This topic is in the 2016 archive. You can read it and like its posts here. It is read only.
Archive 2016Comparison of Zeiss Otus 28 f/1.4 APO vs Leica M 28 f/1.4 ASPH
p.2 #1Comparison of Zeiss Otus 28 f/1.4 APO vs Leica M 28 f/1.4 ASPH
Steve, thanks for these tests. I can imagine how much time and effort you put into it, so my hat off to you! As I hadn't done a similar series with my Otus 28, I wasn't aware I should be so careful with larger apertures, nor had I seen this on any of my shots. But I hadn't looked for it, either. I'll see if I can replicate that.
Nov 01, 2016 at 12:26 AM
p.2 #2Comparison of Zeiss Otus 28 f/1.4 APO vs Leica M 28 f/1.4 ASPH
Thank you for the test.
While the Otus might be sharper in the corners. I would like to know from you the color fidelity of the Otus vs the Leica.
To my eyes, and not knowing the real colors you saw, I prefer the Leica color rendition.
You would 'nt have a Leica R Elmarit 28/2.8 vII for comparison as well
While the Otus might be sharper in the corners. I would like to know from you the color fidelity of the Otus vs the Leica.
To my eyes, and not knowing the real colors you saw, I prefer the Leica color rendition.
You would 'nt have a Leica R Elmarit 28/2.8 vII for comparison as well
Nov 01, 2016 at 01:14 AM
p.2 #3Comparison of Zeiss Otus 28 f/1.4 APO vs Leica M 28 f/1.4 ASPH
JohnJ wrote:
Steve, nice work but none of it matters because the Otus focuses in the WRONG (Nikon) direction so it doesn't exist! Damn Nikon, a pox on them and their focusing direction.
John, I strongly share your preference. For video work, I even have a reversing gear on my follow focus so that the Nikon lenses turn the right way rather than the wrong way and it really feels wrong on video when you are turning toward yourself to focus further away.
Steve, nice work but none of it matters because the Otus focuses in the WRONG (Nikon) direction so it doesn't exist! Damn Nikon, a pox on them and their focusing direction.
John, I strongly share your preference. For video work, I even have a reversing gear on my follow focus so that the Nikon lenses turn the right way rather than the wrong way and it really feels wrong on video when you are turning toward yourself to focus further away.
Nov 01, 2016 at 05:26 AM
p.2 #4Comparison of Zeiss Otus 28 f/1.4 APO vs Leica M 28 f/1.4 ASPH
phuang3 wrote:
At f/1.4 center, Otus is clearly the winner. There is trace of veiling glare on Summilux. Be noted that Summilux shows moderate astigmatism even on M240.
I agree but it is just a trace of veiling glare and interestingly if you compare the centers even the Lux at f/1.4 competes very well with the f/8 exposure in which you have the beginning of diffraction. So both lenses are great in the centre wide open.
At f/1.4 center, Otus is clearly the winner. There is trace of veiling glare on Summilux. Be noted that Summilux shows moderate astigmatism even on M240.
I agree but it is just a trace of veiling glare and interestingly if you compare the centers even the Lux at f/1.4 competes very well with the f/8 exposure in which you have the beginning of diffraction. So both lenses are great in the centre wide open.
Nov 01, 2016 at 05:29 AM
p.2 #5Comparison of Zeiss Otus 28 f/1.4 APO vs Leica M 28 f/1.4 ASPH
uhoh7 wrote:
Jeez, the Lux is going to shoot very well on Kolari or M sensor.
I'd like to see some of your general photography with both.
I will include some a number of types of photography as I update this thread. Anything you would like to see in particular? I am planning close ups and portraits for sure.
Jeez, the Lux is going to shoot very well on Kolari or M sensor.
I'd like to see some of your general photography with both.
I will include some a number of types of photography as I update this thread. Anything you would like to see in particular? I am planning close ups and portraits for sure.
Nov 01, 2016 at 05:31 AM
p.2 #6Comparison of Zeiss Otus 28 f/1.4 APO vs Leica M 28 f/1.4 ASPH
Almass wrote:
Thank you for the test.
While the Otus might be sharper in the corners. I would like to know from you the color fidelity of the Otus vs the Leica.
To my eyes, and not knowing the real colors you saw, I prefer the Leica color rendition.
You would 'nt have a Leica R Elmarit 28/2.8 vII for comparison as well
To my eye both have excellent color fidelity, but I still don't have my wide gamut monitor set up--I will later this week and report back if I see anything of note. I do think the Lux colors are a bit more saturated out of camera but I see that as a typical Leica trait and I do generally like that but it is easily adjusted in post processing. Sadly, I had to sell my Leica R 28 Elmarit II to get the Lux, so I don't have it for comparison.
Thank you for the test.
While the Otus might be sharper in the corners. I would like to know from you the color fidelity of the Otus vs the Leica.
