This topic is in the 2015 archive. You can read it and like its posts here. It is read only.
Archive 2015Zeiss Milvus are out: new range of DSLR lenses!
p.18 #1Zeiss Milvus are out: new range of DSLR lenses!
Steve Spencer wrote:
Quite noticeable on a benchmark test. Absolutely. Quite noticeable by reasonable people in a blind test of output. I'm not so sure.
When I said noticeable, I meant noticeable in an 8 X 10 print. I stand by that statement if the lenses are shot near wide open.
The improved (global) contrast is noticeable at any print size.
Quite noticeable on a benchmark test. Absolutely. Quite noticeable by reasonable people in a blind test of output. I'm not so sure.
When I said noticeable, I meant noticeable in an 8 X 10 print. I stand by that statement if the lenses are shot near wide open.
The improved (global) contrast is noticeable at any print size.
Sep 21, 2015 at 09:43 AM
p.18 #2Zeiss Milvus are out: new range of DSLR lenses!
And I envy your light and discrete Leica RF system which is way better for your great street photography! 
Plus its hotter and more humid there in Bangkok than here in California. My trainer at the gym kicks my ass regularly so my upper body strength is always there.
edwardkaraa wrote:
I actually envy you Wayne You must be still in excellent shape. I guess I got spoiled by RF, because now even the M240 feels heavy sometimes. I do miss shooting with a 1D series body though.
I am holding neutral position about Zeiss's statement and LR's measurement. Good news is lenses like OTUS are indeed went through K8 measurement either from repair or from manufacture based on above statement.
As for lens variation, I now realize this is a very complicated terminology which is highly depend on varies factor like machine used, human error, test methodology as well as the definition. I will not treat LR's results or Zeiss statement as is but as a very good information to know.
From my own experience, I haven't notice big variation on any lens I purchased other than a few Nikon AF lens. (the 24-70mm has very different focus profile and is very hard to compensate with focus adjust. only one out of 3 copy I had perform as is over the zoom range and focus distance and I had a bad copy of 851.8G and exchanged one perform wonderful. I bought a new 24-85G and find it perform horrible. Return it and didn't bother to exchange.)
My experience with high end Leica and Zeiss lens have always been good. OTUS55 indeed show its best f1.4 performance I have seen, and 50lux ASPH also meet my expectation. They all seem perform as MTF suggested. 50lux, 35lux R seems even better than MTF suggested.
I guess it is mainly because I use WO only for central upto 2/3 frame and only time I really care about absolute sharpness cross frame: I have well above f5.6 or f8. And I do believe the variation results are especially sensitive to WO cross frame which usually not very applicable for normal use.I think each of us with 30-40 years of experience in photography, we must be able to distinguish and understand lens performances without the need of MTF graphs. However, I do find that Zeiss MTF have matched each and every Zeiss lens I have owned and used (except the ZA lenses, which MTF are by Sony). I have every reason to trust the MTF. Even though I have not used any Leica glass, from our forum discussions and sample photos, I also find the MTF to be very accurate.
Unfortunately I find the results by LR very inconsistent. Some seem to make sense, and some look to be sensationally different. I know because I have owned or still own some of the offenders. Due to this inconsistency, I stopped looking at their MTF.
Plus its hotter and more humid there in Bangkok than here in California. My trainer at the gym kicks my ass regularly so my upper body strength is always there.
edwardkaraa wrote:
I actually envy you Wayne
You must be still in excellent shape. I guess I got spoiled by RF, because now even the M240 feels heavy sometimes. I do miss shooting with a 1D series body though. wayne seltzer wrote
Edward, I totally agree. MTF's are just one data point IMO and I really need to shoot with a lens to fully evaluate it. The way my Otus 55 renders bright highlights in a controlled fashion and how its clarity and transparency is something no mtf is going to show imo. Bokeh, color rendition, FC etc. too. Glad Zeiss is still focusing some its attention on improving its DSLR lens lineup as I am still an old dinosaur dslr shooter who can still carry the weight of these lenses and can still focus wide open if I have too. My RX1 serves me well when I want to go light. Zeiss lenses are still worth it to me!edwardkaraa wrote
zhangyue wrote
Roger, thanks for comment and detailing about your procedure. I mainly past information I got from Zeiss in recent conversation about my OTUS repair.I am holding neutral position about Zeiss's statement and LR's measurement. Good news is lenses like OTUS are indeed went through K8 measurement either from repair or from manufacture based on above statement.
