fredmiranda.com

Moderated by: Fred Miranda

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 … 13

15 … 57 58 end

Archive 2017 · Official: Zeiss Otus 55mm f/1.4 APO-Distagon

kururu
Offline
• •
Upload & Sell: Off

p.14 #1 · Official: Zeiss Otus 55mm f/1.4 APO-Distagon

zhangyue wrote:
I guess photography just doesn't exist before AF. I am with my kids in the park at the time of writing, I don't have a single case miss AF. Hi, you need understand phitogrpher's need are not universal.

As for sigma vs Zeiss, sorry, I don't know what difference you are talking about, BIF, DIR(dog in run)? I see as much of 'bottle' or 'wall', maybe more in those thread.

It is not about lens, but photographer.
+1

Tariq Gibran wrote:
AF vs MF doesn't really matter to me, I miss with both equally!

The truth is, to use either one skillfully requires experience and practice. I think a lot of folks start using AF, miss a lot of shots and generalize "AF sucks"! To use AF correctly is just as much a skill as using MF IMO. AF does not equal "auto pilot" or something.

Oct 12, 2013 at 02:46 PM

hiepphotog
Offline
• • • •
Upload & Sell: Off

p.14 #2 · Official: Zeiss Otus 55mm f/1.4 APO-Distagon

Light_pilgrim wrote:
Sorry, but what are you talking about? Shoot and crop.....I am really wondering how much time you spend travelling and photographing landscapes. I just can't see myself going on a trip to Iceland, New Zealand, Patagonia and take this lens with me. Heavy...will always limit me to 55 mm...

Not as much as I want, but I think I do travel a fair amount. The weight is certainly a limiting factor, but that would depend on an individual. For more than a day long hiking or mountaineering, this lens might not be the best candidate. But again, when and if you buy it, you should know that. You don't need too many lenses any way. It would often hinder the creativity, at least to me. I need max 3 primes to do the majority of what I do.

Light_pilgrim wrote:
What people use today is 24-70 or 24-105 for flexibility. Then they also use UWA like 21, 17 mm or 16-35 or 17-40 or 14-24 from Nikon. And....in many occasions 70-200 (I used it most of the time in Tuscany).

Sure zooms would provide the flexibility, but I'm very fond of prime quality. It's interesting to see that you understand WA is not exclusive for landscape, but you think 55 would not be the best FL for landscape. Depending on the subject and the vision, you can make it with a 55.

Light_pilgrim wrote:
No, you are super wrong. It is not a job of a photographer to think about a use for a lens. Photographer that is really doing a lot of real life photography knows what tools he needs and will always pick them.

Please enlighten me how you come to "know" which lens to use. You have to shoot with it, know it, and think about the subject matter to pick the lens you want. A focal length is not limited to just one application. It's your imagination is the limit here. Don't just tell me that a 55 wouldn't work with this type of photography, it might be just you who couldn't think of a way to do it. I'm mainly a prime shooter so I can always various subjects at a certain focal lengths. I rarely crop my image, but I rarely find myself thinking that I wouldn't be able to get a picture with the focal length I'm using. Of course you have to know your limitation. I don't bring my manual focus 55 to shoot skittish bugs, bird in fly or such. But landscape is a pretty wide subject, and the 55 has its role.

Light_pilgrim wrote:
I am 100% certain that what we will see from this lens soon is mostly people photographing cans, books, trees or something else to show how sharp the lens is and how great is the boken.

I can guarantee you those are not the only subjects I will shoot with my Otus.

To everyone, please excuse me to include some of my older shots to show that the 55 would work for any application.

Disclaimer: not much of a street shooter myself but there are plenty street shooter using this focal

http://farm9.staticflickr.com/8479/8257037878_6461562d9e_b.jpg

http://farm9.staticflickr.com/8052/8119241266_784493cde7_b.jpg

http://farm9.staticflickr.com/8326/8119227463_495285ef4b_b.jpg

http://farm9.staticflickr.com/8198/8276322490_0e1ae13053_b.jpg

http://farm6.staticflickr.com/5459/8891107768_cec6c1e0be_b.jpg

I can certainly get a bunch of wide shots with both my 55 and 85 as well. The point is I don't limit the application to certain focal length.

