Home · Register · Search · View Winners · Software · Hosting · Software · Join Upload & Sell

Moderated by: Fred Miranda
Username   Password

  New fredmiranda.com Mobile Site
  New Feature: SMS Notification alert
  New Feature: Buy & Sell Watchlist
  

FM Forums | Alternative Gear & Lenses | Join Upload & Sell

1       2       3              18      
19
       20              27       28       end
  

Official: Zeiss Otus 55mm f/1.4 APO-Distagon
  
 
Makten
Offline
• • • •
Upload & Sell: Off
p.19 #1 · p.19 #1 · Official: Zeiss Otus 55mm f/1.4 APO-Distagon


carstenw wrote:
I rest my case


I don't think you'll find any classic, fast ~50 mm lens that would do that better, at that distance and with that terrible background foliage. Certainly not any Nikkor at least. The gate is like 1.7 meters tall, so the distance is larger than you might think.



Oct 20, 2013 at 07:21 PM
carstenw
Offline
• • • • • •
Upload & Sell: Off
p.19 #2 · p.19 #2 · Official: Zeiss Otus 55mm f/1.4 APO-Distagon


Let's see how the new 58/1.4 does.


Oct 20, 2013 at 07:36 PM
Jonas B
Offline
• • • •
Upload & Sell: On
p.19 #3 · p.19 #3 · Official: Zeiss Otus 55mm f/1.4 APO-Distagon


sebboh wrote:
both can contribute to a swirly look and given the right shot either can create a swirly look by itself (as can field curvature).



OK, I have never looked for, or understood it was what I saw, so I take your word for it (about the astigmatism). Thank you.
Maybe I should look up some EF 50/1.0 images and have a second look at them.



Oct 20, 2013 at 07:38 PM
Makten
Offline
• • • •
Upload & Sell: Off
p.19 #4 · p.19 #4 · Official: Zeiss Otus 55mm f/1.4 APO-Distagon


carstenw wrote:
Let's see how the new 58/1.4 does.


It's probably much better than the Noct. I was simply comparing it to lenses of its own age.



Oct 20, 2013 at 07:41 PM
sebboh
Offline
• • • • • •
Upload & Sell: Off
p.19 #5 · p.19 #5 · Official: Zeiss Otus 55mm f/1.4 APO-Distagon


Makten wrote:
I don't think you'll find any classic, fast ~50 mm lens that would do that better, at that distance and with that terrible background foliage. Certainly not any Nikkor at least. The gate is like 1.7 meters tall, so the distance is larger than you might think.


i bet the sigma would do better and the rokkor would be somewhat similar to the noct, not sure which would do better.




Oct 20, 2013 at 07:41 PM
Makten
Offline
• • • •
Upload & Sell: Off
p.19 #6 · p.19 #6 · Official: Zeiss Otus 55mm f/1.4 APO-Distagon


sebboh wrote:
i bet the sigma would do better and the rokkor would be somewhat similar to the noct, not sure which would do better.


The Sigma isn't very smooth at that distance actually, except for the middle of the image. But when talking about bokeh, 9 out of 10 photographers seems only interested in closeups. Not me.



Oct 20, 2013 at 07:45 PM
sebboh
Offline
• • • • • •
Upload & Sell: Off
p.19 #7 · p.19 #7 · Official: Zeiss Otus 55mm f/1.4 APO-Distagon


Makten wrote:
The Sigma isn't very smooth at that distance actually, except for the middle of the image. But when talking about bokeh, 9 out of 10 photographers seems only interested in closeups. Not me.


i admit it's been a while since i looked, but my memory was that it was pretty well controlled even out to 10m or so and a quick trip to flickr seems to support this memory. it has more contrast but less bright rings even in the corners and less weirdness.




Oct 20, 2013 at 07:51 PM
carstenw
Offline
• • • • • •
Upload & Sell: Off
p.19 #8 · p.19 #8 · Official: Zeiss Otus 55mm f/1.4 APO-Distagon


Makten wrote:
It's probably much better than the Noct. I was simply comparing it to lenses of its own age.


Ah, okay, agreed. The Noct-Nikkor was a fantastic lens, I just don't think it deserves its current pricing.