To my eyes, and not knowing the real colors you saw, I prefer the Leica color rendition.
You would 'nt have a Leica R Elmarit 28/2.8 vII for comparison as well
To my eye both have excellent color fidelity, but I still don't have my wide gamut monitor set up--I will later this week and report back if I see anything of note. I do think the Lux colors are a bit more saturated out of camera but I see that as a typical Leica trait and I do generally like that but it is easily adjusted in post processing. Sadly, I had to sell my Leica R 28 Elmarit II to get the Lux, so I don't have it for comparison.
Nov 01, 2016 at 05:34 AM
p.2 #7Comparison of Zeiss Otus 28 f/1.4 APO vs Leica M 28 f/1.4 ASPH
Thanks for the test, very nicely done.
Most surprising difference to me is how much higher the micro contrast of the Lux is compared to the Otus at f/4, center. The Otus looks downrigth soft for that aperture, which is expected to be where the peak performance is.
Most surprising difference to me is how much higher the micro contrast of the Lux is compared to the Otus at f/4, center. The Otus looks downrigth soft for that aperture, which is expected to be where the peak performance is.
Nov 01, 2016 at 05:37 AM
p.2 #8Comparison of Zeiss Otus 28 f/1.4 APO vs Leica M 28 f/1.4 ASPH
alundeb wrote:
Thanks for the test, very nicely done.
Most surprising difference to me is how much higher the micro contrast of the Lux is compared to the Otus at f/4, center. The Otus looks downrigth soft for that aperture, which is expected to be where the peak performance is.
I guess I don't see that. To my eye both the Lux and the Otus have excellent micro contrast at f/4 in the center and I don't really see one as having more than the other. Perhaps your eye is sharper, but I think this is an excellent result.
Thanks for the test, very nicely done.
Most surprising difference to me is how much higher the micro contrast of the Lux is compared to the Otus at f/4, center. The Otus looks downrigth soft for that aperture, which is expected to be where the peak performance is.
I guess I don't see that. To my eye both the Lux and the Otus have excellent micro contrast at f/4 in the center and I don't really see one as having more than the other. Perhaps your eye is sharper, but I think this is an excellent result.
Nov 01, 2016 at 05:57 AM
p.2 #9Comparison of Zeiss Otus 28 f/1.4 APO vs Leica M 28 f/1.4 ASPH
There is also motion blur in Otus f/8. Double wires.
Nov 01, 2016 at 06:04 AM
p.2 #10Comparison of Zeiss Otus 28 f/1.4 APO vs Leica M 28 f/1.4 ASPH
alundeb wrote:
There is also motion blur in Otus f/8. Double wires.
Yes, there is just a touch, but I am not sure if that is camera motion blur or subject motion blur. If you note in that shot there is a van driving over the bridge just when the shot was taken and it definitely has subject motion blur. It might have subtlety vibrated the wires on the bridge as well. I don't see motion blur in other areas, but there might be just a touch. There is also the possibility the bridge I was on was vibrating. It was on a foot bridge and at times runners came over the bridge and vibrated it noticeably, and I had to wait until the vibrations died down to shoot. Perhaps in this shot I didn't wait long enough. In any event, the support should have been plenty to avoid any motion from the setup.
There is also motion blur in Otus f/8. Double wires.
Yes, there is just a touch, but I am not sure if that is camera motion blur or subject motion blur. If you note in that shot there is a van driving over the bridge just when the shot was taken and it definitely has subject motion blur. It might have subtlety vibrated the wires on the bridge as well. I don't see motion blur in other areas, but there might be just a touch. There is also the possibility the bridge I was on was vibrating. It was on a foot bridge and at times runners came over the bridge and vibrated it noticeably, and I had to wait until the vibrations died down to shoot. Perhaps in this shot I didn't wait long enough. In any event, the support should have been plenty to avoid any motion from the setup.
Nov 01, 2016 at 07:17 AM
p.2 #11Comparison of Zeiss Otus 28 f/1.4 APO vs Leica M 28 f/1.4 ASPH
Steve Spencer wrote:
Most surprising difference to me is how much higher the micro contrast of the Lux is compared to the Otus at f/4, center. The Otus looks downrigth soft for that aperture, which is expected to be where the peak performance is.I guess I don't see that. To my eye both the Lux and the Otus have excellent micro contrast at f/4 in the center and I don't really see one as having more than the other. Perhaps your eye is sharper, but I think this is an excellent result.
I think the Otus f/2.8 - f/4 set is a tiny bit front focused. It seems on the light that you changed lenses between each set, and that the focus was better for the Otus in the f/1.4 - f/2 set than in the f/2.8 - f/4 set. Not terribly much, but enough to make f/2 look sharper than f/4, which I don't think is to be expected.
alundeb wrote
Thanks for the test, very nicely done.Most surprising difference to me is how much higher the micro contrast of the Lux is compared to the Otus at f/4, center. The Otus looks downrigth soft for that aperture, which is expected to be where the peak performance is.
