This topic is in the 2015 archive. You can read it and like its posts here. It is read only.
Archive 2015Zeiss "Batis" AF lens line to be released for FF E-mount
p.7 #1Zeiss "Batis" AF lens line to be released for FF E-mount
banpreso wrote:
somebody at zeiss is working a full time job coming up with names for everything... otis, loxia, batis, touit. back in the day it was good ol planar, sonanr, distagon, etc, didn't need new names for decades.
btw i have a good naming system maybe they can use and save some overhead
Zeiss $$$$$ MF (Otis)
Zeiss $$$$ MF (Loxia)
Zeiss $$$$ AF (Batis)
Zeiss $$$ AF-C (Touit)
All the old designations (sonnar, distagon etc.) still apply as they refer to the lens design, not the price bracket, mount or intended market.
If the new lenses perform then they can call them whatever they like, but I have to admit the current naming scheme leaves me baffled. Otus sounds like a breakfast cereal, not something you'd drop $5000 on. Loxia sounds like a cheap imitation smoked salmon, Batis sounds like some TV award that nobody cares about and Touit is the noise an owl makes.
somebody at zeiss is working a full time job coming up with names for everything... otis, loxia, batis, touit. back in the day it was good ol planar, sonanr, distagon, etc, didn't need new names for decades.
btw i have a good naming system maybe they can use and save some overhead
Zeiss $$$$$ MF (Otis)
Zeiss $$$$ MF (Loxia)
Zeiss $$$$ AF (Batis)
Zeiss $$$ AF-C (Touit)
All the old designations (sonnar, distagon etc.) still apply as they refer to the lens design, not the price bracket, mount or intended market.
If the new lenses perform then they can call them whatever they like, but I have to admit the current naming scheme leaves me baffled. Otus sounds like a breakfast cereal, not something you'd drop $5000 on. Loxia sounds like a cheap imitation smoked salmon, Batis sounds like some TV award that nobody cares about and Touit is the noise an owl makes.
Apr 23, 2015 at 04:18 AM
p.7 #2Zeiss "Batis" AF lens line to be released for FF E-mount
hiepphotog wrote:
Admittedly the FE system is becoming more attractive but Sony is still missing the point in their body design. This could change however. It only suffices for them to release just one body with the right ergonomics and they will score big time. For the first time ever, the weakness is not in the lenses, since the line up is impressive, but the bodies suck imho.
PS. Before someone asks me what would be a good body design, I would say something along the lines of the Fuji xt1 or x pro1 or even the nex7.That's interesting - I would have just said the opposite - the camera bodies are fine for me ergonomically (give and take that the A7 II was getting bigger but still okay), but the lenses I find simply not appealing. Not talking about optical image quality here - I believe the Sony FE lenses are excellent there - more talking about the concept regarding size (also the built style with only plastic fantastic does not intrigue me too much either). Why would you like a smaller mirrorless FF body and still fully rely on DSLR size lenses? I don't get this. I think here Sony is missing the point. Zeiss is better here, they at least got the Loxia lenses out. And the argument that you need to have bigger lenses because of the AF system simply doesn't work - look at the Contax G line.I think you're right; the issue though, is that Sony actually has to make money.
Sony is fully capable of making smaller lenses, but that would mean Leica-like glass and either higher prices or lower margins (and likely both).
One might expect that if the E-mount goes anywhere near Sony is (eventually) aiming, they will work to produce more compact optics that better befit their 'AF Leica' premise of a mirrorless full-frame system.
Or maybe Sigma will beat them to it
.Again - look at Contax G glass - former competitor to Leica, small rangefinder lens construction with AF. Why not using this as a template to develop something for the E-mount? It does not at all need to have a Leica price tag either. I could imagine that decent prime/zoom lenses would be even more successful - or do you think professionals like bigger glass to show off (but why would they use a Sony A7 series camera then in the first place?!).
I believe the reason for the bigger glass is a simple one - unexpected success of the E-mount and the A7 FF series. Manufacturing lines are built to accommodate DSLR lenses, well established DSLR lens designs are out there, so simply those blueprints were used and slightly modified for the E-mount.
