Home · Register · Join Upload & Sell

Moderated by: Fred Miranda
Username  

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

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

1       2       3              15      
16
       17              77       78       end
  

Archive 2015 · Zeiss Unveils the Loxia 21mm f/2.8

  
 
gyoung143
Offline
• • •
Upload & Sell: Off
p.16 #1 · p.16 #1 · Zeiss Unveils the Loxia 21mm f/2.8




robgo2 wrote:
The stop point on the Loxias is slightly beyond infinity by design, so it should not be described as "inaccurate." However, it is important to be aware of this feature and not assume that by turning the focusing ring all the way, it will be focused at infinity.

Rob


Never been necessary with 21 lenses in the past, why now?

Gerry



Nov 10, 2015 at 03:47 AM
Viramati
Offline
• • •
Upload & Sell: Off
p.16 #2 · p.16 #2 · Zeiss Unveils the Loxia 21mm f/2.8


The reason why I put 'infinity stop' as one of the reasons why I would prefer the Loxia is not that I would actually place the the lens at infinity but that being truly manual focus I know exactly where the lens is focusing. This is one of the biggest issue I have with these focus-by-wire lenses is that it is difficult to know at what distance the lens is actually focused and the lack of DOF scale. The Leica q is an exception which has a lens which I believe to be focus-by-wire but behaves like a true manual lens when in manual mode with a proper DOF and distance scale


Nov 10, 2015 at 04:01 AM
gyoung143
Offline
• • •
Upload & Sell: Off
p.16 #3 · p.16 #3 · Zeiss Unveils the Loxia 21mm f/2.8


Well I do use the hard infinity stop on my MF lenses, for distant landscape stuff, and its accurate on my 21 Elmarit and Voigtlander 21/4, and also on the 24 Sigma. In fact all my Leica and Voigtlander lenses up to 90mm at least have an accurate hard infinity stop. Teles are another matter especially the 180 Nikkor 2.8 ED.
Not having an accurate focussing scale IMHO defeats the object of having MF lenses, is it sloppy manufacture? Or is the recent suggestion that the Sony A7 etc don't have reliable register correct after all?

Gerry



Nov 10, 2015 at 05:51 AM
bjornthun
Offline
• • • •
Upload & Sell: Off
p.16 #4 · p.16 #4 · Zeiss Unveils the Loxia 21mm f/2.8


Tele lenses, particularly the longer focal lengths, need to focus past the infinity mark in order to account temperature changes, cold and heat. This applies to all brands.


Nov 10, 2015 at 07:58 AM
LightShow
Offline
• • • • •
Upload & Sell: Off
p.16 #5 · p.16 #5 · Zeiss Unveils the Loxia 21mm f/2.8


Some nice shots here:
http://matiash.com/2015/11/18/zeissloxia21f28/



Nov 22, 2015 at 12:42 PM
Fred Miranda
Offline
Admin
Upload & Sell: On
p.16 #6 · p.16 #6 · Zeiss Unveils the Loxia 21mm f/2.8


Comparison against Sigma 20/1.4
http://blog.mingthein.com/2015/11/23/sigma-20-art-vs-zeiss-21-loxia/



Nov 24, 2015 at 11:43 AM
akclimber
Offline
• • • •
Upload & Sell: Off
p.16 #7 · p.16 #7 · Zeiss Unveils the Loxia 21mm f/2.8


Fred Miranda wrote:
Comparison against Sigma 20/1.4
http://blog.mingthein.com/2015/11/23/sigma-20-art-vs-zeiss-21-loxia/


Ooops, I just started a thread about this. Feel free to delete it but thought since Ming's comparison also included the Sigma it deserved it's own, non Loxia specific mention.

Cheers!




Nov 24, 2015 at 11:50 AM
serhan_
Offline
• • •
Upload & Sell: Off
p.16 #8 · p.16 #8 · Zeiss Unveils the Loxia 21mm f/2.8


Zeiss Loxia 21mm PCMagazine Review:
http://www.pcmag.com/article2/0,2817,2495555,00.asp

I used Imatest to see just how sharp the Loxia is when paired with the 36-megapixel Alpha 7R. At f/2.8 it scores 3,098 lines per picture height on a center-weighted sharpness test, which is much better than the 1,800 lines we like to see in an image. Performance is strong through most of the frame, though the center is markedly crisper (3,622 lines) than the edges (2,366 lines).

