p.36 #1 · Zeiss "Batis" AF lens line to be released for FF E-mount
I wonder if lenses corrected by software (Canon for instance) are just going to suck on the 7rII. I guess lens profiles in your raw program will be necessary but could cause a lot of stretching and shrinking of areas in the photo.
p.36 #2 · Zeiss "Batis" AF lens line to be released for FF E-mount
mogul wrote:
I wonder if lenses corrected by software (Canon for instance) are just going to suck on the 7rII. I guess lens profiles in your raw program will be necessary but could cause a lot of stretching and shrinking of areas in the photo.
FUD-phylactic:
"I wonder if lenses corrected by software (every one of them) are just going to be awesome on the a7RII. I guess lens profiles in your raw program will slightly affect some issues but could greatly enhance the end result at minimal effort and cost."
p.36 #3 · Zeiss "Batis" AF lens line to be released for FF E-mount
3% pincushion is really high. If the lens is sharp enough to still be razor sharp after distortion correction, it could be a minor issue, but it's troubling that Sony and Zeiss are relying so much on digital correction. The FE 28/2 has horrible barrel distortion too, though it is sharp enough to make it generally a minor point once corrected, but I'd really like to see more optical correction done. Somehow Fuji manages to do a very good job with optical distortion correction on their lenses, even with wide-angle primes like the 14mm and 16mm, both of which are practically perfectly corrected optically for distortion.
p.36 #4 · Zeiss "Batis" AF lens line to be released for FF E-mount
Jman13 wrote:
Somehow Fuji manages to do a very good job with optical distortion correction on their lenses, even with wide-angle primes like the 14mm and 16mm, both of which are practically perfectly corrected optically for distortion.
Yep.
Or, when they make a lens that relies on optical corrections, like the 18/2, at least they make sure it's tiny.
p.36 #6 · Zeiss "Batis" AF lens line to be released for FF E-mount
adamdewilde wrote:
Leica Q lens was designed in house. The Q camera is also manufactured in house. Glass is built to specs. Camera parts are sourced. Sensor is unique to the Leica Q. And isn't Sony or CMOSIS (we know this part already.) So this is technically a Leica camera, not panasonic rebadged. According to Leica.
Though Zeiss has just recently lied to us... So who knows.
Not that I think it ultimately matters where it's manufactured but it's also very possible that the Q is basically made elsewhere with just enough minor final assembly and quality control carried out in Germany to be able to use the "Made in Germany" marketing claim. We have seen this before from Leica but I guess only Leica really know for sure... unless we start seeing assembly videos turn up on Youtube from elsewhere (as has happened with the M9 and also even with some of the Leica lenses that were mostly made in Portugal but still stamped "Made in Germany"). I think Philber made a great point here in this thread: https://www.fredmiranda.com/forum/topic/1361318/32#13060852
p.36 #9 · Zeiss "Batis" AF lens line to be released for FF E-mount
Do we really know that correcting distortion optically in the lens would have been any better than correcting it digitally? I din't think so. There might then have been just another tradeoff that we wouldn't even have known about.
p.36 #10 · Zeiss "Batis" AF lens line to be released for FF E-mount
edwardkaraa wrote:
Adam, cheap lenses that rely on digital corrections are fine by me. I won't buy them but they are what they are. My worry is that guys like Zeiss and Leica are starting to use digital corrections on mainstream glass, like we see with the Batis 85. I mentioned M mount glass as an example of small, light, and excellent performance without digital correction. I can even say cheap (Voigtlander) or not so expensive (Zeiss).
Yes true.. So you're thinking money isn't the factor?
But if you think about wides. Historically wides weren't fast, cheap or small, unless something was wrong with them.
A 21Lux and 24Lux and now even 28Lux are $5k+ lenses. Even Zeiss ZM or ZE wides are quite costly, and not as quick as we'd like. So I'm thinking it's a cost/performance/size dance that everyone is playing.. And the easy was out is to make cheap/smallish lenses that have digital correction.