In line with your point above, I also think that after a while smaller AF-based glass shows up for the E-mount.Unlikely Sony can ever get down to Contax G size due to steep incident angle of those lenses. Even the G45 exhibits smeared corners due to this. If Sony sticks with the thick sensor glass (not that it's a bad thing), we will continue to see lens at a much bigger size. The 28/2 has to trade distortion for that good enough sharpness in the corners. And it's not exactly Contax G size either. Correcting for distortion while maintaining good sharpness would be the size of the 35/1.4 to get any economical for Sony.
I understand that Sony simplified the process and not having two kind of sensor glasses built for mirrorless and DSLR cameras (which in fact would be great for us consumers, but not so much business-wise for them I guess). Still Sony should think about the approach here - main advantage of mirrorless is the more compact size compared to a DSLR. So it should be logical that also smaller high quality lenses (with AF) should be in line with this strategy. I am sure it could be done for much lower lens prices than Leica currently is asking for. I am surprised also here in this forum that not more people are demanding this.
retrofocus wrote
johnctharp wrote
retrofocus wrote
edwardkaraa wrote
davewolfs wrote
Someone please remind me how Leica will not go out of business one day? I feel like this only strengthens the case for Sony and Zeiss eating into their sales.PS. Before someone asks me what would be a good body design, I would say something along the lines of the Fuji xt1 or x pro1 or even the nex7.
Sony is fully capable of making smaller lenses, but that would mean Leica-like glass and either higher prices or lower margins (and likely both).
One might expect that if the E-mount goes anywhere near Sony is (eventually) aiming, they will work to produce more compact optics that better befit their 'AF Leica' premise of a mirrorless full-frame system.
Or maybe Sigma will beat them to it
.I believe the reason for the bigger glass is a simple one - unexpected success of the E-mount and the A7 FF series. Manufacturing lines are built to accommodate DSLR lenses, well established DSLR lens designs are out there, so simply those blueprints were used and slightly modified for the E-mount.
In line with your point above, I also think that after a while smaller AF-based glass shows up for the E-mount.
I understand that Sony simplified the process and not having two kind of sensor glasses built for mirrorless and DSLR cameras (which in fact would be great for us consumers, but not so much business-wise for them I guess). Still Sony should think about the approach here - main advantage of mirrorless is the more compact size compared to a DSLR. So it should be logical that also smaller high quality lenses (with AF) should be in line with this strategy. I am sure it could be done for much lower lens prices than Leica currently is asking for. I am surprised also here in this forum that not more people are demanding this.
Apr 23, 2015 at 05:07 AM
p.7 #3Zeiss "Batis" AF lens line to be released for FF E-mount
I hate the touit like designs..and i prefer Zeiss cooperate with sony for AF lenses like the already available 35 55 and 16-35. So they could focus entirely on the loxia line and getting new exciting lenses like 24 1.4 35 1.4 and 50 1.4 designed from scratch..
After this release one really thinks the development of the loxia line will be sloow..
After this release one really thinks the development of the loxia line will be sloow..
Apr 23, 2015 at 05:26 AM
p.7 #4Zeiss "Batis" AF lens line to be released for FF E-mount
trogdon wrote:
The 35mm f2 Contax doesn't pair well with the a7r, despite being a planar and not a Biogon. It has massive field curvature, so at f2 it doesn't have much bokeh (more like f4-5.6 honestly), and the edges are smeared. It's super sharp in the center but edges not so much until f11, where it still has a mid zone dip.
Well, in fairness, nearly all the problems you're describing are entirely driven by the A7r pairing. the lens has lots of field curvature, wide open it is only super sharp in the center with a huge drop right out of the gate, and it has a definite mid-zone dip. Even the corner smearing might partially be native to the lens to some extent--the datasheet lists a crazy huge drop in saggital mtf's at the out edge.
http://www.zeiss.com/content/dam/Photography/new/pdf/en/downloadcenter/contax_g/planar2_35mm_e.pdf
It's really just an odd lens. In some sense brilliant, but in others...I don't know.
The 35mm f2 Contax doesn't pair well with the a7r, despite being a planar and not a Biogon. It has massive field curvature, so at f2 it doesn't have much bokeh (more like f4-5.6 honestly), and the edges are smeared. It's super sharp in the center but edges not so much until f11, where it still has a mid zone dip.
