Elijah wrote:
Thanks Corey. I've been lusting over the 200 for a while as well but I don't think I will be getting one. My 70-200 is sufficient enough, only because I need it for weddings. As a hobby, I'd own a 20mm, 58mm and 200mm (something like Joseph had)
Ya, that combo would be damn near perfect. I agree though, the 70-200mm for events/weddings is irreplaceable. For family portrait sessions where you have more time, I could see getting by with the 200mm F2 but it is still really nice to have the zoom for kids on the go.
I would love to see the Otus perform here with fast moving children without AF! !
Sharpness is nothing if you cannot focus on your subject...
But when a lens like the 58 produces so much soft crap does it matter? My Otus needs to be mis-focussed several DOF to produce most of the examples here.
There are however a few very good samples of the 58 lens here. Quality control seems to be it's biggest issue. Most appear to be garbage.
Vancouver47 wrote:
But when a lens like the 58 produces so much soft crap does it matter? My Otus needs to be mis-focussed several DOF to produce most of the examples here.
There are however a few very good samples of the 58 lens here. Quality control seems to be it's biggest issue. Most appear to be garbage.
Yes...most appear to be garbage...
Uh, WHAT?
I've learned that the MFD of this lens isn't how to judge it's sharpness.
Vancouver47 wrote:
But when a lens like the 58 produces so much soft crap does it matter? My Otus needs to be mis-focussed several DOF to produce most of the examples here.
There are however a few very good samples of the 58 lens here. Quality control seems to be it's biggest issue. Most appear to be garbage.
Looks like you've been smoking a bit too much BC bud there mate. . My 300mm F2.8 VRII is way bigger than your otus so there! Now we are speaking the same language.
Elijah wrote:
Thanks Corey. I've been lusting over the 200 for a while as well but I don't think I will be getting one. My 70-200 is sufficient enough, only because I need it for weddings. As a hobby, I'd own a 20mm, 58mm and 200mm (something like Joseph had)
My last engagement/maternity session I did with just the 58 and 200, but I had to really force myself to use the 200, it is just such a heavy beast. For weddings I never even use my 70-200, farthest I go is 85. I'd have to be shooting with an assistant to justify bringing the 200mm to a wedding, its takes up so much space and is quite the commitment to use, but thats just my style, others may certainly be different
Vancouver47 wrote:
Perhaps, but an unfortunate side effect of the truth.
I own the original Noct (17xxxx series, 7-blades), & considered getting the new 58G, so I'm curious on what makes you claim that.
Wide open my Noct seems plenty sharp to me when carefully focussed. Not ZF50MP sharp, but sharp nonetheless.
DOF is razor-thin, pronounced field-curvature comes into play, off-centre objects W.O. not sharp, but the centre.....here judge for yourself.
Full image, followed by 100% crop from focus point.
Vancouver47 wrote:
But when a lens like the 58 produces so much soft crap does it matter? My Otus needs to be mis-focussed several DOF to produce most of the examples here.
There are however a few very good samples of the 58 lens here. Quality control seems to be it's biggest issue. Most appear to be garbage.
The 58mm is not the sharpest tool in the shed, thanks for making a redundant comment. However this lens is special in regards to it's bokeh. You can miss focus your Otus all day and NEVER replicate the bokeh this lens produces. If you don't like the way this lens renders that's fine, but it's not an issue of quality control.
Vancouver47 wrote:
But when a lens like the 58 produces so much soft crap does it matter? My Otus needs to be mis-focussed several DOF to produce most of the examples here.
There are however a few very good samples of the 58 lens here. Quality control seems to be it's biggest issue. Most appear to be garbage.
What's wrong with you? You've never owned a 58G and don't judge these resized images we post on here. Clients would never be able to tell a difference between your overpriced Otus and a regular Nikon 50mm.
Vancouver47 wrote:
But when a lens like the 58 produces so much soft crap does it matter? My Otus needs to be mis-focussed several DOF to produce most of the examples here.
There are however a few very good samples of the 58 lens here. Quality control seems to be it's biggest issue. Most appear to be garbage.
I don't own the 58 or the Otus, but from looking at this thread and the Otus thread I prefer the 58. The images in this thread for me, show a lens that has character and just looks special when used for what is was created for. Looking at the Otus thread, most of the images just look meh to me. Don't get me wrong, the lens is technically perfect, but the results don't jump off of the screen at me like the 58 does.
I would take the 58 with all of its flaws over the optically perfect Otus even if the Otus was the cheaper lens.
Jason_Brook wrote:
I'd kill myself doing a wedding with a 70-200, let alone a 200.
I was really thinking about trading my 70-200VRII for an 85mm f/1.4G... But man, that 70-200 is so versatile for events. I could get away with weddings, but not events.
Elijah wrote:
I was really thinking about trading my 70-200VRII for an 85mm f/1.4G... But man, that 70-200 is so versatile for events. I could get away with weddings, but not events.
I loved using my 70-200mm for weddings. You can capture emotions from the side so well with that lens. To be honest, I couldn't imagine shooting a wedding without it.
Hardcore wrote:
I loved using my 70-200mm for weddings. You can capture emotions from the side so well with that lens. To be honest, I couldn't imagine shooting a wedding without it.
That's the beauty of anything over 12mp, shoot with an 85mm and crop in. I know I only have one wedding under my belt (booked another ) but I never once needed more than 85mm.
Jason_Brook wrote:
That's the beauty of anything over 12mp, shoot with an 85mm and crop in. I know I only have one wedding under my belt (booked another ) but I never once needed more than 85mm.
I crop but for macro purposes. when I use the sigma 35 and 50 ART lenses that have nice low MFDs i get close and then crop with the D800e 36 MP. it snot macro but its still really nice and tight.
twistacatz wrote:
The 58mm is not the sharpest tool in the shed, thanks for making a redundant comment. However this lens is special in regards to it's bokeh. You can miss focus your Otus all day and NEVER replicate the bokeh this lens produces. If you don't like the way this lens renders that's fine, but it's not an issue of quality control.
But with the Otus one can tell where the bokeh begins and ends. Most 58's are so soft wide open, one could argue bokeh extends through its DOF....
Elijah wrote:
What's wrong with you? You've never owned a 58G and don't judge these resized images we post on here. Clients would never be able to tell a difference between your overpriced Otus and a regular Nikon 50mm.
Vancouver47 wrote:
Perhaps, but an unfortunate side effect of the truth.
If the Zeiss Otus Master Race deems it so, then it must be true! We all have been enlightened. lol
Have you used the 58mm f/1.4 lens or do you just enjoy proselytizing the righteousness and purity of the Otus? I'm curious why you'd venture here to this thread other than to troll.
! 
) but I never once needed more than 85mm.