Oct 12, 2013 at 02:57 PM

carstenw
Offline
• • • • • •
Upload & Sell: Off

p.14 #3 · Official: Zeiss Otus 55mm f/1.4 APO-Distagon

Light_pilgrim wrote:
Where and how do you travel and also what do you photograph? What camera you have for these lens? I do not want to come across as not nice, but can you share your work? I just want to see what kind of photography you do when you travel.

Go look through the Zeiss thread, there is a bunch there. I use a D800. Most recently I was on Sylt in August, and before that was probably Denmark. What I enjoy the most is manual focus primes, and these three primes take up no more space or weight than the two pro zooms, so why would I bring the zooms? I take travel and family photos, although I don't post my family photos here.

Edited on Oct 12, 2013 at 03:09 PM · View previous versions

Oct 12, 2013 at 03:04 PM

carstenw
Offline
• • • • • •
Upload & Sell: Off

p.14 #4 · Official: Zeiss Otus 55mm f/1.4 APO-Distagon

Light_pilgrim wrote:
I have no problems with my eyes, but I just can't see whether eyes are in focus when I use Zeiss 35 with my 5D MKIII. I can perfectly photograph a sharp brick or wall....or book....I can do this without any problem.

Well, that's you.

Oct 12, 2013 at 03:06 PM

sebboh
Offline
• • • • • •
Upload & Sell: Off

p.14 #5 · Official: Zeiss Otus 55mm f/1.4 APO-Distagon

Tariq Gibran wrote:
AF vs MF doesn't really matter to me, I miss with both equally!

that's true, using AF right requires a fair learning curve and people that just use multipoint AF are destined have a lot of misses. once you learn how your particular AF works best for your type of shooting things improve drastically. i've still never found an AF system that can track a persons eye at f/1.4 as they move around a room half as well as i can with a good manual focus screen though. the one advantage i will concede to AF is that it can change focus targets much faster than i can � AF can focus a great deal faster than i can turn the focus ring (i actually find this to be a hindrence for shooting small irratic birds if i don't have an AF limiter). many people seem to think AF is better for tracking BIFs and sports, i've never had any trouble with either of those with manual focus, but i haven't spent much time shooting them with modern AF either, so i won't pass judgement yet.

Oct 12, 2013 at 03:28 PM

zhangyue
Offline
• • • • •
Upload & Sell: On

p.14 #6 · Official: Zeiss Otus 55mm f/1.4 APO-Distagon

I can tell for sure, once you manage MF well, most likely, you will do AF just fine. But not vise vasa. But if you are deep into MF, you will find lots of case you miss MF so much that you know they are compliment to each other, and trade off going on.
I couldn't help ask myself will I use AF or MF if I am professional photographer for portrait? Thank god, I don't need answer this question.

But with focal length at 35 or 50, manual focus by putting subject's eyes at any portion of frame without fussy about 65 AF point is priceless. The moment is short.

MF is great with subject within known distance to you, manual is very fast and reliable to track small movement at that case, which is more relevant to me anyway.

No question, MF require a lot brainwork and practice, but it is also rewarding process.

So, back to the topic, this lens indeed relevant for future 40+m pixels camera want sharpness WO. 50ASPH m is almost as good, but I feel its WO seems nevel reach its MTF claimed to me, at least at close distance. I will keep an eyes on this one.

Sorry for typo, I am on iPhone.

Oct 12, 2013 at 04:18 PM

redisburning
Offline
• • •
Upload & Sell: Off

p.14 #7 · Official: Zeiss Otus 55mm f/1.4 APO-Distagon

light_pilgrim do you actually have a point or are you just shitting up this thread to hear yourself speak?

funny, you pulled the same sort of stunt regarding the 135 APO Sonnar. may I suggest a hobby as an out to relieve your pent up frustration? perhaps photography.