Well, in fairness, nearly all the problems you're describing are entirely driven by the A7r pairing. the lens has lots of field curvature, wide open it is only super sharp in the center with a huge drop right out of the gate, and it has a definite mid-zone dip. Even the corner smearing might partially be native to the lens to some extent--the datasheet lists a crazy huge drop in saggital mtf's at the out edge.
http://www.zeiss.com/content/dam/Photography/new/pdf/en/downloadcenter/contax_g/planar2_35mm_e.pdf
It's really just an odd lens. In some sense brilliant, but in others...I don't know.
Apr 23, 2015 at 05:55 AM
p.7 #5Zeiss "Batis" AF lens line to be released for FF E-mount
These new line of lenses and a A7r Mk II with IBIS could make me consider a Sony camera for the first time ever.
I am glad my entire camera budget for this year is already gone. That should give me at least 10-12 months to try and alleviate my GAS
I am glad my entire camera budget for this year is already gone. That should give me at least 10-12 months to try and alleviate my GAS
Apr 23, 2015 at 06:09 AM
p.7 #6Zeiss "Batis" AF lens line to be released for FF E-mount
MAubrey wrote:
Well, in fairness, nearly all the problems you're describing are entirely driven by the A7r pairing. the lens has lots of field curvature, wide open it is only super sharp in the center with a huge drop right out of the gate, and it has a definite mid-zone dip. Even the corner smearing might partially be native to the lens to some extent--the datasheet lists a crazy huge drop in saggital mtf's at the out edge.
http://www.zeiss.com/content/dam/Photography/new/pdf/en/downloadcenter/contax_g/planar2_35mm_e.pdf
It's really just an odd lens. In some sense brilliant, but in others...I don't know.
It's also nearly identical in design and mtf to the 35 Summicron IV, fwiw.
trogdon wrote
The 35mm f2 Contax doesn't pair well with the a7r, despite being a planar and not a Biogon. It has massive field curvature, so at f2 it doesn't have much bokeh (more like f4-5.6 honestly), and the edges are smeared. It's super sharp in the center but edges not so much until f11, where it still has a mid zone dip.http://www.zeiss.com/content/dam/Photography/new/pdf/en/downloadcenter/contax_g/planar2_35mm_e.pdf
It's really just an odd lens. In some sense brilliant, but in others...I don't know.
It's also nearly identical in design and mtf to the 35 Summicron IV, fwiw.
Apr 23, 2015 at 06:51 AM
p.7 #7Zeiss "Batis" AF lens line to be released for FF E-mount
Matt Grum wrote:
btw i have a good naming system maybe they can use and save some overhead
Zeiss $$$$$ MF (Otis)
Zeiss $$$$ MF (Loxia)
Zeiss $$$$ AF (Batis)
Zeiss $$$ AF-C (Touit)
All the old designations (sonnar, distagon etc.) still apply as they refer to the lens design, not the price bracket, mount or intended market.
If the new lenses perform then they can call them whatever they like, but I have to admit the current naming scheme leaves me baffled. Otus sounds like a breakfast cereal, not something you'd drop $5000 on. Loxia sounds like a cheap imitation smoked salmon, Batis sounds like some TV award that nobody cares about and Touit is the noise an owl makes.
I got a laugh in your naming schemes Matt....if it was Japanese it would have an "X" in the naming scheme, if French maybe a beautiful women, if American it would be some sort of war symbol, the British something from their past like Excalibur. The German culture can be obtuse, can't it?
banpreso wrote
somebody at zeiss is working a full time job coming up with names for everything... otis, loxia, batis, touit. back in the day it was good ol planar, sonanr, distagon, etc, didn't need new names for decades.btw i have a good naming system maybe they can use and save some overhead
Zeiss $$$$$ MF (Otis)
Zeiss $$$$ MF (Loxia)
Zeiss $$$$ AF (Batis)
Zeiss $$$ AF-C (Touit)
If the new lenses perform then they can call them whatever they like, but I have to admit the current naming scheme leaves me baffled. Otus sounds like a breakfast cereal, not something you'd drop $5000 on. Loxia sounds like a cheap imitation smoked salmon, Batis sounds like some TV award that nobody cares about and Touit is the noise an owl makes.
I got a laugh in your naming schemes Matt....if it was Japanese it would have an "X" in the naming scheme, if French maybe a beautiful women, if American it would be some sort of war symbol, the British something from their past like Excalibur. The German culture can be obtuse, can't it?
