I am very surprised that the 35 would be a Biogon, and delighted that the 50 would be a Planar. Though the look and size looks suspicious, as does the simplicitiy of the glass. So, SR6 notwithstanding, I am doubtful of this information.
But if the simplicity and Planar design are confirmed, I am putting an order for one, sight unseen. Can hardly wait!
Steve Spencer wrote:
Adam, I think the 55FE is a good lens, but I think Zeiss could improve on it in two important ways. First, I am not overly fond of the bokeh from the 55FE and think a new lens could have a lot better bokeh. The 50 f/1.5 ZM, for example, does, IMO, have quite a bit better bokeh, so maybe that was part of what you meant as well. Second, it is nothing special in terms of correcting for CA. If Zeiss added some APD glass (as their newer ZF/ZE lenses had and the 55FE does not), then I think we could see a noticeable reduction in CA. Maybe not a full APO lens, but they could do much better than the 55FE. So for me, I am hoping that the new 50 Loxia has a lot nice bokeh and a lot better CA control and then even if it is a bit more expensive (as I expect), then I think about getting it eventually.
If either of these things are missing, however, then I probably won't be that interested. If it is a true APO, and the bokeh is only ok, I might get it eventually but I probably won't, and if it doesn't have improved CA control then the bokeh would have to be better than my Rokkor 58 f/1.2 (a pretty tall order) for me to consider it....Show more →
It's interesting that one of the Gold Standards of 50mm performance, the 50 Lux asph on the M9, does not create creamy bokeh, yet has a highly distinct character.
I see no signature of the 55FE at all. It's a real real sharp 50ish lens. I don't doubt you on the bokeh, though I have not been distracted by harshness from the lens in that respect.
Like the NG, I'm a fan of the FE35. Edward hates that one, I know, but I find it's making very nice images when I browse around.
I have a feeling zeiss may be chicken--or cautious-- on the wides, as many note the sensor stack design at 1.6mm is off the chart stupidity--I could not believe they would be this silly a year ago so I poo pooed the whole theory--which has turned out to be correct. Anyway, I hope they can get around it.
Sony just seems distracted. One year later and no great wides, seriously?
I think the forthcoming Sony wide zoom will likely be quite good, I'm basing that off of the 10-18mm zoom for APS-C they made. If the 16-35 is that good, and Zeiss doesn't really satisfy with wides with their Loxia, I'll definitely be considering it. I'm sure they'll have at least one lens wider than 35 though.
Taylor Sherman wrote:
I think the forthcoming Sony wide zoom will likely be quite good, I'm basing that off of the 10-18mm zoom for APS-C they made. If the 16-35 is that good, and Zeiss doesn't really satisfy with wides with their Loxia, I'll definitely be considering it. I'm sure they'll have at least one lens wider than 35 though.
Depends a bit on the size. The 10-18 which I owned, isn't exactly a small zoom, and a FF version likely will be larger still.
I think for a lot of uses whom already have 24, 28 and 35mm options they like, a nice, high quality, and yet as compact as possible 18 or 21mm would be great.
When I first got the A7 the first lens I wanted to get was the ZM18, which would of been an ideal size and wide focal length for me. Sadly results weren't that great
philber wrote:
I am very surprised that the 35 would be a Biogon, and delighted that the 50 would be a Planar. Though the look and size looks suspicious, as does the simplicitiy of the glass. So, SR6 notwithstanding, I am doubtful of this information.
But if the simplicity and Planar design are confirmed, I am putting an order for one, sight unseen. Can hardly wait!
SR6 applies only the authenticity of the image, the other information might be slightly inaccurate. It's hard to say for sure about the size without knowing how much of the front is lens hood, it could be the hood overlaps the end of the barrel slightly.
Tariq Gibran wrote:
I simply have yet to run into any issue with the A7r and flare/ reflections when using adapters with proper baffles. I can't speak about the native lenses (except for the tests which I have seen comparing the A7 to A7r in this respect) but then we don't know how those lens designs would perform on the D800.
There was a comparison here on FM at some point, where you could see that the A7r suffers less, but still suffers noticeably. I suppose your style doesn't let you encounter this. I wish the same was true for me, since I otherwise have no issue with the IQ of the A7.
If the Loxia 35mm f2 Biogon is as wide as the FE35 (61,5mm) it seems from this image to have a length of something like 55mm or slightly less. The Zeiss Biogon T* 35mm f/2 has a length of 43mm from the flange, so with a 9mm E-mount adapter the size is very similar.
Matt Grum wrote:
SR6 applies only the authenticity of the image, the other information might be slightly inaccurate. It's hard to say for sure about the size without knowing how much of the front is lens hood, it could be the hood overlaps the end of the barrel slightly.
I'm a bit surprised (not in a good way) that SAR referred to the initial set of 5 Loxia lenses to be rolled out over 6 to 12 months, rather than Zeiss giving us 5 up front as they seemed to indicate a year ago. Hopefully by Photokina we at least get full specs of all 5 so we know if there are any we'd be interested in waiting for.
carstenw wrote:
Hmm, I really hope that Zeiss has done something better with the 35/2 than just "porting" the ZM lens, which I am not terribly fond of.
The fact they've come out with two lenses with an almost 100% overlap with the currently available native prime lens selection, whilst the other offerings are likely "in development" doesn't bode very well for these being new designs
carstenw wrote:
There was a comparison here on FM at some point, where you could see that the A7r suffers less, but still suffers noticeably. I suppose your style doesn't let you encounter this. I wish the same was true for me, since I otherwise have no issue with the IQ of the A7.
