Home · Register · Software · Software · Join Upload & Sell

 Moderated by: Fred Miranda

 FM Forums | Alternative Gear & Lenses | Join Upload & Sell 1       2       3       …       9       10       end

 CR: Zeiss 1.4/35 Milvus? [ Now in Zeiss.com ]
bushwacker
Offline
• • •
 p.1 #1 · p.1 #1 · CR: Zeiss 1.4/35 Milvus? [ Now in Zeiss.com ]

Canon Rumor's entry

http://www.canonrumors.com/zeiss-to-announce-milvus-35mm-f1-4-very-shortly/

Edited on Jun 21, 2017 at 10:04 AM · View previous versions

Jun 15, 2017 at 01:52 AM
bushwacker
Offline
• • •
 p.1 #2 · p.1 #2 · CR: Zeiss 1.4/35 Milvus? [ Now in Zeiss.com ]

I am wondering if it's the same optical formula as the classic.

Jun 15, 2017 at 01:56 AM
philber
Offline
• • • • •
 p.1 #3 · p.1 #3 · CR: Zeiss 1.4/35 Milvus? [ Now in Zeiss.com ]

I don't know the answer, but my guess is that it will not be the same lens simply ported over to Milvus.

Jun 15, 2017 at 04:11 AM
freaklikeme
Offline
• • • • •
 p.1 #4 · p.1 #4 · CR: Zeiss 1.4/35 Milvus? [ Now in Zeiss.com ]

Why mess with a good thing? It could be better corrected or higher contrast, but at the cost of that beautiful bokeh. In my opinion, it's the nicest SLR 35 for portraits in production today.

Jun 15, 2017 at 04:17 AM
philber
Offline
• • • • •
 p.1 #5 · p.1 #5 · CR: Zeiss 1.4/35 Milvus? [ Now in Zeiss.com ]

This lens was the first of the "newer" ZE/ZF line. Gorgeous bokeh, as you say, but at the cost of reduced contrast wide open, which could make it look less-than-totally-sharp. Plus, large size and weight for that product line. In Milvus garb, it would be huge and heavy, and costly too. My guess is that they will release a design that is more in line with their current thinking. But you could be right, in which case, I might even buy one, because I loved that lens.

Jun 15, 2017 at 04:21 AM
freaklikeme
Offline
• • • • •
 p.1 #6 · p.1 #6 · CR: Zeiss 1.4/35 Milvus? [ Now in Zeiss.com ]

The timing would make more sense if it is an update. If it is a port, why wait this long to produce it? I suppose there could be production/resource reasons. And there's an argument to be made that it needs to be better in objective measurements to be competitive with the fantastic performance of the 35L II or the value of the Sigma Art.

I think they'd be better off leaving it alone and creating an Otus 35 for the perfectionists.

Jun 15, 2017 at 04:38 AM
Steve Spencer
Online
• • • • • •
 p.1 #7 · p.1 #7 · CR: Zeiss 1.4/35 Milvus? [ Now in Zeiss.com ]

freaklikeme wrote:
Why mess with a good thing? It could be better corrected or higher contrast, but at the cost of that beautiful bokeh. In my opinion, it's the nicest SLR 35 for portraits in production today.

I totally agree. So few 35mm lenses have nice bokeh and this lens does. I hope they don't screw that up, and I have always found the lens to be sharp enough even if the CA does bother me at times. Maybe the delay was just because they weren't sure what to do with the lens and whether they wanted to make an Otus 35 f/1.4. I am also surprised that they still haven't made a Milvus 25mm or 28mm. I would have thought just porting the 25mm f/2 to Milvus, which is a fine and very modern lens, would have been easy. The 28mm f/2 is a very nice lens too, but it does have its issues (field curvature, busy bokeh at times). I have assumed that will be a redesign and they haven't come out with that as a way to promote sales of the Otus 28, It will be interesting to see what a Milvus 35 f/1.4 would look like. If it is a redesign then I think we can expect a 25 redesign next and eventually a 28 redesign. If it is the release of the classic in Milvus garb then I think we can expect at least the Milvus 25 to be the same formula as the classic and they haven't released it yet to protect sales of the Otus 28. In that case I still wouldn't be surprised by a redesigned 28 f/2, but it could well be a rerelease as well.