As for lens variation, I now realize this is a very complicated terminology which is highly depend on varies factor like machine used, human error, test methodology as well as the definition. I will not treat LR's results or Zeiss statement as is but as a very good information to know.
From my own experience, I haven't notice big variation on any lens I purchased other than a few Nikon AF lens. (the 24-70mm has very different focus profile and is very hard to compensate with focus adjust. only one out of 3 copy I had perform as is over the zoom range and focus distance and I had a bad copy of 851.8G and exchanged one perform wonderful. I bought a new 24-85G and find it perform horrible. Return it and didn't bother to exchange.)
My experience with high end Leica and Zeiss lens have always been good. OTUS55 indeed show its best f1.4 performance I have seen, and 50lux ASPH also meet my expectation. They all seem perform as MTF suggested. 50lux, 35lux R seems even better than MTF suggested.
I guess it is mainly because I use WO only for central upto 2/3 frame and only time I really care about absolute sharpness cross frame: I have well above f5.6 or f8. And I do believe the variation results are especially sensitive to WO cross frame which usually not very applicable for normal use.
Unfortunately I find the results by LR very inconsistent. Some seem to make sense, and some look to be sensationally different. I know because I have owned or still own some of the offenders. Due to this inconsistency, I stopped looking at their MTF.
Sep 21, 2015 at 10:20 AM
p.18 #3Zeiss Milvus are out: new range of DSLR lenses!
Thank you for the kind words, Wayne! 
Glad to know that you're in great shape. You need those biceps to carry the Otus
wayne seltzer wrote:
And I envy your light and discrete Leica RF system which is way better for your great street photography!
Plus its hotter and more humid there in Bangkok than here in California. My trainer at the gym kicks my ass regularly so my upper body strength is always there.
You must be still in excellent shape. I guess I got spoiled by RF, because now even the M240 feels heavy sometimes. I do miss shooting with a 1D series body though.
I am holding neutral position about Zeiss's statement and LR's measurement. Good news is lenses like OTUS are indeed went through K8 measurement either from repair or from manufacture based on above statement.
As for lens variation, I now realize this is a very complicated terminology which is highly depend on varies factor like machine used, human error, test methodology as well as the definition. I will not treat LR's results or Zeiss statement as is but as a very good information to know.
From my own experience, I haven't notice big variation on any lens I purchased other than a few Nikon AF lens. (the 24-70mm has very different focus profile and is very hard to compensate with focus adjust. only one out of 3 copy I had perform as is over the zoom range and focus distance and I had a bad copy of 851.8G and exchanged one perform wonderful. I bought a new 24-85G and find it perform horrible. Return it and didn't bother to exchange.)
My experience with high end Leica and Zeiss lens have always been good. OTUS55 indeed show its best f1.4 performance I have seen, and 50lux ASPH also meet my expectation. They all seem perform as MTF suggested. 50lux, 35lux R seems even better than MTF suggested.
I guess it is mainly because I use WO only for central upto 2/3 frame and only time I really care about absolute sharpness cross frame: I have well above f5.6 or f8. And I do believe the variation results are especially sensitive to WO cross frame which usually not very applicable for normal use.I think each of us with 30-40 years of experience in photography, we must be able to distinguish and understand lens performances without the need of MTF graphs. However, I do find that Zeiss MTF have matched each and every Zeiss lens I have owned and used (except the ZA lenses, which MTF are by Sony). I have every reason to trust the MTF. Even though I have not used any Leica glass, from our forum discussions and sample photos, I also find the MTF to be very accurate.
Unfortunately I find the results by LR very inconsistent. Some seem to make sense, and some look to be sensationally different. I know because I have owned or still own some of the offenders. Due to this inconsistency, I stopped looking at their MTF.
Glad to know that you're in great shape. You need those biceps to carry the Otus
wayne seltzer wrote:
And I envy your light and discrete Leica RF system which is way better for your great street photography!
Plus its hotter and more humid there in Bangkok than here in California. My trainer at the gym kicks my ass regularly so my upper body strength is always there.
edwardkaraa wrote
I actually envy you Wayne You must be still in excellent shape. I guess I got spoiled by RF, because now even the M240 feels heavy sometimes. I do miss shooting with a 1D series body though. wayne seltzer wrote
Edward, I totally agree. MTF's are just one data point IMO and I really need to shoot with a lens to fully evaluate it. The way my Otus 55 renders bright highlights in a controlled fashion and how its clarity and transparency is something no mtf is going to show imo. Bokeh, color rendition, FC etc. too. Glad Zeiss is still focusing some its attention on improving its DSLR lens lineup as I am still an old dinosaur dslr shooter who can still carry the weight of these lenses and can still focus wide open if I have too. My RX1 serves me well when I want to go light. Zeiss lenses are still worth it to me!edwardkaraa wrote
zhangyue wrote
Roger, thanks for comment and detailing about your procedure. I mainly past information I got from Zeiss in recent conversation about my OTUS repair.I am holding neutral position about Zeiss's statement and LR's measurement. Good news is lenses like OTUS are indeed went through K8 measurement either from repair or from manufacture based on above statement.