Apr 23, 2015 at 08:48 AM
p.7 #8Zeiss "Batis" AF lens line to be released for FF E-mount
mogul wrote:
btw i have a good naming system maybe they can use and save some overhead
Zeiss $$$$$ MF (Otis)
Zeiss $$$$ MF (Loxia)
Zeiss $$$$ AF (Batis)
Zeiss $$$ AF-C (Touit)
All the old designations (sonnar, distagon etc.) still apply as they refer to the lens design, not the price bracket, mount or intended market.
If the new lenses perform then they can call them whatever they like, but I have to admit the current naming scheme leaves me baffled. Otus sounds like a breakfast cereal, not something you'd drop $5000 on. Loxia sounds like a cheap imitation smoked salmon, Batis sounds like some TV award that nobody cares about and Touit is the noise an owl makes.The German culture can be obtuse, can't it?
Not that those names make any more sense to a native German speaker
Matt Grum wrote
banpreso wrote
somebody at zeiss is working a full time job coming up with names for everything... otis, loxia, batis, touit. back in the day it was good ol planar, sonanr, distagon, etc, didn't need new names for decades.btw i have a good naming system maybe they can use and save some overhead
Zeiss $$$$$ MF (Otis)
Zeiss $$$$ MF (Loxia)
Zeiss $$$$ AF (Batis)
Zeiss $$$ AF-C (Touit)
If the new lenses perform then they can call them whatever they like, but I have to admit the current naming scheme leaves me baffled. Otus sounds like a breakfast cereal, not something you'd drop $5000 on. Loxia sounds like a cheap imitation smoked salmon, Batis sounds like some TV award that nobody cares about and Touit is the noise an owl makes.
Not that those names make any more sense to a native German speaker
Apr 23, 2015 at 08:56 AM
p.7 #9Zeiss "Batis" AF lens line to be released for FF E-mount
Who cares how they're called. 
I think it's a smart move from Zeiss. It gives them a more unique identity. Faster/easier to find on the web. This is 2015 after all.
I think it's a smart move from Zeiss. It gives them a more unique identity. Faster/easier to find on the web. This is 2015 after all. Apr 23, 2015 at 09:06 AM
p.7 #10Zeiss "Batis" AF lens line to be released for FF E-mount
I see this Batis line as having both positive and negative aspects. The positive (and that is presuming these are top quality lenses) is that there will now be very high quality AF lenses at 25, 35, 55, and 85 mm lengths. That covers the bulk of prime shooters. The system is now has enough high quality lenses to compete quite well with Canikon for all but a few types of shooting (Sports and Wildlife mainly). That is no doubt a pretty big thing. They also have an example of a nice small lens (i.e., the 35 f/2.8) and a nice lower priced lens (i.e., the Sony 28 f/2) that suggest an even broader set of lenses may well be coming. So for an AF shooter who wants high quality lenses and who doesn't care that much about size, then these Batis lenses are an extremely positive development.
That points to one of the negatives, however. These lenses are quite large or to be more exact quite fat. An 81mm diameter is actually the largest diameter of any FE mount lens so far--even a little fatter than the 24-240. These lenses aren't particularly long and they aren't particularly heavy, but boy are they fat. So for volume the 25 will be about the same volume as the FE 24-70 f/4 (shorter but fatter) and the 85 will be about the same volume as the 16-35 f/4 (here it will be very close in size just a little shorter and a little fatter). Personally, I hate fat lenses, but that is a matter of taste I suppose.
Another way to consider this size issue is to compare them to the Zeiss ZF lenses that are most similar. The Batis 25 f/2 is substantially fatter than the ZF 25 f/2 (81mm vs. 71mm) but with an adapter would be substantially shorter (78mm vs. 99.5mm), but since diameter contributes to volume more than length the ZF actually has a bit smaller volume on a FE mount camera than the Batis (393900 cubic mm vs. 401900 cubic mm). The Batis would be substantially lighter but you wouldn't be saving much in terms of size. You get much the same story if you compare the Batis 85 f/1.8 to the ZF 85 f/1.4. The Batis 85 f/1.8 is fatter (81mm vs. 77mm) and in this case the Batis is even longer than the ZF (92mm vs. 90.5mm including adapter). So the Batis obviously has a larger volume (4741 cubic mm vs. 421400 cubic mm). So if you want to know the size of the Batis lenses they are very close in size to the most similar ZF lenses, just a bit bigger. You won't be saving in size on these lenses vs. the ZF line, but they are substantially lighter.