Stopping down to f/4 boosts the average score to 3,282 lines, and improves the edges to about 2,500 lines. At f/5.6 the lens manages 3,495 lines (with edges that touch 3,000), and peak performance is achieved at f/8—3,601 lines. Beyond that diffraction robs a bit of quality; sharpness dips to 3,376 lines at f/11, 3080 lines at f/16, and 2,257 lines at f/22.

There is some darkening of the corners at f/2.8, about 2EV, which is noticeable. Stopping down to f/4 dropped that to a much more reasonable 1EV—slightly dimmer than the center, but not distracting. At narrower apertures, f/5.6 all the way through f/22, the corners displayed a 1.4EV drop when compared with the center of the frame.

The lens shows some distortion, though it's not drastic. You can expect about 1.2 percent, which you'll have to look for carefully to notice. Its pattern is mustache, which resembles barrel distortion at the center of the frame, but straightens out toward the edges.

In comparison Zeiss Batis 25mm:
http://www.pcmag.com/article2/0,2817,2492704,00.asp

I tested the Bastis 2/25 with the full-frame, 42-megapixel Alpha 7R II. The Imatest resolution test shows that the lens scores 2,715 lines per picture height on a center-weighted test at f/2. That's much better than the 1,800 lines we look for in a photo, and while the edges of the frame can't keep up with the center, they're still crisp at 2,147 lines.

Stopping down to f/2.8 bumps the overall score to 2,844 lines, with edges that approach 2,500 lines. At f/4 the lens improves to 3,197 lines, with even performance across the frame, and it just gets crisper at f/5.6 (3,421 lines) and f/8 (3,664 lines). Diffraction sets in at f/11, but the lens still shows 3,468 lines there. There's a steeper drop at f/16 (3,002 lines), but it's not until the minimum f/22 aperture (2,120 lines) that diffraction really takes away from resolution.

When shooting at f/2 the corners are noticeably dimmer than the center, showing -2EV illumination in comparison. From f/2.8 the fall-off is limited to -1EV at the corners, and from f/4 through f/22 the lens shows about -0.7EV at the corners.

The lens shows about 1.2 percent mustache distortion. The lens shows a bit of barrel distortion at the center of the frame, but that gives way to a pincushion type pattern toward the edges. Thankfully it's pretty minor.

They were not tested on same cameras, but it is close enough as well as the results... 21mm might have a little more center sharpness eg at f/2.8 and more edge fall of w/ vignetting...



Nov 28, 2015 at 02:58 PM
hiepphotog
Online
• • • •
Upload & Sell: On
p.16 #9 · p.16 #9 · Zeiss Unveils the Loxia 21mm f/2.8


Don't understand why they can't do it on the same body. Why went back to the A7R for a newer lens...


Nov 28, 2015 at 03:10 PM
Steve Spencer
Offline
• • • • • •
Upload & Sell: On
p.16 #10 · p.16 #10 · Zeiss Unveils the Loxia 21mm f/2.8


hiepphotog wrote:
Don't understand why they can't do it on the same body. Why went back to the A7R for a newer lens...


Doesn't really matter as they are testing the lens pretty close up, which doesn't make a lot of sense and MTF 50 isn't very useful even if tested at a reasonable distance. I could go on in problems with the test (e.g., only testing one copy), but I will stop there. I hope people can understand the weakness of these tests.



Nov 28, 2015 at 09:44 PM
uhoh7
Offline
• • • •
Upload & Sell: Off
p.16 #11 · p.16 #11 · Zeiss Unveils the Loxia 21mm f/2.8


gyoung143 wrote:
Well I do use the hard infinity stop on my MF lenses, for distant landscape stuff, and its accurate on my 21 Elmarit and Voigtlander 21/4, and also on the 24 Sigma. In fact all my Leica and Voigtlander lenses up to 90mm at least have an accurate hard infinity stop. Teles are another matter especially the 180 Nikkor 2.8 ED.
Not having an accurate focussing scale IMHO defeats the object of having MF lenses, is it sloppy manufacture? Or is the recent suggestion that the Sony A7 etc don't have reliable register correct after all?