As for lens variation, I now realize this is a very complicated terminology which is highly depend on varies factor like machine used, human error, test methodology as well as the definition. I will not treat LR's results or Zeiss statement as is but as a very good information to know.
From my own experience, I haven't notice big variation on any lens I purchased other than a few Nikon AF lens. (the 24-70mm has very different focus profile and is very hard to compensate with focus adjust. only one out of 3 copy I had perform as is over the zoom range and focus distance and I had a bad copy of 851.8G and exchanged one perform wonderful. I bought a new 24-85G and find it perform horrible. Return it and didn't bother to exchange.)
My experience with high end Leica and Zeiss lens have always been good. OTUS55 indeed show its best f1.4 performance I have seen, and 50lux ASPH also meet my expectation. They all seem perform as MTF suggested. 50lux, 35lux R seems even better than MTF suggested.
I guess it is mainly because I use WO only for central upto 2/3 frame and only time I really care about absolute sharpness cross frame: I have well above f5.6 or f8. And I do believe the variation results are especially sensitive to WO cross frame which usually not very applicable for normal use.
Unfortunately I find the results by LR very inconsistent. Some seem to make sense, and some look to be sensationally different. I know because I have owned or still own some of the offenders. Due to this inconsistency, I stopped looking at their MTF.
Sep 21, 2015 at 11:29 AM
p.18 #4Zeiss Milvus are out: new range of DSLR lenses!
Steve Spencer wrote:
When I said noticeable, I meant noticeable in an 8 X 10 print. I stand by that statement if the lenses are shot near wide open.
Both lenses stopped down might approach indistinguishable, but wide open it's going to be extremely obvious which is which, even on an 8x10 print. The 50L just is mediocre wide open, it's selling point being AF, shallow DoF and being better than the lousy 50/1.4 USM.
Now if you put the Sigma Art 50/1.4 up against the Otus at 8x10, that might be a different story, but the 50L is not even in shouting distance of either of those lenses in wide aperture performance and it's visible at web resolution, let alone 8x10.
When I said noticeable, I meant noticeable in an 8 X 10 print. I stand by that statement if the lenses are shot near wide open.
Both lenses stopped down might approach indistinguishable, but wide open it's going to be extremely obvious which is which, even on an 8x10 print. The 50L just is mediocre wide open, it's selling point being AF, shallow DoF and being better than the lousy 50/1.4 USM.
Now if you put the Sigma Art 50/1.4 up against the Otus at 8x10, that might be a different story, but the 50L is not even in shouting distance of either of those lenses in wide aperture performance and it's visible at web resolution, let alone 8x10.
Sep 21, 2015 at 01:16 PM
p.18 #5Zeiss Milvus are out: new range of DSLR lenses!
almost time for the release of the milvus...whos getting
Sep 30, 2015 at 08:20 PM
p.18 #6Zeiss Milvus are out: new range of DSLR lenses!
Hmm. I've given this some decent thought. (Context: I used to own a bunch of Contax C/Y lenses, used on Canon FF. Now I use an A7r with Otus and the 135 APO.)
I, personally, don't see any really good glass in the six launch lenses:
The 2.8/21 is good, but it's not quite the C/Y one. Nothing ever will be. Even with the thick sensor glass and all, the C/Y painted magic at f/5.6, and doing the standard closest-focus-on-a-page-of-text-in-bright-light was actually APO in behaviour.
The 2/35 is... meh. Not worth the cost. You can get the Sigma Art for that cash. Or double up and get the 1.4/35 Distagon. Sure, it's a sharp lens and all, but it lacks character.
The 1.4/50 is interesting, but owning the Otus is a no-go. If I didn't, I still wouldn't consider it, as I don't find it that useful. Because...
The 2/50MP is actually nice. I've owned the ZF.2 version years ago, and it reasonably impressed me. Better coatings will help. Tempting, but I'd rather use the cast for it and sell the Otus and get the Coastal Optiocs UV-VIS-NIR. Even on a regular VIS-only body. Superb.
