p.29 #1 · Zeiss "Batis" AF lens line to be released for FF E-mount
Thanks for bringing the ugly defringing to my attention. In my defense, I cobbled this report together in about an hour and had mistakenly copied some settings that I had used to rectify a bad case of CA on the 28mm. I corrected and will repost the photos momentarily.
What you are seeing in the 85mm shots is the native CA, not corrections there. The CA on the portrait cleaned up easily though. Not so much on the chain shot.
p.29 #2 · Zeiss "Batis" AF lens line to be released for FF E-mount
I was would not bother Chad , we get it. Thanks for the updates on these lenses. Quick question did you try manual focus and how did it feel in hand. Buttery or lossy goosey.
I'm selling pretty much everything and getting both of these and the 35 1.4. I'll figure out a super wide until something is announced. 24,35 and 85 are my main go to lenses . I want native and I want the best I can get my hands on.
p.29 #3 · Zeiss "Batis" AF lens line to be released for FF E-mount
GMPhotography wrote:
I was would not bother Chad , we get it. Thanks for the updates on these lenses. Quick question did you try manual focus and how did it feel in hand. Buttery or lossy goosey.
I'm selling pretty much everything and getting both of these and the 35 1.4. I'll figure out a super wide until something is announced. 24,35 and 85 are my main go to lenses . I want native and I want the best I can get my hands on.
Thanks Guy. Yeah the pixel peepers caught me! All corrected now though.
Unfortunately, my time was so limited with the lenses that I didn't do much with the manual focus BUT I did switch it to that mode so I could see the OLED display work and the ring was very smooth but with some dampening - felt nice.
p.29 #4 · Zeiss "Batis" AF lens line to be released for FF E-mount
Samuli Vahonen wrote:
On some photos this horrible "gray all edges between contrast" wasn't turned on and there Batis 25 does have pretty ugly aberrations -
Samuli
Hi Samuli,
Thanks again for bringing to my attention. The files have been cleaned up and reposted. If you don't mind, please delete those 200% crops - I don't want anyone thinking that the 25mm Batis has some weird problem.
p.29 #5 · Zeiss "Batis" AF lens line to be released for FF E-mount
Hi Chad,
Thanks a lot for the write-up and for the images!
I noticed the same as Samuli. Now when looking at your corrected images the problem seem to still be there? I first noticed this in the image of the chain (the CA). I didn't check the 25mm image with the wires before Samuli pointed it out so seeing the strange artifacts in the 25mm image shouldn't be a problem with cached images anywhere in the Internet chain.
If you have the time I would be interested in knowing how the images are processed - and is it possible to get the raw format file of the 25mm image of the wires?
p.29 #6 · Zeiss "Batis" AF lens line to be released for FF E-mount
Chad Wadsworth wrote:
Thanks again for bringing to my attention. The files have been cleaned up and reposted. If you don't mind, please delete those 200% crops - I don't want anyone thinking that the 25mm Batis has some weird problem.
Edited the post as requested.
Question: So if the photos are now without FE28 CA-correction profile; I would assume the CA we are seeing on right side of the boxes in sample 006 is coming from the lens? (the green edge of cardboard box above the magenta pouch/sack of onions). As this was sample 009 earlier I assume you did process this again - also I'm using other computer so it's not any cache issue.
Could you upload the RAW-file? So we could take a look at without having random sharpening etc. settings on the image?
PS. They were your 100% pixels, not 200% - you might consider adjusting your sharpening process as well, as I agree they looked like 200% after cruel oversharpening on rough hangover day and using overly bright monitor... As a base instruction; when you see stair stepping in diagonal lines you know you for sure you are doing something wrong (clearly seen for example in leaves on tree on the 1st sample or the model's hairs etc.).
p.29 #7 · Zeiss "Batis" AF lens line to be released for FF E-mount
Chad Wadsworth wrote:
Thanks Guy. Yeah the pixel peepers caught me! All corrected now though.