One interesting point of comparison is their Cine lenses. They just recently released their CP.3 lenses which look a lot like their Milvus line up, but in those lenses they simply used the optical formula for the classic 25mm and the 28mm. The 35mm is the same optical formula as the Milvus 35 f/2, so it tells us nothing about this lens. One can expect, however, based on the CP.2 line of lenses, that Zeiss will soon release a set of what it calls superspeed CP.3 lenses and I think a good bet is that it will be based on the Otus lenses. I would think they will want a 35mm superspeed CP.3 as well and it seems likely this lens will be a good candidate for that CP.3 superspeed lens. Perhaps this indicates that this lens will be closer in performance to the Otus lenses, but they just thought it would be more profitable as a Milvus. I suspect it would be hard to sell a $5,000 Otus when Canon, Nikon, and Sigma all have very good 35mm f/1.4 lenses that are much cheaper. An$1,800 Milvus 35mm f/1.4 that exceeds the performance of the native lenses in at least some ways may well sell much better. The Milvus 85 f/1.4 might be an excellent example of what they are going for. It isn't quite the Otus, but it is a pretty phenomenal lens and has a pretty reasonable price. It has fantastic bokeh too. A Milvus 35 f/1.4 that matches (or even comes pretty close to) the performance of the Milvus 85 f/1.4 would be pretty awesome.

Jun 15, 2017 at 10:28 AM
bushwacker
Offline
• • •
 p.1 #8 · p.1 #8 · CR: Zeiss 1.4/35 Milvus? [ Now in Zeiss.com ]

Steve Spencer wrote:
I totally agree. So few 35mm lenses have nice bokeh and this lens does. I hope they don't screw that up, and I have always found the lens to be sharp enough even if the CA does bother me at times. Maybe the delay was just because they weren't sure what to do with the lens and whether they wanted to make an Otus 35 f/1.4. I am also surprised that they still haven't made a Milvus 25mm or 28mm. I would have thought just porting the 25mm f/2 to Milvus, which is a fine and very modern lens,

I'm thinking this lens will be a refined classic lens without bugs, on milvus package. I read somewhere that the two milvus makros got better IQ ( sharper )than the classics... Eventhough zeiss reported the same MTF values.

Jun 15, 2017 at 12:34 PM
Steve Spencer
Online
• • • • • •
 p.1 #9 · p.1 #9 · CR: Zeiss 1.4/35 Milvus? [ Now in Zeiss.com ]

bushwacker wrote:
I'm thinking this lens will be a refined classic lens without bugs, on milvus package. I read somewhere that the two milvus makros got better IQ ( sharper )than the classics... Eventhough zeiss reported the same MTF values.

I don't think the macros got better, but lens rentals testing indicates they have a bit less copy variation. One of the advantages of the Milvus casings seems to be that Zeiss improved the manufacturing process to have tighter tolerances.

Jun 15, 2017 at 12:44 PM
jcolwell
Offline
• • • • • • •
 p.1 #10 · p.1 #10 · CR: Zeiss 1.4/35 Milvus? [ Now in Zeiss.com ]

bushwacker wrote:
I'm thinking this lens will be a refined classic lens without bugs, on milvus package. I read somewhere that the two milvus makros got better IQ ( sharper )than the classics... Eventhough zeiss reported the same MTF values.

Here's what Zeiss had to say about Classic vs. Milvus for the 100/2 macro, when I asked in October 2016. I posted this at that time, but I can't find a citation for it.

My question to Zeiss was about about some DXO lens tests that show the Milvus 100/2 performs noticeably better than the Classic 100/2.

\begin{quotation}
Dear James,

The Milvus 2/100 has exactly the same optical design like its predecessor, the Classic Makro-Planar T* 2/100. So their basic optical performance shown in our data sheets (e.g. MTF, vignetting, distorsion) is identical.

The improvements in some coating layers with the new Milvus in less ghosting, less flare and slightly enhanced contrast in critical (backlight) situations.

The reasons for different test results of those two lenses could be caused e.g. by inconsistent test conditions, small variations of the tested lenses and camera bodies, and mainly by vary small focus variations. Very small differences in focusing accuracy will result in very different results when it comes to talk about the contrast and "resolution" at certain image heights.

In most cases, test results are influenced by a combination of the parameters mentioned above.

MTF charts can only provide conclusions about a small fraction of the overall characteristics and performance of a lens. I´m sure you already know our articles from our Dr. Nasse (1951-2016) in Lenspire:

http://lenspire.zeiss.com/en/measuring-lenses-objectively-why-do-we-need-mtf-curves/

With best regards

Bertram Hönlinger
_________________

Bertram Hönlinger
Kundensupport / Customer Support
Camera Lens Division

Carl Zeiss AG
Carl-Zeiss-Straße 22
73447 Oberkochen, Germany

Telefon/Phone: +49 7364 20-6175
[email protected]
www.zeiss.de

\end{quotation}

Jun 15, 2017 at 01:04 PM

 Search in Used Dept.
bushwacker
Offline
• • •
 p.1 #11 · p.1 #11 · CR: Zeiss 1.4/35 Milvus? [ Now in Zeiss.com ]

jcolwell wrote:
Here's what Zeiss had to say about Classic vs. Milvus for the 100/2 macro, when I asked in October 2016. I posted this at that time, but I can't find a citation for it.