Gerry


+1 to the need for accurate infinity stop. Every M lens I own seems to have this perfect, including the 135 APO. As yo say it is extremely useful for long landscapes and the more useful the wider you get.

Does the Loxia 21 really stop past infinity? How is the batis 25 on this?

Imatest certainly hints both are very strong, but as usual the long infinity shots with distant foregrounds are few and far between.

Finally, two years after the introduction of the A7 we have two good wide angle primes, though both are hard to get, and so close in FL it's ridiculous.

But I'm glad to see it for all my friends who use the camera



Nov 28, 2015 at 11:27 PM
Steve Spencer
Offline
• • • • • •
Upload & Sell: On
p.16 #12 · p.16 #12 · Zeiss Unveils the Loxia 21mm f/2.8


uhoh7 wrote:
+1 to the need for accurate infinity stop. Every M lens I own seems to have this perfect, including the 135 APO. As yo say it is extremely useful for long landscapes and the more useful the wider you get.

Does the Loxia 21 really stop past infinity? How is the batis 25 on this?

Imatest certainly hints both are very strong, but as usual the long infinity shots with distant foregrounds are few and far between.

Finally, two years after the introduction of the A7 we have two good wide angle primes, though both are hard to get, and so
...Show more

Much better than Imatest, we have the Zeiss MTF charts which are measured and suggest these lenses will be excellent at infinity. Then we have good samples with both showing that indeed they are. If you haven't seen Ming's recent tests of the Loxia you should and they included some nice infinity shots and several around here have posted great shots with the Batis. Give it another year and I think we will have an 18mm Batis and a 28mm Loxia and there will be less reason to complain about bunching of the focal lengths. Having what we have within 2 years of introduction is actually pretty impressive and if we have what I expect after 3 years, Sony and Zeiss will have made a great effort in getting lenses out. I know we always want stuff faster, but it takes time to make a line of lenses and make them well.



Nov 29, 2015 at 07:45 AM
GMPhotography
Offline
• • • • • • •
Upload & Sell: On
p.16 #13 · p.16 #13 · Zeiss Unveils the Loxia 21mm f/2.8


Im really torn on if I should get this or not. Im smack on either side of a 21 with a 15 VC and Batis 25 and there is no way in hell Im selling the Batis 25 or the 85 for that matter. Im also thinking of going back to the ZE 35mm 1.4 even though this damn Tammy 35 1.8 is nailing everything in sight. Damn lens is maybe a little to good. I just traded for my 55 for a 24-70 F4 which i can't stand that lens but I need it and just no way of getting around it for PR work.

This 21 looks killer too. Seriously folks you asked me a year ago what lenses to buy it was far easier than now. We actually have some great choices.

Bad news i am first on my dealers list so I better make up my mind soon here.



Nov 29, 2015 at 10:14 AM
hiepphotog
Online
• • • •
Upload & Sell: On
p.16 #14 · p.16 #14 · Zeiss Unveils the Loxia 21mm f/2.8


Steve Spencer wrote:
Doesn't really matter as they are testing the lens pretty close up, which doesn't make a lot of sense and MTF 50 isn't very useful even if tested at a reasonable distance. I could go on in problems with the test (e.g., only testing one copy), but I will stop there. I hope people can understand the weakness of these tests.


I understand the limitations of Imatest and DxO. However, I view them as another data point without completely discarding them. There is only one place out there that is doing optical bench with multiple copies and publishing it. I would love to see a second source to corroborate with what Roger is doing, since some of the older bench tests are kinda iffy.

As a wide-angle shooters, I understand the importance of infinity performance tests, but mid- to close-distance tests do have their merits since sometimes you do take those. Generally, lenses without floating elements would perform badly so it's nice to know that. For instance, this Loxia 21 does not have one, yet it can still produce an impressive Imatest result. That would say something.



Nov 29, 2015 at 10:27 AM
Steve Spencer
Offline
• • • • • •
Upload & Sell: On
p.16 #15 · p.16 #15 · Zeiss Unveils the Loxia 21mm f/2.8


hiepphotog wrote:
I understand the limitations of Imatest and DxO. However, I view them as another data point without completely discarding them. There is only one place out there that is doing optical bench with multiple copies and publishing it. I would love to see a second source to corroborate with what Roger is doing, since some of the older bench tests are kinda iffy.