Oct 20, 2013 at 07:58 PM
Ernie Aubert
Offline
• • • •
Upload & Sell: On
p.19 #9 · p.19 #9 · Official: Zeiss Otus 55mm f/1.4 APO-Distagon


Pages and pages of posts about Nikkor lenses... what's the title of this thread?


Oct 20, 2013 at 08:17 PM
Jonas B
Offline
• • • •
Upload & Sell: On
p.19 #10 · p.19 #10 · Official: Zeiss Otus 55mm f/1.4 APO-Distagon




Ernie Aubert wrote:
Pages and pages of posts about Nikkor lenses... what's the title of this thread?

You know.... we discussed it from the inside and all the way to the look of it and the lens cap design. Now we need inages from a copy in the wild.



Oct 20, 2013 at 08:43 PM
 

Search in Used Dept. 



adamdewilde
Offline
• • • •
Upload & Sell: Off
p.19 #11 · p.19 #11 · Official: Zeiss Otus 55mm f/1.4 APO-Distagon


Mescalamba wrote:
Yea so AF lens somehow make throat size smaller?

You can use adapted C/Y 85/1.2 on it if I remember right. Its most likely not cause they cant, just cause they dont want.. But yes, it would be expensive, 50/1.2 L isnt exactly cheap lens.



The electrical contacts probably would.. I guess they could do what Canon did with the 85 1.2L?

BTW, I'd love to see Nikon make a 50 1.2, but I'm going to buy the 58mm anyway, since I'm not a fan of the current 50mm lenses for Nikon, but use the 50/1.4G frequently for work. While Nikon's at it, 135 G please! AND SOON.




Oct 21, 2013 at 03:31 PM
adamdewilde
Offline
• • • •
Upload & Sell: Off
p.19 #12 · p.19 #12 · Official: Zeiss Otus 55mm f/1.4 APO-Distagon


Makten wrote:
I don't think you'll find any classic, fast ~50 mm lens that would do that better, at that distance and with that terrible background foliage. Certainly not any Nikkor at least. The gate is like 1.7 meters tall, so the distance is larger than you might think.



For sure any of my Leica 50mm lenses would, although I don't think they're classic's in the way you meant it (and fast is a relative term)..



Oct 21, 2013 at 03:34 PM
adamdewilde
Offline
• • • •
Upload & Sell: Off
p.19 #13 · p.19 #13 · Official: Zeiss Otus 55mm f/1.4 APO-Distagon


redisburning wrote:
It is interesting to me, on a personal level. If it were small and well built, I could see paying that kind of money assuming it wasn't like the ZM50 in practice.

I do not design lenses. Still, I have experience in creating products and know what it is like to see the baby fawn standing up for the first time attempts of others to match your talent and vision. I am putting myself in someone else's shoes.

Zeiss made a lens for the future, Nikon a lens for this generation of cameras. One side of me sees a nice lens whose
...Show more

ZM50 in practice, I don't understand?
I'm really quite annoyed by Zeiss, and I personally think that they're selling themselves short (more then Nikon who has "missed opportunities") as well by not making all there lenses autofocus. I'm honestly going to have to buy an A99 just to get some autofocus Zeiss lenses..

Which brings up a good question, and if anyone would like to answer, please check out my topic, as I don't want to hijack this thread with random non-Otus talk.
(http://www.fredmiranda.com/forum/topic/1248716)




Oct 21, 2013 at 03:55 PM
Ernie Aubert
Offline
• • • •
Upload & Sell: On
p.19 #14 · p.19 #14 · Official: Zeiss Otus 55mm f/1.4 APO-Distagon


Why not; that's what's been done already.


Oct 21, 2013 at 04:08 PM
redisburning
Offline
• • •
Account locked
p.19 #15 · p.19 #15 · Official: Zeiss Otus 55mm f/1.4 APO-Distagon


adamdewilde wrote:
ZM50 in practice, I don't understand?


poor fine detail reproduction.

good luck in your hunt for AF Zeiss glass. I would be OK with them making some in F mount as long as the same lens was available in manual only. I can think of only one word to summarize how I feel about autofocus: junk.



Oct 21, 2013 at 04:37 PM
hiepphotog
Online
• • •
Upload & Sell: On
p.19 #16 · p.19 #16 · Official: Zeiss Otus 55mm f/1.4 APO-Distagon


redisburning wrote:
poor fine detail reproduction.

good luck in your hunt for AF Zeiss glass. I would be OK with them making some in F mount as long as the same lens was available in manual only. I can think of only one word to summarize how I feel about autofocus: junk.