The other negative of this release, IMO, but I hope I am wrong, is that these lenses might well signal that the Loxia lens line will develop more slowly and will be less geared to stills photography and more geared toward video. I was hoping for a Loxia 25 f/2.8 and a Loxia 85 f/2 to come out soon. I would be surprised if those come out anytime in the near future. And if future Loxia lenses are developed I think they will be developed with video performance as the foremost concern and stills performance only a secondary at most concern. For someone like me who greatly favours MF over AF this is a loss. I was hoping Zeiss would develop the Loxia line to be much like the ZE/ZF line for Canikon cameras, but it doesn't look like that is going to happen.
Still all is not lost on us MF folks. Leica R and M lenses offer a great alternative as do some older film lenses and with the new Kolari modification of the camera there appears to be a bright future for small MF lenses on Sony cameras. So for those who like high quality AF lenses (and that includes my wife so I am sure we will get some Batis lenses) I am happy for this development even if personally I would have much preferred these to be Loxia lenses and much smaller in diameter.
That points to one of the negatives, however. These lenses are quite large or to be more exact quite fat. An 81mm diameter is actually the largest diameter of any FE mount lens so far--even a little fatter than the 24-240. These lenses aren't particularly long and they aren't particularly heavy, but boy are they fat. So for volume the 25 will be about the same volume as the FE 24-70 f/4 (shorter but fatter) and the 85 will be about the same volume as the 16-35 f/4 (here it will be very close in size just a little shorter and a little fatter). Personally, I hate fat lenses, but that is a matter of taste I suppose.
Another way to consider this size issue is to compare them to the Zeiss ZF lenses that are most similar. The Batis 25 f/2 is substantially fatter than the ZF 25 f/2 (81mm vs. 71mm) but with an adapter would be substantially shorter (78mm vs. 99.5mm), but since diameter contributes to volume more than length the ZF actually has a bit smaller volume on a FE mount camera than the Batis (393900 cubic mm vs. 401900 cubic mm). The Batis would be substantially lighter but you wouldn't be saving much in terms of size. You get much the same story if you compare the Batis 85 f/1.8 to the ZF 85 f/1.4. The Batis 85 f/1.8 is fatter (81mm vs. 77mm) and in this case the Batis is even longer than the ZF (92mm vs. 90.5mm including adapter). So the Batis obviously has a larger volume (4741 cubic mm vs. 421400 cubic mm). So if you want to know the size of the Batis lenses they are very close in size to the most similar ZF lenses, just a bit bigger. You won't be saving in size on these lenses vs. the ZF line, but they are substantially lighter.
The other negative of this release, IMO, but I hope I am wrong, is that these lenses might well signal that the Loxia lens line will develop more slowly and will be less geared to stills photography and more geared toward video. I was hoping for a Loxia 25 f/2.8 and a Loxia 85 f/2 to come out soon. I would be surprised if those come out anytime in the near future. And if future Loxia lenses are developed I think they will be developed with video performance as the foremost concern and stills performance only a secondary at most concern. For someone like me who greatly favours MF over AF this is a loss. I was hoping Zeiss would develop the Loxia line to be much like the ZE/ZF line for Canikon cameras, but it doesn't look like that is going to happen.
Still all is not lost on us MF folks. Leica R and M lenses offer a great alternative as do some older film lenses and with the new Kolari modification of the camera there appears to be a bright future for small MF lenses on Sony cameras. So for those who like high quality AF lenses (and that includes my wife so I am sure we will get some Batis lenses) I am happy for this development even if personally I would have much preferred these to be Loxia lenses and much smaller in diameter.
Apr 23, 2015 at 09:06 AM
p.7 #11Zeiss "Batis" AF lens line to be released for FF E-mount
Keep hearing that mirrorless lenses should be small. While portability is an advantage, the main advantage of mirrorless breed of cameras for me is that they come with a different school of shooting, mainly, evf and lcd. If its a FF mirrorless, the lenses will be bigger, can't help it.