Oct 12, 2013 at 05:43 PM

carstenw
Offline
• • • • • •
Upload & Sell: Off

p.14 #8 · Official: Zeiss Otus 55mm f/1.4 APO-Distagon

Oct 12, 2013 at 05:48 PM

Jorgen Udvang
Offline
• • • •
Upload & Sell: Off

p.14 #9 · Official: Zeiss Otus 55mm f/1.4 APO-Distagon

Light_pilgrim wrote:
Canon does everything possible to make people stop using Zeiss lenses - they even no longer allow to replace a focusing screen.

This is actually a valid point. I'm considering this lens, but I was very surprised when I realised that Nikon doesn't offer alternative focusing screens for the DSLR bodies. It is possible to change the screen, and there are third party alternatives available at least for the D700, but Nikon advises against it, which means no support from those guys if anything goes wrong. The fact that they offer 7 different focusing screens for the F6 makes this all the more weird. Still, there are 7 AIS lenses marked as "current" on the Nikon website, plus the T/S lenses.

With Canon, it's actually a bit better. The 6D has interchangeable screens, and there are still screens available from Canon for that camera. Don't know about the top models.

There is always the electronic focus assist at the bottom left corner of my viewfinders, but that is not where I want to look when I take photos. If I can dig up enough money, I consider buying this lens in F-mount, using it with the F6 and with an adapter on a 6D. However, this is making things more complicated, and the lens less attractive.

Oct 12, 2013 at 09:04 PM

Light_pilgrim
Offline
• •
Upload & Sell: Off

p.14 #10 · Official: Zeiss Otus 55mm f/1.4 APO-Distagon

redisburning wrote:
light_pilgrim do you actually have a point or are you just shitting up this thread to hear yourself speak?

funny, you pulled the same sort of stunt regarding the 135 APO Sonnar. may I suggest a hobby as an out to relieve your pent up frustration? perhaps photography.

Smart....why do you think I am rarely posting on forums? Indeed, much more happy to discuss photographs...than to argue with fanboys. Do not want to prove any point. But...when people try to tell me that this 55 mm lens is a geat landscape lens and that it is all about the photographer.....then I really feel sorry. But that is fine.....I really do not care what people use. I just expressed my opinion that having MF glass on AF body with no possibility to replace the focusing screen is useless for portrait and street photography. Also.....people say then can really see without problems whether eyes are in focus with 35 mm f 1.4........really? This is becoming silly.....

But I really do not care what people use. Leica is designed for MF, so it makes sense.

Oct 12, 2013 at 10:21 PM

redisburning
Offline
• • •
Upload & Sell: Off

p.14 #11 · Official: Zeiss Otus 55mm f/1.4 APO-Distagon

it sounds like you got a you problem but you think it's an us problem.

the last two threads you were reasonably active in have demonstrated a pattern of being a contrarian rather than a dissenter who actually contributes to the discussion. please watch as I give exactly zero f*** as you leave, especially as I ONLY use manual focus on AF bodies without having replaced the screen or even using focus confirm and have had no problem doing for years despite having the visual accuity of a 97 year old.

Oct 12, 2013 at 10:26 PM

Light_pilgrim
Offline
• •
Upload & Sell: Off

p.14 #12 · Official: Zeiss Otus 55mm f/1.4 APO-Distagon

redisburning wrote:
it sounds like you got a you problem but you think it's an us problem.

the last two threads you were reasonably active in have demonstrated a pattern of being a contrarian rather than a dissenter who actually contributes to the discussion. please watch as I give exactly zero f*** as you leave, especially as I ONLY use manual focus on AF bodies without having replaced the screen or even using focus confirm and have had no problem doing for years despite having the visual accuity of a 97 year old.

And what do you photograph?