Unfortunately, my time was so limited with the lenses that I didn't do much with the manual focus BUT I did switch it to that mode so I could see the OLED display work and the ring was very smooth but with some dampening - felt nice.
p.29 #8 · Zeiss "Batis" AF lens line to be released for FF E-mount
Samuli Vahonen wrote:
Edited the post as requested.
Question: So if the photos are now without FE28 CA-correction profile; I would assume the CA we are seeing on right side of the boxes in sample 006 is coming from the lens? (the green edge of cardboard box above the magenta pouch/sack of onions). As this was sample 009 earlier I assume you did process this again - also I'm using other computer so it's not any cache issue.
Could you upload the RAW-file? So we could take a look at without having random sharpening etc. settings on the image?
PS. They were your 100% pixels, not 200% - you might consider adjusting your sharpening process as well, as I agree they looked like 200% after cruel oversharpening on rough hangover day and using overly bright monitor... As a base instruction; when you see stair stepping in diagonal lines you know you for sure you are doing something wrong (clearly seen for example in leaves on tree on the 1st sample or the model's hairs etc.).
On the box shot, I missed correcting the CA setting before I re-uploaded, not really what I planned on doing this Saturday morning but gotta keep you all well informed. I adjusted in LR but am not seeing much of a difference so yes, what you are seeing is native CA in that shot.
As far as the 100% vs 200% goes, I think something odd is happening, maybe with wordpress. There is no stair stepping or edge artifacts visible in Light Room 1:1 view on my Retina screen.
I will not be uploading RAW files so please enjoy what you see and while I sincerely thank you for catching the CA adjustment issue (can't believe I missed it), I wouldn't make much more out of what you are seeing at full zoom off of the blog files. I'm sure other reviewers that do this for a living will soon be providing all the appropriate levels of technical assessment but that's not my thing.
p.29 #9 · Zeiss "Batis" AF lens line to be released for FF E-mount
Totally agree . I would not look into anything with these shots as someone that tests gear a lot using Wordpress and jpegs is not indicative of the files. Frankly I hate LR too but that's me. I use C1 which I find a much better raw processing engine. Even good jpegs at 100 percent suck
p.29 #10 · Zeiss "Batis" AF lens line to be released for FF E-mount
Jonas B wrote:
Hi Chad,
Thanks a lot for the write-up and for the images!
I noticed the same as Samuli. Now when looking at your corrected images the problem seem to still be there? I first noticed this in the image of the chain (the CA). I didn't check the 25mm image with the wires before Samuli pointed it out so seeing the strange artifacts in the 25mm image shouldn't be a problem with cached images anywhere in the Internet chain.
If you have the time I would be interested in knowing how the images are processed - and is it possible to get the raw format file of the 25mm image of the wires?
That 25mm image of the orange shades (wires) is corrected now.I missed it originally. There is still some uncorrected native CA but it would clean up easily. No RAWS, sorry. The write-up is what it is
Here is what everyone needs to be clear on - There is NO weird CA or artifacts generated by the Batis 25mm. It appears there is some minor CA depending on the conditions but nothing I would even think twice about. The lens renders beautifully and has excellent, color, sharpness and bokeh. Not much more to worry about.
p.29 #11 · Zeiss "Batis" AF lens line to be released for FF E-mount
I understand no lens generates the problem we saw. Should be PP or sensor problems, in this case I think it was about PP. There is still some grey shading around the wires but I quote you and think "Not much more to worry about".
p.29 #12 · Zeiss "Batis" AF lens line to be released for FF E-mount
Chad Wadsworth wrote:
On the box shot, I missed correcting the CA setting before I re-uploaded, not really what I planned on doing this Saturday morning but gotta keep you all well informed. I adjusted in LR but am not seeing much of a difference so yes, what you are seeing is native CA in that shot.
Chad thanks for all the info and effort - despite sharpening issues your images provided some new info about Batis 25 boke and aberrations (at least for the lens sample you tried), which was not available on Zeiss Flickr page or Lloyd Chambers review images.