I think the Otus f/2.8 - f/4 set is a tiny bit front focused. It seems on the light that you changed lenses between each set, and that the focus was better for the Otus in the f/1.4 - f/2 set than in the f/2.8 - f/4 set. Not terribly much, but enough to make f/2 look sharper than f/4, which I don't think is to be expected.
Nov 01, 2016 at 07:54 AM
p.2 #12Comparison of Zeiss Otus 28 f/1.4 APO vs Leica M 28 f/1.4 ASPH
alundeb wrote:
Most surprising difference to me is how much higher the micro contrast of the Lux is compared to the Otus at f/4, center. The Otus looks downrigth soft for that aperture, which is expected to be where the peak performance is.I guess I don't see that. To my eye both the Lux and the Otus have excellent micro contrast at f/4 in the center and I don't really see one as having more than the other. Perhaps your eye is sharper, but I think this is an excellent result.I think the Otus f/2.8 - f/4 set is a tiny bit front focused. It seems on the light that you changed lenses between each set, and that the focus was better for the Otus in the f/1.4 - f/2 set than in the f/2.8 - f/4 set. Not terribly much, but enough to make f/2 look sharper than f/4, which I don't think is to be expected.
No, I don't think so in this case. Look at the radio tower behind the bridge. The bridge is about 600 yards away, but the tower behind it is about another mile further away, so it is much further away than the bridge. If you look at the f/4 center shot to me it looks like the tower is at least as in focus as in the f/1.4 shot, so I don't think the f/4 shot was front focussed. The focus point was actually the building on the lower right of the center crops, which is about 700 yards from where I was shooting and about 100 yards further away than the bridge with the wires, so I would have had to badly front focus to mess up the bridge. I used the 14X (or whatever the highest magnification is for the A7rII) magnification on the back LCD. I did my best, but I don't claim it was perfect. By the way, I shot the f/1.4 shots first with the Otus followed by the Lux, then the f/2 shots, then the f/2.8 shots, so that each aperture would have as similar light as possible to compare the two lenses. So, the f/4 shots were about 5 minutes or so later than the f/1.4 shots and I think the difference is not focus but the change in the quality of light, but it is pretty hard to say.
Edited on Nov 01, 2016 at 04:58 PM · View previous versions
Steve Spencer wrote
alundeb wrote
Thanks for the test, very nicely done.Most surprising difference to me is how much higher the micro contrast of the Lux is compared to the Otus at f/4, center. The Otus looks downrigth soft for that aperture, which is expected to be where the peak performance is.
No, I don't think so in this case. Look at the radio tower behind the bridge. The bridge is about 600 yards away, but the tower behind it is about another mile further away, so it is much further away than the bridge. If you look at the f/4 center shot to me it looks like the tower is at least as in focus as in the f/1.4 shot, so I don't think the f/4 shot was front focussed. The focus point was actually the building on the lower right of the center crops, which is about 700 yards from where I was shooting and about 100 yards further away than the bridge with the wires, so I would have had to badly front focus to mess up the bridge. I used the 14X (or whatever the highest magnification is for the A7rII) magnification on the back LCD. I did my best, but I don't claim it was perfect. By the way, I shot the f/1.4 shots first with the Otus followed by the Lux, then the f/2 shots, then the f/2.8 shots, so that each aperture would have as similar light as possible to compare the two lenses. So, the f/4 shots were about 5 minutes or so later than the f/1.4 shots and I think the difference is not focus but the change in the quality of light, but it is pretty hard to say.
Edited on Nov 01, 2016 at 04:58 PM · View previous versions
Nov 01, 2016 at 09:34 AM
p.2 #13Comparison of Zeiss Otus 28 f/1.4 APO vs Leica M 28 f/1.4 ASPH
I was just going by the foreground in the center crop, which is not as soft, relatively speaking. Do you have any other explanation to why the Otus is suddenly softer at f/2.8 and f/4 than at f/2 and then suddenly sharper at f/5.6 again? I don't think it is the light as it doesn't look that way, and it happens only to that particular set and not the Lux.
Nov 01, 2016 at 11:40 AM
p.2 #14Comparison of Zeiss Otus 28 f/1.4 APO vs Leica M 28 f/1.4 ASPH
alundeb wrote:
I was just going by the foreground in the center crop, which is not as soft, relatively speaking. Do you have any other explanation to why the Otus is suddenly softer at f/2.8 and f/4 than at f/2 and then suddenly sharper at f/5.6 again? I don't think it is the light as it doesn't look that way, and it happens only to that particular set and not the Lux.