Apr 23, 2015 at 09:12 AM
p.7 #12Zeiss "Batis" AF lens line to be released for FF E-mount
Steve Spencer wrote:
I see this Batis line as having both positive and negative aspects. The positive (and that is presuming these are top quality lenses) is that there will now be very high quality AF lenses at 25, 35, 55, and 85 mm lengths. That covers the bulk of prime shooters. The system is now has enough high quality lenses to compete quite well with Canikon for all but a few types of shooting (Sports and Wildlife mainly). That is no doubt a pretty big thing. They also have an example of a nice small lens (i.e., the 35 f/2.8) and...Show more →
Hi Steve,
As things were relayed to me from Zeiss when I spoke with them at PhotoPlus, they were designing the Loxia line operation for Video users and did not see or realize that there would be any issues for still users. So, this goes hand in hand with what you may be suggesting of a slower release of Loxia FF lenses.
With all of the FF AF lenses being released now by both Sony and Zeiss and quite likely in the future by Sigma and Tamron, it is beginning to look very frustrating for releasing relatively large lenses that have MF by wire. So, unless I decide to delve into some of these AF by Zeiss, Sony, or someone else in the future I will in most instances be happier with the smaller current and out of production Leica M, other M mount lenses and my Leica R lenses. I just hope that in the future in order to take advantage of the smaller RF WA lenses that the Sony E mount FF cameras will be able to be modified with a thin sensor stack to take advantage of the WA M mount lens performance.
Rich
I see this Batis line as having both positive and negative aspects. The positive (and that is presuming these are top quality lenses) is that there will now be very high quality AF lenses at 25, 35, 55, and 85 mm lengths. That covers the bulk of prime shooters. The system is now has enough high quality lenses to compete quite well with Canikon for all but a few types of shooting (Sports and Wildlife mainly). That is no doubt a pretty big thing. They also have an example of a nice small lens (i.e., the 35 f/2.8) and...Show more →
Hi Steve,
As things were relayed to me from Zeiss when I spoke with them at PhotoPlus, they were designing the Loxia line operation for Video users and did not see or realize that there would be any issues for still users. So, this goes hand in hand with what you may be suggesting of a slower release of Loxia FF lenses.
With all of the FF AF lenses being released now by both Sony and Zeiss and quite likely in the future by Sigma and Tamron, it is beginning to look very frustrating for releasing relatively large lenses that have MF by wire. So, unless I decide to delve into some of these AF by Zeiss, Sony, or someone else in the future I will in most instances be happier with the smaller current and out of production Leica M, other M mount lenses and my Leica R lenses. I just hope that in the future in order to take advantage of the smaller RF WA lenses that the Sony E mount FF cameras will be able to be modified with a thin sensor stack to take advantage of the WA M mount lens performance.
Rich
Apr 23, 2015 at 09:16 AM
p.7 #13Zeiss "Batis" AF lens line to be released for FF E-mount
nandadevieast wrote:
Keep hearing that mirrorless lenses should be small. While portability is an advantage, the main advantage of mirrorless breed of cameras for me is that they come with a different school of shooting, mainly, evf and lcd. If its a FF mirrorless, the lenses will be bigger, can't help it.
I don't think this is true. In fact, I kind of expect Sony to develop a very small and high quality set of Sony/Zeiss lenses. I think you will see a 24 f/2.8, a 50 f/2, and and 85 f/2.8 to go with the 35 f/2.8 for a great set of small high quality primes.
I think you will also get a set of value based primes which will be fairly small and will be plain Sony. We already have the 28 f/2. I think we may well get a 45 f/2 and a 100 f/2 based on Minolta heritage. I would love to see them make a 75 f/2 and a 35 f/2 in this series as well.
I think these lenses are totally doable and would make Sony some decent money, and they will show that you can have small lenses and a small FF body, but you just need slower lenses to achieve that. I think they will come in time and the 35 f/2.8 and the 28 f/2 already show what is possible.
Keep hearing that mirrorless lenses should be small. While portability is an advantage, the main advantage of mirrorless breed of cameras for me is that they come with a different school of shooting, mainly, evf and lcd. If its a FF mirrorless, the lenses will be bigger, can't help it.
