Tariq Gibran wrote:
Of course, it has to be better than just not that bad. Maybe they will make it even more of a Distagon (I think Zeiss use the term "Distagon genes" or something) but still call it a Biogon.
I'm surprised they didn't call it a distagon instead of a biogon even though it will be somewhere in between the two.
sebboh wrote:
that just looks like an effect of lens design to me. a lot of the faster sony zeiss lenses and even some older contax lenses have corner bokeh that can look kinda like that. it's pretty dependent on subject and background distance though.
agree totally with sebboh here and that is part of what I don't like about the 55FE's bokeh, hopefully the Loxia 50 f/2 will do better in this regard, but if it is just a reworking of the ZM 50 f/2 planar I don't have a lot of hope for its bokeh.
Planar® with 6 lens elements in 4 groups
Focal length 50 mm
Aperture range f/2.0–f/22
Elements/groups 6/4
Focusing range m/ft 0.45–∞/1.48–∞
Field angle* (diag./horiz./vert.) 46.78°/39.38°/26.70°
Coverage** mm/inch 255.1 x 168.3/10.04 x 6.63
We don't have 100% confirmation yet that it will be called Biogon do we?
Just for reference, here is Ron Scheffler's test of 35's on the A7r. You can see that the ZM 35/2 Biogon does not fare well outside of the central area at infinity - even at F8.
This photo of the FE planar is really bugging me. It can't be that short, taking into account the shallowness of the mount. It's got to be at least 4-5 cm longer. What's going on here? Did Zeiss finally start to use aspherics to shorten the length?
Perhaps the lens hood attaches partway down the lens? Otherwise, there must be some optical redesign over the ZM version. Both to make it shorter and to revise performance.
While the ZM lens is very, very good, it is outclassed in terms of sheer detail resolution by many other 50s, as pointed out in one of Roger's 50mm shootout posts, and is something I also saw when I did my rangefinder lens shootout on the a7R.
I'm now even more curious to see the optical block design for it, because on paper it sounds a lot like the ZM. I also wonder at what price point this will arrive? The ZM has gone up a fair amount in the last 3-4 years and isn't much less than the FE55. I could maybe accept a ZM repackaged lens at ~$600. But if it really is this short and therefore with significant optical redesign... it just doesn't seem to fit Zeiss's philosophy of optical correction via 'relaxed' lens designs that tend to favour more and larger elements.
i think perhaps you guys are misjudging it's size. i think this lens has a larger diameter than the zm 50/2, i expect it's the same diameter as FE mount. this wider diameter makes it look proportionally shorter perhaps?
edwardkaraa wrote:
This photo of the FE planar is really bugging me. It can't be that short, taking into account the shallowness of the mount. It's got to be at least 4-5 cm longer. What's going on here? Did Zeiss finally start to use aspherics to shorten the length?
Looks to me about the same length as the Contax G45 Planar (which is really closer to 50mm) + e-mount adapter. Take that lens, add a nice focusing helicoid (and possibly a few aperture blades), and you have an absolute winner on the A7.
retrofocus wrote:
Is there any difference from the given specs seen above compared to the existing 50/2 M-version of this lens other than a different mount?