My question to Zeiss was about about some DXO lens tests that show the Milvus 100/2 performs noticeably better than the Classic 100/2.

begin{quotation}
Dear James,

The Milvus 2/100 has exactly the same optical design like its predecessor, the Classic Makro-Planar T* 2/100. So their basic optical performance shown in our data sheets (e.g. MTF, vignetting, distorsion) is identical.

The improvements in some coating layers with the new

that Dr. Nasse again keeps on popping up. Tnx.

Jun 15, 2017 at 04:00 PM
carlitos
Offline
• • •
 p.1 #12 · p.1 #12 · CR: Zeiss 1.4/35 Milvus? [ Now in Zeiss.com ]

I recently bought a used Milvus 50/1.4 Distagon. I like its detail rendering with slide film. It's Milvus packaging makes it a pleasure to use, and I'm sure it will be around and functional long after I've ceased to be. Heavy? You bet, with a Nikon F2, but I can hand hold at 1/60 if I lean against a wall. I'm interested in seeing what a Milvus 35/1.4 produces. Maybe it's a slightly wider Distagon 50.

Jun 15, 2017 at 04:51 PM
philber
Offline
• • • • •
 p.1 #13 · p.1 #13 · CR: Zeiss 1.4/35 Milvus? [ Now in Zeiss.com ]

Steve Spencer wrote:
I totally agree. So few 35mm lenses have nice bokeh and this lens does. I hope they don't screw that up, and I have always found the lens to be sharp enough even if the CA does bother me at times. Maybe the delay was just because they weren't sure what to do with the lens and whether they wanted to make an Otus 35 f/1.4. I am also surprised that they still haven't made a Milvus 25mm or 28mm. I would have thought just porting the 25mm f/2 to Milvus, which is a fine and very modern lens,

At the not inconsiderable risk of disagreeing with the ever-clever Steve Spencer, I disagree! Based on conversations with Zeiss, one of their key concerns is resolution. They want their lenses to be future-proof, and that means good for 80 Mp. My guess is that not all their present designs gets them there. In particular, I am not sure how the 35 f:1.4 would hold up, even with a 5DSR today. In my opinion, it has too many weaknesses showing up already at 22Mp to be "clean" at 80 Mp. Hence my guess that it will be redesigned. The 25 is more unexpected. It is a truly stellar lens, often underrated, even on a A7RII. Its weakness ia in the extreme corners only, which makes it a fabulous 28mm...
I guess we will know more soon... And in fact, I wish Steve to be right, because the 35 f:1.4 is a delightful lens n many ways.

Jun 15, 2017 at 04:56 PM
DannyBurkPhoto
Online
• • •
 p.1 #14 · p.1 #14 · CR: Zeiss 1.4/35 Milvus? [ Now in Zeiss.com ]

My guess is that it's a completely new design along the lines of other redesigned Milvi, e.g. 18, 50, and 85mm. The "classic" design, in terms of resolution, doesn't come close to the more recent designs on a high res camera. I'd be surprised if the new design isn't close to an Otus in many ways, just as the new 50 and 85 are.

That said, I love my 35/1.4 "classic" ZE and I'll certainly keep it. I use it with my A7RII (and, rarely, with my little-used 5DSR) and while resolution may not match some more recent designs, its rendering is so lovely that I couldn't part with it. IMO, rendering is just as important as resolution, while giving more weight in one direction vs another, depending on usage. For landscape, of course I want very high res. For wide-open flower portraits, I value the rendering a lot more than I value super high resolution...that's why I love my 50/1.4 Planar "classic" ZE so much for flower closeups...certainly not for its wide-open resolution!

Jun 15, 2017 at 05:19 PM
uscmatt99
Offline
• • •
 p.1 #15 · p.1 #15 · CR: Zeiss 1.4/35 Milvus? [ Now in Zeiss.com ]

I'd prefer an outright redesign along the lines of the Otus family. Highly corrected with smooth rendering, flat plane of focus. Size be damned. That way the ZE/ZF 35/1.4 will maintain it's unique status, and we have more options. Rehousing an old design seems half-assed to me, and I wouldn't expect that of Zeiss.