I don't think this is true. In fact, I kind of expect Sony to develop a very small and high quality set of Sony/Zeiss lenses. I think you will see a 24 f/2.8, a 50 f/2, and and 85 f/2.8 to go with the 35 f/2.8 for a great set of small high quality primes.
I think you will also get a set of value based primes which will be fairly small and will be plain Sony. We already have the 28 f/2. I think we may well get a 45 f/2 and a 100 f/2 based on Minolta heritage. I would love to see them make a 75 f/2 and a 35 f/2 in this series as well.
I think these lenses are totally doable and would make Sony some decent money, and they will show that you can have small lenses and a small FF body, but you just need slower lenses to achieve that. I think they will come in time and the 35 f/2.8 and the 28 f/2 already show what is possible.
Apr 23, 2015 at 09:25 AM
p.7 #14Zeiss "Batis" AF lens line to be released for FF E-mount
Steve Spencer wrote:
Another way to consider this size issue is to compare them to the Zeiss ZF lenses that are most similar. The Batis 25 f/2 is substantially fatter than the ZF 25 f/2 (81mm vs. 71mm) but with an adapter would be substantially shorter (78mm vs. 99.5mm), but since diameter contributes to volume more than length the ZF actually has a bit smaller volume on a FE mount camera than the Batis (393900 cubic mm vs. 401900 cubic mm). The Batis would be substantially lighter but you wouldn't be saving much in terms of size. You get much the same...Show more →
It might be more fair to compare sizes to other AF lenses since those motors take up a lot of space diameter-wise. The Nikon 85/1.8G is 80mm Dia x 101.5mm L and 85/1.4G is 86.5mm Dia x 112.5mm L, including adapters, which makes the Batis 85 seem less unreasonable. (However the latest Nikon G primes have grown considerably; the 85/1.8D was 71.5mm x 87mm [though not internal focusing] and 85/1.4D was 80mm x 101mm.) The story isn't quite as good for the 25 though: Nikon's 24/1.4G is 83mm x 117mm and even the 20/1.8G is only 80.5mm x 109mm. Yeah, these are fat lenses but fairly short. Given the small body size, fat but short is better for handling/balance that the alternative.
Another way to consider this size issue is to compare them to the Zeiss ZF lenses that are most similar. The Batis 25 f/2 is substantially fatter than the ZF 25 f/2 (81mm vs. 71mm) but with an adapter would be substantially shorter (78mm vs. 99.5mm), but since diameter contributes to volume more than length the ZF actually has a bit smaller volume on a FE mount camera than the Batis (393900 cubic mm vs. 401900 cubic mm). The Batis would be substantially lighter but you wouldn't be saving much in terms of size. You get much the same...Show more →
It might be more fair to compare sizes to other AF lenses since those motors take up a lot of space diameter-wise. The Nikon 85/1.8G is 80mm Dia x 101.5mm L and 85/1.4G is 86.5mm Dia x 112.5mm L, including adapters, which makes the Batis 85 seem less unreasonable. (However the latest Nikon G primes have grown considerably; the 85/1.8D was 71.5mm x 87mm [though not internal focusing] and 85/1.4D was 80mm x 101mm.) The story isn't quite as good for the 25 though: Nikon's 24/1.4G is 83mm x 117mm and even the 20/1.8G is only 80.5mm x 109mm. Yeah, these are fat lenses but fairly short. Given the small body size, fat but short is better for handling/balance that the alternative.
Apr 23, 2015 at 09:43 AM
p.7 #15Zeiss "Batis" AF lens line to be released for FF E-mount
Steve, I take your point regarding volume, but I happen to feel otherwise. I tested a Otus 55 on my A7R. Now I hate heavy lenses, and have never wanted to own one that size or weight for "normal" FLs. My conclusion for the Otus is that, because it is paired with a lighter camera body than a DSLR, the combo remains below the threshold where I say "no". I expect the same with bulk. Yes, ideally, I'd prefer more compact lenses, but the smaller body still means the combos will be advantageous over DSLRs
Apr 23, 2015 at 10:06 AM
p.7 #16Zeiss "Batis" AF lens line to be released for FF E-mount
MAubrey wrote:
It's really just an odd lens. In some sense brilliant, but in others...I don't know.