Chad Wadsworth wrote:
I wouldn't make much more out of what you are seeing at full zoom off of the blog files. I'm sure other reviewers that do this for a living will soon be providing all the appropriate levels of technical assessment but that's not my thing.
Full images were 6000x4000 so I would assume even they are "blog files" they are valid source of data. I don't know why Wordpress would have processed 6000x4000 images, even it would generate the smaller photos - at least EXIF looked normal LightRoom EXIF. I have newer even tried to see anything useful info on the sub-1000px thumbnails on your blog.
Personally I rely more people here than "reviewers that do this for a living", so very much appreciate you samples. Most of the reviewers are just scam and everything is excellent without any critic, and some even try to hide the defects of lenses. Due to their "business model" they have to do it like this to keep themselves in the "business" and receiving stuff for reviews in future as well (also their readers are so childish that they don't like if someone reviews stuff they have "invested in" and say something not positive about it, so also for that reason they are forced to give all positive write-ups to get more site visits - this is just sick if you ask from me). Of course there are some who do good work as well and give objective reviews, but year after year % of the good reviewers is dropping.
Seems that I have to figure out, which is worse; the ridiculous field curvature (in corners) of ZE25 or some CA of Batis, and then pick the options, which compromises are least harmful to me. With my luck, the day I order and pay Batis 25, Zeiss tells us that wide Otus is f/2 25mm, and eventually I end up with 3x Zeiss 2/25 lenses
Chad Wadsworth wrote:
As far as the 100% vs 200% goes, I think something odd is happening, maybe with wordpress. There is no stair stepping or edge artifacts visible in Light Room 1:1 view on my Retina screen.
Not a very experienced Lightroom user, but in that case your export settings have sharpening turned on.
p.29 #13 · Zeiss "Batis" AF lens line to be released for FF E-mount
Samuli,
Again, my pleasure.
Agreed that it is all about compromises when selecting gear, isn't it? Happily, I think both of these new Batis will suite me well. I can't tell you how disappointed I was in the ZA 24mm - was in love with the rendering but focus issues on the A900 made it unusable (and I tried three copies!).
On the export settings - I actually turned off sharpening (it was set to standard) and compared 100% crops - little if any discernible difference. I'm not losing sleep over it though.
p.29 #14 · Zeiss "Batis" AF lens line to be released for FF E-mount
Sleep is not something anyone should lose over pre-production/release/preparation anything, lol. Micro inspection of such files is inadvisable, too many variables. I suspect this is why pre-release imagery is at the standard it is, yet viewers cannot believe files are not 'sharp enough', coming from the makers.
Early files are best used to indicate *drawing style* - the macro look the lens can produce, something of far greater photographic relevance at this early stage. I read the suggestion somewhere Lloyd may have got optimised copies, highly unlikely in my view. For what purpose - to hoodwink would be buyers into buying second rate product, only to return it and can the lens ever after?
Thanks Chad for your composure and your willingness to share.
p.29 #15 · Zeiss "Batis" AF lens line to be released for FF E-mount
Chad Wadsworth wrote:
As far as the 100% vs 200% goes, I think something odd is happening, maybe with wordpress. There is no stair stepping or edge artifacts visible in Light Room 1:1 view on my Retina screen.
Not surprising as a "Retina" resolution screen hides detail at 100% view as compared to a traditional resolution screen at that same % view. In essence, what you see at 100% on the Retina screen is like viewing at 50% on a traditional screen. This works out perfect when printing (as 50% view at 240ppi is about what you see in a print*) but when critically editing an image, viewing between 150%-200% is required to simulate what non Retina users see at 100%. Yes, confusing but one aspect of using higher resolution screens...