I guess my point is - how do we know the specific lens in use is not causing some of the issue itself? To do that and 100% know the problem is with the sensor/ sensor cover would require using the same lens on a different FF sensor system other than either A7 and see no issue I would think. So maybe A7r vs D800 with same lens (so obviouly not a native FE lens) using one of the adapters that have baffles front and back. Perhasp that test has been done?
Yes, I believe it was ZF or ZE lenses used. If I get a chance in the next couple of days I will look for a link.
The current A7* situation is a bit frustrating for me. The A7r has the shutter issue, the A7 has the reflections issue and a bit less DR, and the A7s has too little resolution for my taste, and all of them have iffy ergonomics. When does the truly great A-camera come? There is so much to like on these cameras, that if Sony could just get their sh*t together and ducks all in a row for a single camera, I would likely buy it, and feel much more secure in expanding my FE lens lineup.
carstenw wrote:
Yes, I believe it was ZF or ZE lenses used. If I get a chance in the next couple of days I will look for a link.
The current A7* situation is a bit frustrating for me. The A7r has the shutter issue, the A7 has the reflections issue and a bit less DR, and the A7s has too little resolution for my taste, and all of them have iffy ergonomics. When does the truly great A-camera come? There is so much to like on these cameras, that if Sony could just get their sh*t together and ducks all in a row for a single camera, I would likely buy it, and feel much more secure in expanding my FE lens lineup....Show more →
Heh, funny that I came to same conclusion even without actually buying one of these. Tho I thought a lot about A7s. Little bit less resolution is survivable..
Yea it needs some "pro A7" camera. Or just fixed A7R MK2.
Re-using old design isnt suprise, its expensive to design new stuff..
The lens availability seems to be a disaster to me. Still no 24mm one whole year later. what are they playing at? Zeiss seems no better, duplicating the two focal lengths that are already available, and failing on the wide front, or even on the short tele demand.
Is it really because of the idiot decision to have a thick (1.6mm) sensor stack that they are unable to make a decent, small wide, and therefore won't? I've resisted an A7/r so far because of all the body problems, and now this ongoing dearth of decent small lenses makes it seem foolish to move away from Canon, especially in the light of Canon's rumoured 24mm pancake.
Aug 29, 2014 at 07:45 AM
Steve Spencer Offline • • • • • • • Upload & Sell: On
ecarlino wrote:
I'm a bit surprised (not in a good way) that SAR referred to the initial set of 5 Loxia lenses to be rolled out over 6 to 12 months, rather than Zeiss giving us 5 up front as they seemed to indicate a year ago. Hopefully by Photokina we at least get full specs of all 5 so we know if there are any we'd be interested in waiting for.
Five in a year was always very ambitious, but what I worried about then I worry about even more now. That the new lenses will just be slight modifications of their ZM line. Unfortunately these first two lenses look exactly like that. IMO, that isn't so bad for the 50 f/2 which was at least decent on the Sony cameras, but I have worries about the 35. The ZM 35 f/2 was quite weak at infinity on the Sony cameras. I hope they were able to rework so that it has at least decent performance. I had hopes that they would really re-engineer these with floating elements and APD glass, but so far that doesn't look like it going to happen. I'm not going to panic too much, however. The first lenses offered in the ZF line were the 50 and 85 planers, which were not major revisions from the C/Y mount lenses, and then later lenses were new designs/bigger modifications. I hope the same is true with the loxia lenses. I would like to see some newer designs and some bigger modifications.
carstenw wrote:
When does the truly great A-camera come? There is so much to like on these cameras, that if Sony could just get their sh*t together and ducks all in a row for a single camera, I would likely buy it, and feel much more secure in expanding my FE lens lineup.
Steve Spencer wrote:
Five in a year was always very ambitious, but what I worried about then I worry about even more now. That the new lenses will just be slight modifications of their ZM line. Unfortunately these first two lenses look exactly like that. IMO, that isn't so bad for the 50 f/2 which was at least decent on the Sony cameras, but I have worries about the 35. The ZM 35 f/2 was quite weak at infinity on the Sony cameras. I hope they were able to rework so that it has at least decent performance. I had hopes that they would really re-engineer these with floating elements and APD glass, but so far that doesn't look like it going to happen. I'm not going to panic too much, however. The first lenses offered in the ZF line were the 50 and 85 planers, which were not major revisions from the C/Y mount lenses, and then later lenses were new designs/bigger modifications. I hope the same is true with the loxia lenses. I would like to see some newer designs and some bigger modifications....Show more →
Steve, I think we have to wait a few more days to get the full story (or most of it) as to just what was done with these lenses as far as optical/ design changes. If the 35/2 delivers incredible performance, I think it would be quite a good sign for the FF E-Mount system that Zeiss was able to acheive that in what looks like a fairly compact size. On the other hand, if the performance is not there (noticebly better than the current sony solutions, particularly with the 35), then start worrying!
Sony needs to correct the lens problems fast. They are 4.5 years into the APS-C line for E mount and they still have no good wide primes, nothing faster than f1.8, some good but not great zooms, and a handful of good lenses. If third parties like Zeiss with the Touit line, Sigma with the DN line and Rokinon with the 8 fisheye and 12/2 didn't exist, there wouldn't be that many solid lenses in the Emount system for APS-C. Fuji, in half the time, already has a significantly better enthusiast lineup, and unfortunately, Sony is likely to repeat the same mistakes again with the FE lineup.
The two standard zooms are decent but not great, the two primes are good but not very fast and the 70-200 is pretty good but not as good as the two big boys 70-200/4. I hope Zeiss did modify the ZM designs to make them really sing on Sony, because the system needs it. I'm hoping the others in the Loxia line are a 21, 24 and 85.