The point I was trying to make is that it's hardly the kind of lens Zeiss or Sony is going to bring out new and say ta-da, here's that compact 35mm f/2 you were asking for! It wouldn't fly, especially not at the prices being asked.
trogdon wrote
The 35mm f2 Contax doesn't pair well with the a7r, despite being a planar and not a Biogon. It has massive field curvature, so at f2 it doesn't have much bokeh (more like f4-5.6 honestly), and the edges are smeared. It's super sharp in the center but edges not so much until f11, where it still has a mid zone dip.The point I was trying to make is that it's hardly the kind of lens Zeiss or Sony is going to bring out new and say ta-da, here's that compact 35mm f/2 you were asking for! It wouldn't fly, especially not at the prices being asked.
Apr 23, 2015 at 10:23 AM
p.7 #17Zeiss "Batis" AF lens line to be released for FF E-mount
Any guesses on how the 25/2 will do with milky way photography (wide open sharpness, coma, etc.)?
I was thinking about getting the Samyang 24/1.4 for this purpose, but maybe will hold off until the new Batis reviews come in...
I was thinking about getting the Samyang 24/1.4 for this purpose, but maybe will hold off until the new Batis reviews come in...
Apr 23, 2015 at 11:16 AM
p.7 #18Zeiss "Batis" AF lens line to be released for FF E-mount
Steve Spencer wrote:
I see this Batis line as having both positive and negative aspects. The positive (and that is presuming these are top quality lenses) is that there will now be very high quality AF lenses at 25, 35, 55, and 85 mm lengths. That covers the bulk of prime shooters. The system is now has enough high quality lenses to compete quite well with Canikon for all but a few types of shooting (Sports and Wildlife mainly). That is no doubt a pretty big thing. They also have an example of a nice small lens (i.e., the 35 f/2.8) and...Show more →
+1. Couldn't agree more with this well written summary!
I see this Batis line as having both positive and negative aspects. The positive (and that is presuming these are top quality lenses) is that there will now be very high quality AF lenses at 25, 35, 55, and 85 mm lengths. That covers the bulk of prime shooters. The system is now has enough high quality lenses to compete quite well with Canikon for all but a few types of shooting (Sports and Wildlife mainly). That is no doubt a pretty big thing. They also have an example of a nice small lens (i.e., the 35 f/2.8) and...Show more →
+1. Couldn't agree more with this well written summary!
Apr 23, 2015 at 12:24 PM
p.7 #19Zeiss "Batis" AF lens line to be released for FF E-mount
Lee Saxon wrote:
It might be more fair to compare sizes to other AF lenses since those motors take up a lot of space diameter-wise.
If this is true, how was a Contax G lens with AF ever be accomplished?!
It might be more fair to compare sizes to other AF lenses since those motors take up a lot of space diameter-wise.
If this is true, how was a Contax G lens with AF ever be accomplished?!
Apr 23, 2015 at 12:28 PM
p.7 #20Zeiss "Batis" AF lens line to be released for FF E-mount
philber wrote:
Steve, I take your point regarding volume, but I happen to feel otherwise. I tested a Otus 55 on my A7R. Now I hate heavy lenses, and have never wanted to own one that size or weight for "normal" FLs. My conclusion for the Otus is that, because it is paired with a lighter camera body than a DSLR, the combo remains below the threshold where I say "no". I expect the same with bulk. Yes, ideally, I'd prefer more compact lenses, but the smaller body still means the combos will be advantageous over DSLRs
I was under the impression that the Sony/Otus combo was about as rare as spotting a Unicorn It must become all lens handling at this point as the grip is too small to comfortably handle a lens of that size.
Edited on Apr 23, 2015 at 12:38 PM · View previous versions
Steve, I take your point regarding volume, but I happen to feel otherwise. I tested a Otus 55 on my A7R. Now I hate heavy lenses, and have never wanted to own one that size or weight for "normal" FLs. My conclusion for the Otus is that, because it is paired with a lighter camera body than a DSLR, the combo remains below the threshold where I say "no". I expect the same with bulk. Yes, ideally, I'd prefer more compact lenses, but the smaller body still means the combos will be advantageous over DSLRs
I was under the impression that the Sony/Otus combo was about as rare as spotting a Unicorn
It must become all lens handling at this point as the grip is too small to comfortably handle a lens of that size.Edited on Apr 23, 2015 at 12:38 PM · View previous versions
Apr 23, 2015 at 12:37 PM