Upload & Sell: Off
That's why I said Leica is Leica... their product has always carried a premium. Look it this way, 1st party lenses are usually the most expensive. Leica on Leica M being the most, while the rest follows (including Zeiss ZM)
The Otus target market is Canon/Nikon users, and since Zeiss decided to go beyond the 1st party price, as a Nikon shooter, I expect nothing less than the absolute best. Thus, Otus should outperform all 5*mm lenses available to Nikon/Canon mounts in every single aspect.
I'm not saying it doesn't, but that's the expectation. Anything less than that, it's a bit of...Show more →
So let me get this straight. If the Otus outperforms the top 50s from Nikon and Canon in sharpness, bokeh, reduced chromatic aberrations in the focus plane, reduced chromatic aberrations out of the focus plane, better close up performance, and only is as good as the Canikon lenses on vignetting then because it doesn't beat them in this last aspect, but only in effect ties them, it isn't doesn't really go far enough. It should also be obvious in one important aspect (maximum aperture) the Otus lens was not going to beat the best Canikon lenses. After looking at the specs and the samples, however, I am pretty sure if I wanted to shoot between f/1.4 and f/2.8 I think the Otus would typically produce better results, and I am pretty sure that in any situation at any aperture in which CA might be an issue the Otus would produce better results. For me that is enough to want one even though I certainly can't afford it.
By the way, the Otus 55 f/1.4 is a lot better on pretty much all dimensions including vignetting (but of course not maximum aperture) than the Zeiss 55 f/1.2. That is an interesting and even exceptional lens but I am not sure it pushed the Planar design to the limit. In my view, this Otus lens is a much farther step forward than the Zeiss 55 f/1.2 Planar.