Oct 12, 2013 at 10:41 PM

Light_pilgrim
Offline
• •
Upload & Sell: Off

p.14 #13 · Official: Zeiss Otus 55mm f/1.4 APO-Distagon


	http://www.dylikowski.com/wp-content/uploads/2012/08/LI7A4673-2.jpg

A girl was playing a street pantomime, was moving all the time. All shots I have taken were really sharp with eyes perfectly in focus. Did same with birds flying around people, etc. when something changes rapidly, when I photograph people....I rarely have something not in focus.

I was never able to do it with Zeiss and 5D MKIII. I see perfectly, but despite this....I cannot really tell whether eyes are in focus and so many great shots were oof.

But I am really fine with what other folks are doing. Just do not believe some things.....

Oct 12, 2013 at 10:52 PM

redisburning
Offline
• • •
Upload & Sell: Off

p.14 #14 · Official: Zeiss Otus 55mm f/1.4 APO-Distagon

dear lord you're seriously crying about a 35/1.4.

like I said you got a you problem. instead of soaking this thread in your tears maybe you should practice your MF or make some for sale threads for what remaining ZE stuff you have. for all your "not caring" you've spent an awful lot of time derailing this thread to be about how bad you are at focusing yourself rather than us talking about the 55 Otus.

edit: well Michael just told the **** out of you rofl. I mean, Im pretty much laughing AT you at this point because you suck at something and blame tools that other people manage to operate just fine. it's ridiculous, ergo I hope that the fact that I am ridiculing you comes across.

Edited on Oct 12, 2013 at 11:39 PM · View previous versions

Oct 12, 2013 at 11:14 PM

zhangyue
Offline
• • • • •
Upload & Sell: On

p.14 #15 · Official: Zeiss Otus 55mm f/1.4 APO-Distagon

Light_pilgrim wrote:
Smart....why do you think I am rarely posting on forums? Indeed, much more happy to discuss photographs...than to argue with fanboys. Do not want to prove any point. But...when people try to tell me that this 55 mm lens is a geat landscape lens and that it is all about the photographer.....then I really feel sorry. But that is fine.....I really do not care what people use. I just expressed my opinion that having MF glass on AF body with no possibility to replace the focusing screen is useless for portrait and street photography. Also.....people say then can really see...Show more →

There are several point to make first:

If you can't focus because of focus screen, then, buy them, there are tons of after market or OEM screen available.

If you are talking about focus 35mm/50mm at f1.4, then I suggest you train your eyes and skill and not try to put your formula to generalize universal case. please don't put it like stupid, or unbelievable etc etc..... for anyone buy this lens, it is simply not true and childish. I was having trouble with 35f1.4 zeiss, but recently, I have found I have no problem with leica R 35, 50, 80 lux, I don't think it is because of lens but operator improved and I dont give enough time for that lens to understand its performance.

If you are professional portrait, kids, family, wedding photographer need take thousands photos per day, by all means have your Canikon ready, I must admit manual focus require a lot more brain power, eyes, mind and hand collaborationetc, and IQ advantage is not obvious to regular customer. But for people care, why is so hard for you to understand the value of the lens? Saying this lens useless is simply WRONG and no back ground for that even for portrait.

To be honest, the lens is not for everyone, might not for you, but for some, this is the 135mm format lens people have been waiting for. (for me, If I buy it I only buy it for its 1.4 performance)

I dont know why you say f1.4 portrait or street is imposible :

I have a lot more like these, I know they all family type of photos,( in bottom of photographic level for SOME professional I guess) but I am sure your beautiful model won't move faster than my kids.....

Just want prove you wrong. I will remove the photo later to keep thread theme.

Edited on Oct 13, 2013 at 10:38 AM · View previous versions

Oct 12, 2013 at 11:30 PM

Light_pilgrim
Offline
• •
Upload & Sell: Off

p.14 #16 · Official: Zeiss Otus 55mm f/1.4 APO-Distagon

Folks, I apologize for moving the conversation into the wrong direction. Yes, I think I have to agree that different people have different needs and maybe this is why Zeiss keeps coming with lenses like this one.