And believe me, I'm also not a fan of this. What happened to Leica and it's 50APO glory.. Or Zeiss and their Otus line?! Why not just continue to put out no compromise optics?
Though I guess we don't have the Batis lenses in hand. I'd just be a bit sad if they were not performers.
p.36 #11 · Zeiss "Batis" AF lens line to be released for FF E-mount
Tariq Gibran wrote:
Not that I think it ultimately matters where it's manufactured but it's also very possible that the Q is basically made elsewhere with just enough minor final assembly and quality control carried out in Germany to be able to use the "Made in Germany" marketing claim. We have seen this before from Leica but I guess only Leica really know for sure... unless we start seeing assembly videos turn up on Youtube from elsewhere (as has happened with the M9 and also even with some of the Leica lenses that were mostly made in Portugal but still stamped "Made in Germany"). I think Philber made a great point here in this thread: https://www.fredmiranda.com/forum/topic/1361318/32#13060852...Show more →
True, we probably won't find out the fine details.. I don't think there is anything wrong with lenses made elsewhere. I don't think the Portuguese are less skilled then the Germans at working. The problem exists when you don't get paid enough to care about your job. And I suspect it's a cost thing. If you're paying a German a ton of money to come into Wetzlar Park and assemble lenses for you. He/She is going to take pride in the work. If your'e paying a Portuguese grandmother very little to assemble things.. She's not going to care, or understand how doing a bad job impacts the photographer or the company. On the flip side, maybe in Portugal she's getting a lot of money (even though to us it's very little), and she will take pride in her work. Maybe it's the German who's being under paid for the area he lives in. I don't pretend to know, which is why I just use the product and judge for myself.
Would I have liked to have had the lens designed by the same guy who designed my 50APO (Peter Karbe) YES.. But it wasn't, even though I'm sure somewhere along the lines someone consulted him. Or at least got some type of approval from him to go ahead with the decision to make optical corrections to cut cost(?).. I suppose at the end of the day, what matters is that the brand stays loyal to their core beliefs (history), and that we as consumers trust the brands enough to make decisions that'll be in line with what we expect from them.
Zeiss has a strike against them now.. I specifically emailed them about the Batis line. I was lied to. I don't like the idea that a company would straight out lie. IF it's a purchased lens design, then so be it... But don't build your whole marking campaign on a lie, and then follow up in e-mails and on social media lying about the product.
I'm still going to give the Batis lenses a shot BTW.
p.36 #12 · Zeiss "Batis" AF lens line to be released for FF E-mount
I have a preorder in for 85, but the distortion gives me some pause. In addition to some photo use, I will be doing some handheld and monopod supported video where I want to use AF and OSS (on VG900). Will the distortion have much impact on video? Yes, I know -- MF and a tripod are the ideal route, and I have the Contax Zeiss 85/1.4 for that, but I also like AF in many cases. Plus, I have touchscreen focus on the VG900 (but only with e-mount lenses of course).
p.36 #13 · Zeiss "Batis" AF lens line to be released for FF E-mount
contaxzeiss wrote:
I have a preorder in for 85, but the distortion gives me some pause. In addition to some photo use, I will be doing some handheld and monopod supported video where I want to use AF and OSS (on VG900). Will the distortion have much impact on video? Yes, I know -- MF and a tripod are the ideal route, and I have the Contax Zeiss 85/1.4 for that, but I also like AF in many cases. Plus, I have touchscreen focus on the VG900 (but only with e-mount lenses of course).
p.36 #15 · Zeiss "Batis" AF lens line to be released for FF E-mount
I agree with Edward. 28 cron has little distortion, shoots so so clean, Q......nice in the main areas, but you move to edges and corners and it's obvious there are some major pixel rearrangements happening.
p.36 #16 · Zeiss "Batis" AF lens line to be released for FF E-mount
Jman13 wrote:
it's troubling that Sony and Zeiss are relying so much on digital correction.