*50% view at around 240ppi on a traditional resolution screen (which is about half the resolution of a Retina screen) is roughly equivalent to 100% view on say a Retina Macbook Pro 15" since it's screen has a native resolution of 220ppi.
p.29 #16 · Zeiss "Batis" AF lens line to be released for FF E-mount
Tariq Gibran wrote:
Not surprising as a "Retina" resolution screen hides detail at 100% view as compared to a traditional resolution screen at that same % view. In essence, what you see at 100% on the Retina screen is like viewing at 50% on a traditional screen. This works out perfect when printing (as 50% view at 240ppi is about what you see in a print*) but when critically editing an image, viewing between 150%-200% is required to simulate what non Retina users see at 100%. Yes, confusing but one aspect of using higher resolution screens...
*50% view at around 240ppi on a traditional resolution screen (which is about half the resolution of a Retina screen) is roughly equivalent to 100% view on say a Retina Macbook Pro 15" since it's screen has a native resolution of 220ppi. ...Show more →
Good to know and another reason why I like the Retina - less pixel peeping
p.29 #17 · Zeiss "Batis" AF lens line to be released for FF E-mount
Chad Wadsworth wrote:
Good to know and another reason why I like the Retina - less pixel peeping
Yes, the Retina screens make every camera or lens look better than they really are (if one does not take the extra screen resolution into account when editing/ viewing critically)!
p.29 #18 · Zeiss "Batis" AF lens line to be released for FF E-mount
Thanks Chad for the nice comparison. I have the older Contarex version of 25mm, 50mm and 85mm which are most probably less sharp and less contrasty but more optically corrected lenses. It will be interesting to compare these lenses esp I am interested in 85mm also. I see also CA on the chain shot with 85mm (sample 14). I guess they are more designed to be digitally corrected as the distortion is high on 85mm also.
How is the af speed on these lenses compared to 28mm? Touit af was used to be slow compared to nex lenses before the firmware updates.
p.29 #19 · Zeiss "Batis" AF lens line to be released for FF E-mount
Tariq Gibran wrote:
Not surprising as a "Retina" resolution screen hides detail at 100% view as compared to a traditional resolution screen at that same % view. In essence, what you see at 100% on the Retina screen is like viewing at 50% on a traditional screen. This works out perfect when printing (as 50% view at 240ppi is about what you see in a print*) but when critically editing an image, viewing between 150%-200% is required to simulate what non Retina users see at 100%. Yes, confusing but one aspect of using higher resolution screens...
*50% view at around 240ppi on a traditional resolution screen (which is about half the resolution of a Retina screen) is roughly equivalent to 100% view on say a Retina Macbook Pro 15" since it's screen has a native resolution of 220ppi. ...Show more →
OT (sorry) I don't know what you're talking about... I'd love for you to explain it in a way I can understand.
Here's my problem with my Retina display. When I open a photo in Preview on my Mac Retina, it looks pixelated at 100% view (command+0). When I open the same file on my older Macbook Pro non-Retina, it looks fine, and is exactly the same size as it is on my Retina display.
I find that I have to view everything on my Retina one step below 100% as in, I press command and 0 then command and - (minus button next to 0 button). This gives me a slightly zoomed out view, and that's the only time images look sharp.
This pixelation also happens on a lot of websites, where someone uploads a say 800x1200 image and I'm viewing it at 800x1200. No matter the DPI, quality etc. The second I go onto my old MBP it's fine.
So I don't know if it's a flaw in the programming of the OS, but I hate my Retina display. All my works ends up being done on my Thunderbolt display, which is just the HD display, and doesn't have this problem.
Do I have something set wrong? Or is this the normal behaviour you're talking about?
p.29 #20 · Zeiss "Batis" AF lens line to be released for FF E-mount
Honestly even though these Retina screens look nice and punchy for images they are actually the worst to work with. Real raw processing by Professionals is done on wide gamut monitors by Eizo and NEC. There maybe a few others . But these monitors see almost the whole gamut of Adobe RGB. Everything else is just SRGB monitors that basically compress your files to fit in a SRGB color gamut which is far smaller than Adobe RGB. They may look cool but there far from accurate to your file. Retina is nice for viewing as it makes your file nice and saturated and images look sharp. But there really not the best tool for accurate color and file gamut.