The 1.4/85 looks really, really interesting. Waiting for a whole lot of real-world bokeh examples. I loved the way the C/Y 1.4/85 Planar drew. While the ZE/ZF/Zx version was barf-tacular in its bokeh. Waste of a lens. (Just like the 1.4/50 Planar.) It'll be a tough choice between it and the Otus version. It's the one instance where I may go for this one, if the drawing style is there.
The 2/100 MP is... wanted, but I fear regretting buying it. Really mixed-bag results with the Zx version. If I can stage the shots and control the lighting, fantabulous lens. If I try and wing it hand-held outside... not so much. Or go B&W. I also have the 2/135 APO, so... less incentive. The 1:2 instead of 1:4 sure is nice, but not worth the cost.
My $0.0150526...
I, personally, don't see any really good glass in the six launch lenses:
The 2.8/21 is good, but it's not quite the C/Y one. Nothing ever will be. Even with the thick sensor glass and all, the C/Y painted magic at f/5.6, and doing the standard closest-focus-on-a-page-of-text-in-bright-light was actually APO in behaviour.
The 2/35 is... meh. Not worth the cost. You can get the Sigma Art for that cash. Or double up and get the 1.4/35 Distagon. Sure, it's a sharp lens and all, but it lacks character.
The 1.4/50 is interesting, but owning the Otus is a no-go. If I didn't, I still wouldn't consider it, as I don't find it that useful. Because...
The 2/50MP is actually nice. I've owned the ZF.2 version years ago, and it reasonably impressed me. Better coatings will help. Tempting, but I'd rather use the cast for it and sell the Otus and get the Coastal Optiocs UV-VIS-NIR. Even on a regular VIS-only body. Superb.
The 1.4/85 looks really, really interesting. Waiting for a whole lot of real-world bokeh examples. I loved the way the C/Y 1.4/85 Planar drew. While the ZE/ZF/Zx version was barf-tacular in its bokeh. Waste of a lens. (Just like the 1.4/50 Planar.) It'll be a tough choice between it and the Otus version. It's the one instance where I may go for this one, if the drawing style is there.
The 2/100 MP is... wanted, but I fear regretting buying it. Really mixed-bag results with the Zx version. If I can stage the shots and control the lighting, fantabulous lens. If I try and wing it hand-held outside... not so much. Or go B&W. I also have the 2/135 APO, so... less incentive. The 1:2 instead of 1:4 sure is nice, but not worth the cost.
My $0.0150526...
Sep 30, 2015 at 08:34 PM
p.18 #7Zeiss Milvus are out: new range of DSLR lenses!
Sam_W wrote:
Hmm. I've given this some decent thought. (Context: I used to own a bunch of Contax C/Y lenses, used on Canon FF. Now I use an A7r with Otus and the 135 APO.)
I, personally, don't see any really good glass in the six launch lenses:
The 2.8/21 is good, but it's not quite the C/Y one. Nothing ever will be. Even with the thick sensor glass and all, the C/Y painted magic at f/5.6, and doing the standard closest-focus-on-a-page-of-text-in-bright-light was actually APO in behaviour.
The 2/35 is... meh. Not worth the cost. You can get the Sigma Art for that cash. Or...Show more →
good thoughts. i think the 85mm f1.4 looks the most interesting. Though phoblogger did a quick compare of the lens against the sigma 85 and said they both draw similarly. This was after he gave his initial review of the miles 85 a glowing review saying its their most favorite 85 (over an otus?)Almost to the conclusion to whats it worth to get milvus 85 while the aging sigma draws just as good..granted the build is leagues beyond what sigma can put out, but isn't it all about the image in the end?
I might take the 50mm f1.4 for a spin and I'm almost going to bite on the 85mm to fill some 85 action.
Hmm. I've given this some decent thought. (Context: I used to own a bunch of Contax C/Y lenses, used on Canon FF. Now I use an A7r with Otus and the 135 APO.)
I, personally, don't see any really good glass in the six launch lenses:
The 2.8/21 is good, but it's not quite the C/Y one. Nothing ever will be. Even with the thick sensor glass and all, the C/Y painted magic at f/5.6, and doing the standard closest-focus-on-a-page-of-text-in-bright-light was actually APO in behaviour.