Jun 15, 2017 at 05:38 PM
Steve Spencer
Online
• • • • • •
 p.1 #16 · p.1 #16 · CR: Zeiss 1.4/35 Milvus? [ Now in Zeiss.com ]

philber wrote:
At the not inconsiderable risk of disagreeing with the ever-clever Steve Spencer, I disagree! Based on conversations with Zeiss, one of their key concerns is resolution. They want their lenses to be future-proof, and that means good for 80 Mp. My guess is that not all their present designs gets them there. In particular, I am not sure how the 35 f:1.4 would hold up, even with a 5DSR today. In my opinion, it has too many weaknesses showing up already at 22Mp to be "clean" at 80 Mp. Hence my guess that it will be redesigned. The 25 is

I think you are probably right, Phillipe. In my long winded, rambling, and somewhat inconsistent post I think I was mixing my hopes with what I makes sense to happen. I really like the ZE/ZF 35 f/1.4 despite its flaws, but they probably will redesign it to hold up to higher megapixel sensors. I probably won't like it as much, but it will probably be a better lens. I do like the Otus 28 a lot, however, so I might just like this new MIluvs 35 f/1.4 too. I just hope they don't sacrifice portrait performance to improve the more technical aspects of the lens.

Jun 15, 2017 at 05:58 PM
Steve Spencer
Online
• • • • • •
 p.1 #17 · p.1 #17 · CR: Zeiss 1.4/35 Milvus? [ Now in Zeiss.com ]

uscmatt99 wrote:
I'd prefer an outright redesign along the lines of the Otus family. Highly corrected with smooth rendering, flat plane of focus. Size be damned. That way the ZE/ZF 35/1.4 will maintain it's unique status, and we have more options. Rehousing an old design seems half-assed to me, and I wouldn't expect that of Zeiss.

Well they did rehouse the Milvus 21 f/2.8; 35 f/2; 50 f/2 Makro, 100 f/2 Makro, and 135 f/2 APO, so they have done it a lot. These later released lenses might be more likely to be new designs, however.

Jun 15, 2017 at 06:01 PM
philber
Offline
• • • • •
 p.1 #18 · p.1 #18 · CR: Zeiss 1.4/35 Milvus? [ Now in Zeiss.com ]

Looking at it another way, the ZE/ZF 28 wasn't the strongest in the lineup, nor the 35 f:2.0. And that was before challengers like the Sigma 35 f:1.4 ART. So Zeiss have quite a bit riding on getting their new 35 just right. If their Loxia 21 and 85, the Milvus 85 and 50 f:1.4 are anything to go by, I have high expectations!

Jun 15, 2017 at 06:11 PM
Lee Saxon
Offline
• • • •
 p.1 #19 · p.1 #19 · CR: Zeiss 1.4/35 Milvus? [ Now in Zeiss.com ]

For you guys who like the "classic" thing, I think the 35/2 Milvus was Zeiss's concession to you.

Between rehousing that lens early and taking so long to add a 35/1.4, I think it's very likely any 35/1.4 would be a trio of big new designs with the 50/1.4 and 85/1.4.

Yes, the 15 and 135 got rehoused later, but not this much later. And those were much newer lenses; Zeiss may have needed to stretch their lifespans for financial reasons - a concern the 35/1.4 "classic" wouldn't share.

After a new 35/1.4 completes the Milvus "high speed trio," I'm personally more interested in seeing them release some more "slower tier" Milvii to go along with the 35/2. Or, well, no, that'd be interesting, but if I could ask for anything it'd be a 150/2 or 180/2.

Jun 15, 2017 at 09:02 PM
Andre Y
Offline
• •
 p.1 #20 · p.1 #20 · CR: Zeiss 1.4/35 Milvus? [ Now in Zeiss.com ]

A couple of observations:

- the MFD markings on the leaked Milvus photos appear to be different than the specs for the classic 1.4/35: 20 inches/0.5m vs. 12 inches/0.3m. It could be that we just can't see the rest of the Milvus's distance scale though.

- not launching a rebodied 1.4/35 immediately could also be caused by limited production capabilities and perhaps a healthy stock of the classic model. They might have been waiting for a production line to open up as well as their back stock to deplete before switching over, so launching this late doesn't necessarily mean it's a new design.

I do hope it's a new design even though 35mm is not my thing, mainly to see where their thinking on wideangle designs is going. Personally, I'm more excited by the upcoming Nikon 28/1.4E.

Jun 15, 2017 at 11:56 PM
1
2       3              9       10       end

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

1
2       3              9       10       end

 You are not logged in. Login or Register