would adopt the same aperture when using any other equivalent lens. The above comparison is meaningless.

Presumably the Otus performs better at every aperture than the Sigma when compared on a like for like basis (though they can never truly be like for like given the difference in focal length)?

Quote
Sigma has a new series of lenses, called the Art series, the 35/1.4A is being the first of them. There is also a 24-120/4. But more lenses will be coming.

This reinforces my suspicion that with the release of one, possibly two great performing lenses, photographers have extrapolated that all lenses released by Sigma in future will be groundbreaking. I hope they are correct as it will help to drive down the price charged by competing manufacturers for equivalent lenses. However, in my opinion it is a bit of a stretch to imagine that all lenses released by Sigma in future will wow the photographic community in the way that the 35mm f/1.4 has. I will be very pleased if I am mistaken.

Cheers,
« Last Edit: November 23, 2013, 04:11:35 AM by AreBee » Logged

ErikKaffehr
Sr. Member
****
Online Online

Posts: 7928


WWW
« Reply #35 on: November 23, 2013, 05:18:58 AM »
ReplyReply

Hi


If a photographer adopted f/8 for a composition when using an Otus 55mm f/1.4 then they would adopt the same aperture when using any other equivalent lens. The above comparison is meaningless.

Presumably the Otus performs better at every aperture than the Sigma when compared on a like for like basis (though they can never truly be like for like given the difference in focal length)?

When you stop down, aberrations are reduced until a point where diffraction starts to dominate over aberrations. At that point the lens becomes diffraction limited. Once diffraction limit is reached most lenses are performing pretty similar. Stopping down one stop from the optimal aperture reduces MTF on Otus. What the example shows is that once stopped down to f/5.6 or below differences will be very small.

What I can see in the MTF curves is that Otus has an advantage at maximum aperture, both lenses are equal at f/5.6, both loose drop at f/8-

Quote

This reinforces my suspicion that with the release of one, possibly two great performing lenses, photographers have extrapolated that all lenses released by Sigma in future will be groundbreaking. I hope they are correct as it will help to drive down the price charged by competing manufacturers for equivalent lenses. However, in my opinion it is a bit of a stretch to imagine that all lenses released by Sigma in future will wow the photographic community in the way that the 35mm f/1.4 has. I will be very pleased if I am mistaken.

Sigma has a new series of lenses called the "Art" series that are designed with very high performance. There are some APS-C lenses in that series. All lenses in the A-series are excellent performers.  Similarly, Zeiss has a new line of lenses called Otus designed for peak performance.

The reason I compared the Sigma 35/1.4 and the Otus 55/1.4 that these are the two top performers in the focal and aperture range and both have been tested by DxO.

Best regards
Erik
« Last Edit: November 23, 2013, 05:20:54 AM by ErikKaffehr » Logged

AreBee
Full Member
***
Offline Offline

Posts: 138



WWW
« Reply #36 on: November 23, 2013, 06:27:38 AM »
ReplyReply

Erik,

Quote
Stopping down one stop from the optimal aperture reduces MTF on Otus

Stopping down one stop from the optimal aperture reduces MTF on any lens.

Quote
What the example shows is that once stopped down to f/5.6 or below differences will be very small.

This is true for the overwhelming majority of lenses, yet photographers that typically shoot at f/8 do not always purchase the cheapest lenses. While performance is likely to be the 1st consideration when it comes to lens purchase, it is rarely if ever the only one.

Quote
What I can see in the MTF curves is that Otus has an advantage at maximum aperture, both lenses are equal at f/5.6, both loose drop at f/8-

Then the Otus has achieved its original design goal. Smiley

Regards,
Logged

ErikKaffehr
Sr. Member
****
Online Online

Posts: 7928


WWW
« Reply #37 on: November 23, 2013, 06:41:37 AM »
ReplyReply

Hi,

My point is that I would not spend on the Otus, although it being excellent, because that excellence is diminished where I am shooting. I also would suggest that is worth consideration, with the Otus being something like 5-6 times as expensive as the Sigma. If there is no significant difference at apertures I shoot it makes little sense to pay for something I don't see.

Would I shoot large apertures, I would be more interested,  but I don't.

Best regards
Erik

Erik,

Stopping down one stop from the optimal aperture reduces MTF on any lens.

This is true for the overwhelming majority of lenses, yet photographers that typically shoot at f/8 do not always purchase the cheapest lenses. While performance is likely to be the 1st consideration when it comes to lens purchase, it is rarely if ever the only one.

Then the Otus has achieved its original design goal. Smiley

Regards,
Logged

allegretto
Sr. Member
****
Offline Offline

Posts: 638


« Reply #38 on: November 23, 2013, 06:51:21 AM »
ReplyReply

Sorry, I must have phrased that in such a way to make you think I am challenging the "fairness". In truth I was just pointing out that it's difficult for Canonites (with my knowledge base, perhaps I'll figure out what Eric alluded to that Canon results can be inferred from the Nikon data) to say much about Canon lenses on DXO.

But since we're talking... if Canon came out with a 35-50 MP sensor and wrapped a good body or two around it depending upon anticipated use (say a 1Dx and 5DIII or 6D body), would it generate many converts from Nikon?



I understand your frustration, but I only answered your question about the reason why there is no a Canon lens in the top 20 of DxO Mark.

But if you wish to stop talking about technical aspects, how could anyone sensible not agree that those technical aspects are only part of the equation?

What I don't fully understand is why you bother challenging the fairness of DxOMark results considering your views on the lack of relevance of technical data?

Cheers,
Bernard

Logged
shadowblade
Sr. Member
****
Offline Offline

Posts: 718


« Reply #39 on: November 23, 2013, 06:56:19 AM »
ReplyReply

I just hope Zeiss releases a 14mm Otus, and that Sigma also releases a high-quality lens in the 12-15mm range. Some tilt-shifts would also be nice - at the moment, the Canon TS-E 17L and TS-E 24L are unbeatable, apart from the fact that you can't mount them on Nikon bodies.
Logged
Pages: « 1 [2] 3 »   Top of Page
Print
Jump to:  

Ad
Ad
Ad