The 2/35 is... meh. Not worth the cost. You can get the Sigma Art for that cash. Or...Show more →
good thoughts. i think the 85mm f1.4 looks the most interesting. Though phoblogger did a quick compare of the lens against the sigma 85 and said they both draw similarly. This was after he gave his initial review of the miles 85 a glowing review saying its their most favorite 85 (over an otus?)Almost to the conclusion to whats it worth to get milvus 85 while the aging sigma draws just as good..granted the build is leagues beyond what sigma can put out, but isn't it all about the image in the end?
I might take the 50mm f1.4 for a spin and I'm almost going to bite on the 85mm to fill some 85 action.
Sep 30, 2015 at 09:45 PM
p.18 #8Zeiss Milvus are out: new range of DSLR lenses!
Also note that the mythical Sigma 1.4/85 Art may show up in the next 12 months or so, especially with PhotoKina 2016 being a few streets down, to the right, follow the winding road, wait 11 months.
That will really push the Otus out of the running, since, I would estimate, it'll be 98-99% of the performance, with AF, and for, realistically, cheaper than the Milvus 85.
That will really push the Otus out of the running, since, I would estimate, it'll be 98-99% of the performance, with AF, and for, realistically, cheaper than the Milvus 85.
Sep 30, 2015 at 11:46 PM
p.18 #9Zeiss Milvus are out: new range of DSLR lenses!
For me, excellent color correction in all dimensions is worth more than 1% of a lens.
Sep 30, 2015 at 11:57 PM
p.18 #10Zeiss Milvus are out: new range of DSLR lenses!
The fact that the Milvus 85 has been designed with no aspherics at all should make its bokeh very different from the Sigma's, if their 85 follows their usual design approach.
Oct 01, 2015 at 12:00 AM
p.18 #11Zeiss Milvus are out: new range of DSLR lenses!
Sam_W wrote:
Also note that the mythical Sigma 1.4/85 Art may show up in the next 12 months or so, especially with PhotoKina 2016 being a few streets down, to the right, follow the winding road, wait 11 months.
That will really push the Otus out of the running, since, I would estimate, it'll be 98-99% of the performance, with AF, and for, realistically, cheaper than the Milvus 85.
The 85mm f1.4 Art will probably have the exact same optics as the current version.
Also note that the mythical Sigma 1.4/85 Art may show up in the next 12 months or so, especially with PhotoKina 2016 being a few streets down, to the right, follow the winding road, wait 11 months.
That will really push the Otus out of the running, since, I would estimate, it'll be 98-99% of the performance, with AF, and for, realistically, cheaper than the Milvus 85.
The 85mm f1.4 Art will probably have the exact same optics as the current version.
Oct 01, 2015 at 02:42 AM
p.18 #12Zeiss Milvus are out: new range of DSLR lenses!
I never agree about the current 50 and 85 planars having awful bokeh. Wide open they can indeed look terrible, but slightly stopped down they have fantastic bokeh. No double edges, no annoying outlining, no cat's eyes at the edges,... really no harshness at all. Much nicer than many more modern lenses. I guess many people only judge these lenses on how they look at F1.4.
Oct 01, 2015 at 03:37 AM
p.18 #13Zeiss Milvus are out: new range of DSLR lenses!
philber wrote:
The fact that the Milvus 85 has been designed with no aspherics at all should make its bokeh very different from the Sigma's, if their 85 follows their usual design approach.
The bokeh on the art lenses do make me dizzy. Quite literally in many images I've seen my eyes strain badly. I think the 24 has the least of it IMO.
The fact that the Milvus 85 has been designed with no aspherics at all should make its bokeh very different from the Sigma's, if their 85 follows their usual design approach.
The bokeh on the art lenses do make me dizzy. Quite literally in many images I've seen my eyes strain badly. I think the 24 has the least of it IMO.
Oct 01, 2015 at 07:08 AM
p.18 #14Zeiss Milvus are out: new range of DSLR lenses!
The 2.8/21, 2/35 and the 1.4/50 as well as the Loxia 2/50 have arrived here today 8Loaners from Zeiss)
I don't have enough time (and decent weather) to do a full review of all of them but I will try to have write one for both 50's.
If you have any requests please let me know and I will try my best to deliver. But please no requests that would require a lot of time to fullfill.
I don't have enough time (and decent weather) to do a full review of all of them but I will try to have write one for both 50's.
If you have any requests please let me know and I will try my best to deliver. But please no requests that would require a lot of time to fullfill.
