I like Zeiss lenses when other people use them well. And I understand the allure of this lens. Given the apparent performance, nothing about it, from the size to price, seem out of line to me. But I haven't found a Zeiss yet that makes me want to use it over one of my other lenses. I was stoked about the 135 APO and ended up selling it off after a month. So I think I'll save myself a few grand and just enjoy the samples from others on this one.
This lens has very slow and smooth transition from focus pt. to OOF pt. similar more to 50MP than 50P. The architecture shot with the building next to the river and tower in back shows the lens rendering lots of detail from front to back in that scene at f5.6. This slower focus transition rendering style is in contrast with the faster focus falloff of the 50P which draws more attention to the subject focus point in the scene even when stopped down to f5.6. I like both styles so I have both 50P and 50MP. This lens has obviously better contrast and sharpness and less lens aberrations wide open compared to previous Zeiss Z* 50`s. The clean colors and performance in harsh midday light look great like more recent Zeiss Z*lenses. I am glad Zeiss are coming out with this higher performance line and would love this lens on my D800E but the price is out of my budget right now.
Latin is my favourite language and owl (otus) is a symphatetic bird,but lens with price approaching small car is something that does't make sense for me.
Let it be opticaly flawless at f1.4,but I don't think it'll outperform by that much all my 50 Z and C/Y lenses.
No, with rendering more like the 50MP or Leica lenses, than the older Planar and Distagon designs, I would be surprised if it would render images with much pop, apart from DoF separation. I would be happy to be wrong though.
Exactly, I have always found that the Zeiss 3D pop is achieved by a special mix of several design imperfections, in which field curvature plays a prime role. It's almost like good 3D pop and sharp corners never coexist.
carstenw wrote:
No, with rendering more like the 50MP or Leica lenses, than the older Planar and Distagon designs, I would be surprised if it would render images with much pop, apart from DoF separation. I would be happy to be wrong though.
I'd rather see Zeiss bring a good AF solution on full frame than this ultimultiapo-clumsyclunky-tanklike lens designs. The best 50mm lenses (any brand) have never been lenses to complain about. This Otus is predictably going to be marginally better than the best 50-ies so far. It will have it's applications for ultra high res photography, forensic and research etc. but for most other types of photography this is not gonna bring anything additional. Aux contraire, a clinical / sterile look of images will most probably be the result. It's price prohibits wide spread presence in photographers bags. The Otus will prove to be for Zeiss just what Bugatti or the Phaeton is to Volkswagen, a loss bringing project accepted for brand image purposes. Pity though that for brand image purposes Zeiss didn't need to convince me they can design and produce a perfect 55 mm lens.
^Something tells me forensic photographers won't be taking images at f/1.4. They'd be stopping down and using a flash. IMO this is a lens for artistic purposes.
Forensic photography is not just for flash, you would be surprised how many shots for forensic applications are done by existing light. I am not saying this is a lens specificially for forensic photography or research purposes , but I believe those are areas where a highly corrected lens like this Otus is most appreciated and where budget for those reasons isn't the limit.
I was excited about this lens, but once realized I haven't take any landscape shot at f1.4, my enthusiasm fade away. I'd love to have it, but it is pricy.
I wish they can sacrifice a little at f1.4 corner performance bring us a planar size, priceX2 updated version of P50. Really, I don't know what this lens will bring us anything extra after f5.6 compare P50 in real world image.
I remember both Babu and Seekuh choose stay with 50lux after pixel PP with 50AA. The difference is academic even with 50lux mid frame dip.
zhangyue wrote:
I was excited about this lens, but once realized I haven't take any landscape shot at f1.4
But now you can.... I can see this for wide field astrophotography or aerial photography. As good as the ISO performance is nowadays, using low ISO or shorter exposure time would still be preferable. Certainly, it's hardly a possibility before (that's part of the reason why the Noct Nikon is so highly sought after), but now it is.
hiepphotog wrote:
But now you can.... I can see this for wide field astrophotography or aerial photography. As good as the ISO performance is nowadays, using low ISO or shorter exposure time would still be preferable. Certainly, it's hardly a possibility before (that's part of the reason why the Noct Nikon is so highly sought after), but now it is.
This just confirm the lens is more like a statement than real world consideration that they desperately need a updated P50 at reasonable price for its poor WO performance. The p50 mp50 and nikon 1.2ais, 1.4g and many more will be fine at 50M body after f5.6....
snapsy wrote:
Haha, I did once. Here is a cityscape at f/1.4 using the Canon 50mm f/1.4 and 5DM2.
Lens test? If not, With tripod, you don't need to do that, do you?
zhangyue wrote:
This just confirm the lens is more like a statement than real world consideration that they desperately need a updated P50 at reasonable price for its poor WO performance. The p50 mp50 and nikon 1.2ais, 1.4g and many more will be fine at 50M body after f5.6....
That's just it. I know my 50 would not be up to the task for a corner-to-corner performance at WO, so I'm forced to stop down to 5.6 or 8. This certainly limits the type of shooting I can do. Now with this WO performance, I can do shot that no one is able to do it before. It's just like that candle lit shot using the 0.7 Zeiss (or is it 0.75). I don't think there is no practical application for a sharp WO shot at this focal length. I think the problem is more about the price tag to get you there. Sure if you can wait a few years down the line, I don't doubt that others will come up with a decent WO performance 50/1.4. But the here and now, this lens is it.
. I'd love to have it, but it is pricy. 
. I can see this for wide field astrophotography or aerial photography. As good as the ISO performance is nowadays, using low ISO or shorter exposure time would still be preferable. Certainly, it's hardly a possibility before (that's part of the reason why the Noct Nikon is so highly sought after), but now it is.