Ya, I wouldn't want them to go AF exclusively. If the Touit is of any indication, I would say the current AF Zeiss is not as good as they can be if they have gone with MF instead.



Oct 21, 2013 at 04:58 PM
Steve Spencer
Offline
• • • • •
Upload & Sell: On
p.19 #17 · p.19 #17 · Official: Zeiss Otus 55mm f/1.4 APO-Distagon


hiepphotog wrote:
I re-read the Bokeh write-up by Dr. Nasse, and he definitely didn't mention anything about it. However, it seems like every web site talking about how to interpret the MTF does mention about the convergence (good bokeh) and divergence (bad bokeh) effect on bokeh. Quoting directly from Nikon:

"Using an MTF chart to determine the Bokeh effect of the lens
Another factor that can be read from the MTF graph is the 'bokeh'. Bokeh is a term used to describe the quality of the out of focus areas a lens produces. The bokeh effect varies between lenses and the effect is influenced
...Show more

It is clear that a bunch of things can create bokeh that some people are not going to like. The shape of the aperture can be a problem. For example, I really like the bokeh of the Carl Zeiss Jena 135 f/3.5 except if you stop down and then the highlights from the aperture are pentagons. That bugged me when I had the lens, but other people it doesn't.

Similarly, under corrected spherical aberrations will produce very diffuse background bokeh at the expense of really busy foreground bokeh (over corrected creates the opposite or maybe I had that backwards but you get the point--over or under correcting SAs makes one side of the focal plane very diffuse at the expense of the other).

High CA can also be a bokeh killer. If it is in the focal plane, then I believe it would indicate a busy bokeh. If it is outside the focal plane, then you will get colour fringing in the bokeh. I am less sure what astigmatism and come do to bokeh, but they probably are not good either. So what does this mean for the MTFs and bokeh? Perhaps someone can chime in who knows more, but my understanding is that it is not simply the divergence in the sagittal and tangential lines in the MTF that can indicate CA in the focal plane, but it is a pattern when comparing wide open MTFs to stopped down MTFs in which the divergence between the sag and tang lines gets bigger as you stop down that suggests a potential problem with CA. One way that this pattern can emerge is that a lot of uncorrected SAs mask the divergence between sag and tang lines wide open, but when these SAs clear up as the lens is stopped down the divergence between the sag and tang lines becomes evident. Such a pattern, (at least as I understand it) can be caused by both high SAs and high focal plane CAs.

If this reasoning is correct, then when we consider the 55 Otus we know that it has very low in focal plane CA and since we know that the MTFs are unlikely to give us any other hints about its bokeh. Basically, the Otus passes the one problem the MTFs might show, but there are lots of other things that can mess up the bokeh and there are certainly some APO lenses out there with low focal plane CA that have bokeh that I don't like (e.g., the Leica M 75mm APO). So this doesn't mean that the Otus will have great bokeh. In the same way that knowing that a lens has a nice round aperture when stopping down doesn't mean that it will have nice bokeh.

In contrast, if we consider the new Nikon Noct the close sag and tang lines wide open in no way indicates it will have good bokeh. In fact, if the lens has high SAs (which it probably does) the MTFs wide open would hide any divergence between the sag and tang lines and in no way would indicate low focal plane CA or good bokeh. Even if the New Noct has low in focal plane CA, it still could have terrible bokeh--a lot of other things could make it bad.

So we will just have to see from examples how good the bokeh is for each of these lenses. I think certain things from specifications (like a small number of aperture blades) and from MTFs can indicate that the bokeh might be bad and perhaps even exactly how it might be bad, but I don't think there is any way to know it is going to be good until you see it used in a lot of situations.

The good news is that so far both lenses look like they produce some good bokeh (at least according to my taste) in at least some situations. I hope it is most situations, but I suspect like most lenses there will be some situations in which the bokeh won't look so good. Knowing exactly when each lenses works well (i.e., makes nice bokeh) and when it doesn't will take a fair bit of time to uncover.