+1
I agree with this and it's a reason why i'm contemplating going back to Canon.
Sure the A7r is great but apart from the 55 I don't really like the lens lineup.
The system works so so with Canon lenses but then it's big ol canon lens on little mirrorless body and with the metabones funnyness thrown in.
I'm thinking FF mirrorless with small form factor lenses and great optical performance equal to say latest Canon/ZE/ZF may be too much to ask.
Edit - sure there's the Leica M which size wise go very well with the mirrorless form factor,but for me it's to out of my wallet range.
p.36 #17 · Zeiss "Batis" AF lens line to be released for FF E-mount
All I know is if the 25/2 Batis is in stock by July 20th they will have my money.
Jun 16, 2015 at 02:23 PM
Steve Spencer Offline • • • • • • • Upload & Sell: On
p.36 #18 · Zeiss "Batis" AF lens line to be released for FF E-mount
johnahill wrote:
+1
I agree with this and it's a reason why i'm contemplating going back to Canon.
Sure the A7r is great but apart from the 55 I don't really like the lens lineup.
The system works so so with Canon lenses but then it's big ol canon lens on little mirrorless body and with the metabones funnyness thrown in.
I'm thinking FF mirrorless with small form factor lenses and great optical performance equal to say latest Canon/ZE/ZF may be too much to ask.
Edit - sure there's the Leica M which size wise go very well with the mirrorless form factor,but for me it's to out of my wallet range.
It sounds to me like some ZM with a couple of choice Leica Ms might work well for you. If you get the Kolari mod all the Zeiss ZM lenses (well almost all the 21 f/4.5 still is a bit shaky, but it is on the Leica digital cameras too) seem to work fine. You could go ZM 50mm and wider and the right Leica Ms above 50 and put together a nice compact and not too expensive kit.
Jun 16, 2015 at 02:48 PM
Steve Spencer Offline • • • • • • • Upload & Sell: On
p.36 #19 · Zeiss "Batis" AF lens line to be released for FF E-mount
Getting back to the Batis lenses I think Zeiss made some quite reasonable decisions. It looks to me like for the 25mm, they optically corrected for most of the distortion, but may have left some of the in plane CA to be corrected by the software. This kept the size and cost down, which probably means more people will be interested in it. For a wide allowing big distortion would really weaken the performance in the edges and corners and that would kill the performance for a lot of typical uses, and CA correction probably won't be that objectionable for most.
For the 85mm in contrast, however, they did a quite nice job of correcting especially the out of focus CA (aka bokeh fringing, longitudinal CA) at least that is how it looks in the Kraft like above. However, they left the distortion to be corrected with software. For a portrait lens this decision makes sense to me as the corners that will have reduced resolution because of the correction will often not be that noticeable as they will be blurred. This too keeps the costs and size down which probably means more people will be interested in it.
So, I guess you could describe their approach as controlling the most important aberration(s) optically for that focal length and expected usage and then leaving the remaining aberrations to be corrected with software. To me a quite sensible approach even if it won't warm my heart with excitement for the lenses.
p.36 #20 · Zeiss "Batis" AF lens line to be released for FF E-mount
slightly off-topic, i do wonder what is happening to the Sony/Zeiss/Tamron lens design team. with regards to Tamron working on the 85mm, Sony did port the old contax 85mm F2.8 Sonnar to their own A-mount 85mm albert without the T* coating. so i wonder if now there is no offical team in Sony that does the designing but everyone is actually in Tamron. We saw the 18-200mm for Sony E mount was designed by Tamron, we also saw the older 70-300mm G also the case. it looks to me that each company only hold their own coating tech and the rest (like sonnar design, AF design etc) are now shared and probably all based in Tamron office.
disclaimer: i dont work for any of these companies and this is purely my speculation.
