Archive 2015 · Zeiss "Batis" AF lens line to be released for FF E-mount
Steve Spencer Offline • • • • • • • Upload & Sell: On
p.41 #1 · Zeiss "Batis" AF lens line to be released for FF E-mount
philip_pj wrote:
Let me try a different version, comparing the two paradigms facing Zeiss: that of the future with that of the past.
Batis cost effectiveness ($1200-$1300), market appeal (light, small, balanced, fine ergo, excellent optics), hit rate-efficiency (AF), future (very strong commitment by Zeiss to a full range) and operational effectiveness (OIS, IBIS)..
isn't happening at:
Otus / 135 APO weight (1030 grams-1200 grams-930 grams), tripod dependency (see previous), huge bulk, lack of utility-speed-operational flexibility (manual focus, unstabilized), focus inaccuracy (non-EVF target mount dependency (EF/F)) and rich man's toy prices.
A stark difference is emerging between the needs of the enthusiast/pro mass markets and the desires of aficionados and purists. Horses for courses - best not to take a draft horse to the race track. Sony are the new stars of the track. The other lenses may soon be curios of a bygone era.
Of course you could use the Otus/135 APO trio on a Sony camera with IBIS and a smart adapter and you would fix the unstabilized and no EVF part. I would not even be surprised to see Zeiss offering these in E mount one day, taking away the adapter issue. It would not be hard for them to do so. They certainly understand the E mount and how to communicate with it, so all they would have to do is add about 26mm in length (which hardly matters in such a big lens) so that it focusses properly on the sensor. That leaves MF (which some of us prefer) and size (and price) as the remaining issues. Personally, I find these lenses are too big, but I can certainly see why some would deal with the size to maximize performance. I think price may be at least as big a barrier as size, however, for people adopting these lenses. The Batis will sell a lot more largely because it is a lot easier for many folks to afford them.
p.41 #4 · Zeiss "Batis" AF lens line to be released for FF E-mount
Steve Spencer wrote:
Of course you could use the Otus/135 APO trio on a Sony camera with IBIS and a smart adapter and you would fix the unstabilized and no EVF part. I would not even be surprised to see Zeiss offering these in E mount one day, taking away the adapter issue. It would not be hard for them to do so. They certainly understand the E mount and how to communicate with it, so all they would have to do is add about 26mm in length (which hardly matters in such a big lens) so that it focusses properly on the sensor. That leaves MF (which some of us prefer) and size (and price) as the remaining issues. Personally, I find these lenses are too big, but I can certainly see why some would deal with the size to maximize performance. I think price may be at least as big a barrier as size, however, for people adopting these lenses. The Batis will sell a lot more largely because it is a lot easier for many folks to afford them....Show more →
I've used the Zeiss 135/2 APO in my Nikon days and it is marvelous. But for my A7 I think I'd prefer a smaller and lighter Batis 135/2.5 or 2.8 APO with AF if they'd make one.
p.41 #5 · Zeiss "Batis" AF lens line to be released for FF E-mount
If I could swing the Sony 135 STF and f/1.8, I would die happy. I know there are a couple here that has both. Not saying they should watch their backs, but.....
Thorsten wrote:
I've used the Zeiss 135/2 APO in my Nikon days and it is marvelous. But for my A7 I think I'd prefer a smaller and lighter Batis 135/2.5 or 2.8 APO with AF if they'd make one.
p.41 #11 · Zeiss "Batis" AF lens line to be released for FF E-mount
Steve, the Batises are about sheer practicalities. A very large proportion of potentially great 85mm portraits cannot be shot using manual focus lenses at these focal lengths. Even with Sony's EVFs this a sad fact of life.
So that is the alternate explanation for the coming popularity of the Batis range, rather than:
'The Batis will sell a lot more *largely* because it is a lot easier for many folks to afford them.'
This is much more about hard nosed pragmatism in photography than the relative cost of lenses - it is about what works best for the best result in the work environment. I would not buy an Otus 85/1.4 if it cost the same as the Batis 85 lens for the above reasons. It would just gather dust, because it is unfit for (my) purpose.
In the same vein, eye focus is of course the coming game changer for Sony and AF lenses. See here for a nice demo:
Having 90-95% of the IQ of an Otus level lens with accurate eye focus that tracks across the frame will appeal to a very large audience of portraitists. Then add IBIS and 42Mp to make up the shortfall.
Having a tough time deciding between this and the 35/1.4 as a wide prime.
Jul 04, 2015 at 06:20 PM
Steve Spencer Offline • • • • • • • Upload & Sell: On
p.41 #13 · Zeiss "Batis" AF lens line to be released for FF E-mount
philip_pj wrote:
Steve, the Batises are about sheer practicalities. A very large proportion of potentially great 85mm portraits cannot be shot using manual focus lenses at these focal lengths. Even with Sony's EVFs this a sad fact of life.
So that is the alternate explanation for the coming popularity of the Batis range, rather than:
'The Batis will sell a lot more *largely* because it is a lot easier for many folks to afford them.'
This is much more about hard nosed pragmatism in photography than the relative cost of lenses - it is about what works best for the best result in the work environment. I would not buy an Otus 85/1.4 if it cost the same as the Batis 85 lens for the above reasons. It would just gather dust, because it is unfit for (my) purpose.
In the same vein, eye focus is of course the coming game changer for Sony and AF lenses. See here for a nice demo:
Having 90-95% of the IQ of an Otus level lens with accurate eye focus that tracks across the frame will appeal to a very large audience of portraitists. Then add IBIS and 42Mp to make up the shortfall. ...Show more →
I don't know that I really agree with you. A lot of absolutely fabulous portraits have been taken with MF and still can be. I realize that some people definitely prefer AF, but personally I prefer MF for portraits. Only a very small proportion of the portraits that I take would be easier with AF, but maybe that is just me. In addition, some of my portraits I feel turn out better because I use MF and some I believe could only be gotten with MF (particularly with pre-focussing to a zone, which could be done with an AF lens too). Still I gladly concede that very likely the big majority want AF, but I think they want less expensive lenses as well. I think the Batis lenses will be much more popular than the Otus lenses, but I think both will serve an important purpose for Zeiss.
p.41 #14 · Zeiss "Batis" AF lens line to be released for FF E-mount
Completely different focal lengths. Depends what you are shooting and what look you are after.
Having owned the Nikon 24mm 1.4 which was optically excellent I was never a fan of the FL. Yes it did allow for a lot of unique shots but the 35mm 1.4 was a lot more practical.
Currently shooting with a 28/50. 35/85 is also popular.
I have my eye on the 16-35 but would also consider a 21mm prime when Zeiss releases it.
joychris wrote:
Here's a nice look at the Batis 25.
p.41 #15 · Zeiss "Batis" AF lens line to be released for FF E-mount
davewolfs wrote:
Completely different focal lengths. Depends what you are shooting and what look you are after.
Having owned the Nikon 24mm 1.4 which was optically excellent I was never a fan of the FL. Yes it did allow for a lot of unique shots but the 35mm 1.4 was a lot more practical.
Currently shooting with a 28/50. 35/85 is also popular.
I have my eye on the 16-35 but would also consider a 21mm prime when Zeiss releases it.
I use the 24 and the 35 a lot - along with the 85. I had all three when I shot Canon along with a 24-105 that I used a lot at the widest end. I'm kinda thinking with the A7rII's crop mode having so many MP, I can use the 25 in crop for a ~38mm FOV and spending 35mm cash elsewhere. But it is fun shooting the 35 at 1.4. Decisions, decisions...