Oct 21, 2013 at 05:56 PM
zhangyue
Offline
• • • •
Upload & Sell: On
p.19 #18 · p.19 #18 · Official: Zeiss Otus 55mm f/1.4 APO-Distagon


hiepphotog wrote:
I re-read the Bokeh write-up by Dr. Nasse, and he definitely didn't mention anything about it. However, it seems like every web site talking about how to interpret the MTF does mention about the convergence (good bokeh) and divergence (bad bokeh) effect on bokeh. Quoting directly from Nikon:

"Using an MTF chart to determine the Bokeh effect of the lens
Another factor that can be read from the MTF graph is the 'bokeh'. Bokeh is a term used to describe the quality of the out of focus areas a lens produces. The bokeh effect varies between lenses and the effect is influenced
...Show more

Since Nikon also mentioned number of aperture blade, I feel they might indicate the Bokeh quality as point light source roundness quality.(at least is one of them) As 'Divergence of the sagittal and tangential lines' will make the highlight wired shape (coma) instead of round.

I don't know if there is science behind this, as leica 50lux ASPH has very smooth bokeh but also have this divergence.

The same with 35lux R, 35cron R... but at the same time, both seems relative consistent at most center portion, (which has beautiful DOF transition), but get worse at corner....

On the other hand, 100 APO does have beautiful Bokeh as well as aligned sagittal and tangential line.

Many people feel Bokeh is subjective, but I feel actually, it is quite objective in most case if not all.....

So far, I don't see people complain 100APO or RX1 sonnar 35 Bokeh..... 50lux ASPH also a good contender...

We need see more samples of this 55Zeiss. it is introduced at a bad timing, not many high pixel camera around yet and too many stuff available to buy with so many new stuffs introduced to this 'standard' prime lens.



Oct 21, 2013 at 06:06 PM
hiepphotog
Online
• • •
Upload & Sell: On
p.19 #19 · p.19 #19 · Official: Zeiss Otus 55mm f/1.4 APO-Distagon


zhangyue wrote:
I don't know if there is science behind this, as leica 50lux ASPH has very smooth bokeh but also have this divergence.

The same with 35lux R, 35cron R... but at the same time, both seems relative consistent at most center portion, (which has beautiful DOF transition), but get worse at corner....

On the other hand, 100 APO does have beautiful Bokeh as well as aligned sagittal and tangential line.


That's the thing. I have seen such suggestion in many articles about reading MTF (Roger's MTF article suggested the same thing). Yet, none of them actually explained why. I, myself, had the same assumption after reading through so many of those. But now looking back, I'm not quite sure about the reason behind it. You brought up some interesting examples right there. I have to dig through my archive for shots with the ZA 24/2. That one has the most hideous divergence of all the lenses I have ever shot with. At the moment, I'm not convinced that astigmatism or mechanical vignette is the sole cause.



Oct 21, 2013 at 06:18 PM
alba63
Offline
• • •
Upload & Sell: Off
p.19 #20 · p.19 #20 · Official: Zeiss Otus 55mm f/1.4 APO-Distagon


hiepphotog wrote:
Ya, I wouldn't want them to go AF exclusively. If the Touit is of any indication, I would say the current AF Zeiss is not as good as they can be if they have gone with MF instead.


I have heard before that some say/ think that AF goes against best optical excellence. Could anybody give a very short general explanation what compromises optical quality in AF (without technical details)?

While I do like excellent glass (I have used for several years Zeiss ZF lenses), claims like "AF is junk" do not convince me. I have used several AF lenses and the better ones produce very nice detail. In any case I think that a 24 or 36MP camera with a fine AF lens (lets say the Digma 35/1,4 or a good 50mm lens) will produce finer detail than a 16MP camera with an MF lens.

Also, MF lenses limit the photographer to static or almost static scenes. The loss of sharpness by less than exact focus (on moving targets) makes you loose much more sharpness than the MF versus AF lens (if there is any).

Detail and sharpness is - and that is my personal opinion - one of the largely overestimated parameters of photography. Except for people who exhibit or sell to galleries where this is a quality that is expected or required. Like fine art landscape BW photography.


Bernie



Oct 21, 2013 at 06:36 PM
1       2       3              18      
19
       20              27       28       end




FM Forums | Alternative Gear & Lenses | Join Upload & Sell

1       2       3              18      
19
       20              27       28       end
    
 

You are not logged in. Login or Register

Username   Password    Retrive password