Oct 07, 2015 at 04:05 PM
p.18 #15Zeiss Milvus are out: new range of DSLR lenses!
how about a downward looking gear shot to give a good idea how big the milvus 50mm is compared to the a7?
i'd mostly be interested in the wide open bokeh from the 50/1.4 at various distances.
if you have time for direct comparison between the g45 and loxia that'd be awesome too...
i'd mostly be interested in the wide open bokeh from the 50/1.4 at various distances.
if you have time for direct comparison between the g45 and loxia that'd be awesome too...
Oct 07, 2015 at 04:08 PM
p.18 #16Zeiss Milvus are out: new range of DSLR lenses!
sebboh wrote:
how about a downward looking gear shot to give a good idea how big the milvus 50mm is compared to the a7?
like this?
sebboh wrote:
i'd mostly be interested in the wide open bokeh from the 50/1.4 at various distances.
if you have time for direct comparison between the g45 and loxia that'd be awesome too...
I'll try my best! My G45 has some mechanical issues, I will see if I can get it to work.
how about a downward looking gear shot to give a good idea how big the milvus 50mm is compared to the a7?
like this?
sebboh wrote:
i'd mostly be interested in the wide open bokeh from the 50/1.4 at various distances.
if you have time for direct comparison between the g45 and loxia that'd be awesome too...
I'll try my best! My G45 has some mechanical issues, I will see if I can get it to work.
Oct 07, 2015 at 04:30 PM
p.18 #17Zeiss Milvus are out: new range of DSLR lenses!
Phillip Reeve wrote:
like this?
yup, thanks!
like this?
yup, thanks!
Oct 07, 2015 at 04:55 PM
p.18 #18Zeiss Milvus are out: new range of DSLR lenses!
Phillip Reeve wrote:
like this?
https://farm1.staticflickr.com/644/21403854094_e06d38f9a2_b.jpg
https://farm1.staticflickr.com/759/21405498003_086051e5d7_b.jpg
https://farm1.staticflickr.com/698/22014339882_8384dae89a_b.jpg
https://farm1.staticflickr.com/752/21405496643_6d5d867c4f_b.jpg
https://farm6.staticflickr.com/5747/21839733809_3d30c03ef6_b.jpg
if you have time for direct comparison between the g45 and loxia that'd be awesome too...I'll try my best! My G45 has some mechanical issues, I will see if I can get it to work.
Gosh!
sebboh wrote
how about a downward looking gear shot to give a good idea how big the milvus 50mm is compared to the a7?https://farm1.staticflickr.com/644/21403854094_e06d38f9a2_b.jpg
https://farm1.staticflickr.com/759/21405498003_086051e5d7_b.jpg
https://farm1.staticflickr.com/698/22014339882_8384dae89a_b.jpg
https://farm1.staticflickr.com/752/21405496643_6d5d867c4f_b.jpg
https://farm6.staticflickr.com/5747/21839733809_3d30c03ef6_b.jpg
sebboh wrote
i'd mostly be interested in the wide open bokeh from the 50/1.4 at various distances.if you have time for direct comparison between the g45 and loxia that'd be awesome too...
Gosh!
Oct 07, 2015 at 07:04 PM
p.18 #19Zeiss Milvus are out: new range of DSLR lenses!
Well, since you have the two lenses, I'd love to see a comparison between Loxia 50 and Milvus 50.
Oct 07, 2015 at 11:01 PM
p.18 #20Zeiss Milvus are out: new range of DSLR lenses!
carlitos wrote:
Gosh!
Yeah, I'm not really sure what Zeiss was thinking. Maybe I'm totally off base. But I think anyone serious and demanding enough about their needs to be willing to carry around a ~50 the size and weight of a 180 is (a) demanding enough to also need the real Otus's APO correction and/or (b) serious enough to justify the price of the real Otus.
Then again Fuji is doing pretty well selling Leica M3 knockoffs to aspirational nostalgists and hipsters, so what do I know.
I think the real question I'd like to ask Zeiss is with all sorts of advanced glass they're starting to use more off, and more and more computer aided design tools, lens design is getting harder not easier.
Gosh!
Yeah, I'm not really sure what Zeiss was thinking. Maybe I'm totally off base. But I think anyone serious and demanding enough about their needs to be willing to carry around a ~50 the size and weight of a 180 is (a) demanding enough to also need the real Otus's APO correction and/or (b) serious enough to justify the price of the real Otus.
Then again Fuji is doing pretty well selling Leica M3 knockoffs to aspirational nostalgists and hipsters, so what do I know.
I think the real question I'd like to ask Zeiss is with all sorts of advanced glass they're starting to use more off, and more and more computer aided design tools, lens design is getting harder not easier.
Oct 07, 2015 at 11:28 PM