Oct 12, 2013 at 11:36 PM

hiepphotog
Offline
• • • •
Upload & Sell: Off

p.14 #17 · Official: Zeiss Otus 55mm f/1.4 APO-Distagon

You know you're not going to convince anyone here about the uselessness of manual focus lens, right? You couldn't make it worked doesn't mean someone else can't. However, I'm glad that you know your limitation and find a way to get around it. This thread is about a manual lens at a focal length that you can't find any use for. I don't see how your further discussion would benefit the thread.

Oct 12, 2013 at 11:56 PM

Light_pilgrim
Offline
• •
Upload & Sell: Off

p.14 #18 · Official: Zeiss Otus 55mm f/1.4 APO-Distagon

zhangyue, great shots:-)

Oct 13, 2013 at 12:20 AM

Light_pilgrim
Offline
• •
Upload & Sell: Off

p.14 #19 · Official: Zeiss Otus 55mm f/1.4 APO-Distagon

P.S. My Zeiss 35 F/1.4 ZE is for sale at a super good price....in a perfect,mint condition:-) 1000 EUR:-)

Oct 13, 2013 at 12:21 AM

Steve Spencer
Offline
• • • • • • •
Upload & Sell: On

p.14 #20 · Official: Zeiss Otus 55mm f/1.4 APO-Distagon

Light_pilgrim wrote:
I was never able to do it with Zeiss and 5D MKIII. I see perfectly, but despite this....I cannot really tell whether eyes are in focus and so many great shots were oof.

But I am really fine with what other folks are doing. Just do not believe some things.....

It seems clear what your problem was. You were using a 5D MKIII and trying to use the stock screen for manual focus with f/1.4 lenses. You had the wrong camera to use MF through the viewfinder. If you had a 5D MKII you could have gotten a screen that would have aided your ability to MF. With that camera and some practice I believe you would have been fine. If you would have gotten a 1Ds MKIII or 1DX, or 6D or a 5D MK1, I think you would have been fine. You just happened to pick the only full frame camera from Canon in which you can't replace the screen to aid manual focus. My experience has been that with a full frame camera and the matte screen that aids manual focus and a good deal of practice MF can work well in a lot of situations.

True I haven't been able to shoot birds in flight with manual focus, but I actually haven't been able to with auto focus either. I can see the value of AF for tracking an athlete is sports photography, but if I understand the sport I can get some great shots with MF as well. Certainly for portraits I enjoy using manual focus. AF might allow me to change focus faster than I can turn the ring sometimes, but MF gives me a lot more compositional flexibility than AF (I can focus on any point in the frame and ignore AF points). So there are some tradeoffs, but really it isn't that hard to use MF for portraits and at times it can be a real benefit. So to me if I get this lens (which I doubt I will be able to for at least a number of years because of the price) one of my major uses would be portraits. Another major use would be nature photography. By this I don't mean landscapes strictly speaking, but rather capturing interesting light highlighting beautiful natural objects. Both of these types of shooting are well suited to a 55mm focal length. Currently I use my manual focus Minolta Rokkor 58mm f/1.2 for these types of shooting a lot. I very much like the lens, but it has some serious weaknesses including strong veiling flare until about f/2 and occasional disturbing bokeh in some mid-range shots at f/1.2 (I almost always like the bokeh of this lens, however, especially at f/2 or narrower). Here first are two examples of portraits and then three examples of nature type shots all shot with the 58mm Rokkor. I like these shots with the Rokkor, but it is these types of shots that makes me want a Zeiss Otus 55.

Oct 13, 2013 at 12:31 AM

1 2 3 … 13 14 15 … 57 58 end
FM Forums \| Leica & Alternative Gear \| Join Upload & Sell 1 2 3 … 13 14 15 … 57 58 end