As a wide-angle shooters, I understand the importance of infinity performance tests, but mid- to close-distance tests do have their merits since sometimes you do take those. Generally, lenses without floating elements would perform badly so it's nice
...Show more

Hiep,

I know you know how to take the Imatest stuff with the right qualifications and a grain of salt, but many people do not. Heck, when I look back it took me a long time and some good explanation from others to put these tests in their proper perspective. An MTF 50 score which is what they use is just one indication of sharpness and not even a very good one. In this particular case if we had Imatest scores from exactly the same camera, then I don't think it would help much. We already have Zeiss' MTF charts, which are done on the same machine and tell us so much more (tested at multiple points across the frame, at different lp/mm, we get both saggital and tangential scores, we get the precise pattern of the distortion across the frame, that knowing the MTF 50 scores of one copy of each lens at 2 or 3 points across the frame even if they are on the same camera really, IMO, won't add a thing to our knowledge. More samples will help us a lot, however, so I hope people provide them. Samples so far suggest that close performance is good with both lenses too. Bottom line is both lenses are excellent and, IMO, focal length and preference for AF vs. MF should be people's primary consideration in choosing between these lenses.



Nov 29, 2015 at 11:17 AM
philber
Offline
• • • • • •
Upload & Sell: Off
p.16 #16 · p.16 #16 · Zeiss Unveils the Loxia 21mm f/2.8


Nobody seems to mention the Voigtländer WA, with a 15mm already optimised for the Sony, and it and both 12mm and 10mm announced in native E-mount.
As to Loxia 21 and Batis 25 being "too close", I think they appeal to different shooters.I have used both, and they felt very different to me, and not because of the focal length.



Nov 29, 2015 at 12:14 PM
Jannik Peters
Offline
• • •
Upload & Sell: Off
p.16 #17 · p.16 #17 · Zeiss Unveils the Loxia 21mm f/2.8


philber wrote:
As to Loxia 21 and Batis 25 being "too close", I think they appeal to different shooters.I have used both, and they felt very different to me, and not because of the focal length.


That's interesting! I think the reason is that there are nearly no informations about the 10mm and 12mm around the web. The 15mm III is well known and I dont expect to see any difference with E-Mount.

I think about pairing one of these with the Loxia 21. I lean towards the 12mm but wait until we get more informations and eventually a few reviews.



Nov 29, 2015 at 12:18 PM
uhoh7
Offline
• • • •
Upload & Sell: Off
p.16 #18 · p.16 #18 · Zeiss Unveils the Loxia 21mm f/2.8


Jannik Peters wrote:
The 15mm III is well known and I dont expect to see any difference with E-Mount.


In fact, the CV 15 v3 is no better than the WATE, but at least we can afford it A good copy of the 1635 is not far off, still. Maybe I have it wrong, but my impression is the Loxia 21 is in another league.

There will need to be another wider lens of this quality, and the sooner the better. We are not getting any younger.



Nov 29, 2015 at 01:30 PM
pdmphoto
Offline
• • • •
Upload & Sell: Off
p.16 #19 · p.16 #19 · Zeiss Unveils the Loxia 21mm f/2.8


hiepphotog wrote:
Don't understand why they can't do it on the same body. Why went back to the A7R for a newer lens...


I've wondered if the Batis/Loxia were designed for the A7R or A7RII? My guess would be they were designed around the A7R, as the A7RII was still in development when the lenses were in their infancy.



Nov 29, 2015 at 02:38 PM
gyoung143
Offline
• • •
Upload & Sell: Off
p.16 #20 · p.16 #20 · Zeiss Unveils the Loxia 21mm f/2.8


Indeed we aren't getting any younger, I bought my M6ttl 12 yrs ago expecting it to 'see me out', and now look whats happened 😮

Gerry



Nov 29, 2015 at 03:02 PM
1       2       3              15      
16
       17              77       78       end




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

1       2       3              15      
16
       17              77       78       end
    
 

You are not logged in. Login or Register

Username       Or Reset password



This site is protected by reCAPTCHA and the Google Privacy Policy and Terms of Service apply.