Yes, the f/4 center foreground is sharper than the f/1.4 center foreground, but you would expect that as you stop down the area within the depth of field will get closer to the camera. I don't think the f/4 center shot is less sharp than the f/2 center shot for the Otus, but maybe that is just my eyes. I do think the light for the Otus f/2 center shot is especially nice as there was a nice break in the clouds with some nice light of the setting sun just at that time. There isn't as much improvement if any for the Otus in the center from f/2 to f/2.8 and I attribute that to the change in light, but to my eyes the center f/4 shot is a bit better than either the f/2 or the f/2.8 shot. Of course minor variance in vibrations on the bridge I was standing on and in my focussing could also affect the results. I don't think there is much more to it than that. As I said I focussed on the building on the bottom left in the center crops and I used the highest magnification (I think 14X) on the rear LCD to focus. The test isn't perfect, but I did give it my best effort.
I was just going by the foreground in the center crop, which is not as soft, relatively speaking. Do you have any other explanation to why the Otus is suddenly softer at f/2.8 and f/4 than at f/2 and then suddenly sharper at f/5.6 again? I don't think it is the light as it doesn't look that way, and it happens only to that particular set and not the Lux.
Yes, the f/4 center foreground is sharper than the f/1.4 center foreground, but you would expect that as you stop down the area within the depth of field will get closer to the camera. I don't think the f/4 center shot is less sharp than the f/2 center shot for the Otus, but maybe that is just my eyes. I do think the light for the Otus f/2 center shot is especially nice as there was a nice break in the clouds with some nice light of the setting sun just at that time. There isn't as much improvement if any for the Otus in the center from f/2 to f/2.8 and I attribute that to the change in light, but to my eyes the center f/4 shot is a bit better than either the f/2 or the f/2.8 shot. Of course minor variance in vibrations on the bridge I was standing on and in my focussing could also affect the results. I don't think there is much more to it than that. As I said I focussed on the building on the bottom left in the center crops and I used the highest magnification (I think 14X) on the rear LCD to focus. The test isn't perfect, but I did give it my best effort.
Nov 01, 2016 at 03:42 PM
p.2 #15Comparison of Zeiss Otus 28 f/1.4 APO vs Leica M 28 f/1.4 ASPH
In case anyone is interested, I also tried my 28 Lux on the a7RII (a loaner that has since been returned). The files are accessible here. I probably should have focus bracketed the wide open shot, which shows a lot of glow. I'm not sure it's representative as it's worse than Steve's example and on the M240 I don't see it to this extent. Focus was on the church steeple near the center of the frame. I didn't try refocusing at the edge to see how that would/could improve edge performance.
As hinted, I also shot the same scene with the M240. Edges are about as good as center at infinity (vastly different from what I got with the a7RII), though there is a mild mid zone dip that disappears by f/5.6. I'm reluctant to post my M240 results because it appears my 28 Lux copy focuses just shy of infinity and therefore probably isn't representative of the lens's optimum infinity performance. Unfortunately I don't have access to a 28 Otus to compare.
As hinted, I also shot the same scene with the M240. Edges are about as good as center at infinity (vastly different from what I got with the a7RII), though there is a mild mid zone dip that disappears by f/5.6. I'm reluctant to post my M240 results because it appears my 28 Lux copy focuses just shy of infinity and therefore probably isn't representative of the lens's optimum infinity performance. Unfortunately I don't have access to a 28 Otus to compare.
Nov 01, 2016 at 05:18 PM
p.2 #16Comparison of Zeiss Otus 28 f/1.4 APO vs Leica M 28 f/1.4 ASPH
Steve Spencer wrote:
The test isn't perfect, but I did give it my best effort.
It's OK. There is valuable information in it, I just take some reservations in parts of the results.
The test isn't perfect, but I did give it my best effort.
It's OK. There is valuable information in it, I just take some reservations in parts of the results.
Nov 02, 2016 at 03:59 AM
p.2 #17Comparison of Zeiss Otus 28 f/1.4 APO vs Leica M 28 f/1.4 ASPH
I love my Otus 28 and can't imagine a lens beating it in sharpness across the frame wide open. I was very impressed with that when I took shots of Stanford's MemU church, a good planar subject with lots of detail. Things are super busy at work so don't have time to post some shots yet. The 95mm filter size is pretty massive. I bought a polarizer with it but need to now get a 7 stop ND filter.
Nov 02, 2016 at 07:30 AM
p.2 #18Comparison of Zeiss Otus 28 f/1.4 APO vs Leica M 28 f/1.4 ASPH
wayne seltzer wrote:
I love my Otus 28 and can't imagine a lens beating it in sharpness across the frame wide open. I was very impressed with that when I took shots of Stanford's MemU church, a good planar subject with lots of detail. Things are super busy at work so don't have time to post some shots yet. The 95mm filter size is pretty massive. I bought a polarizer with it but need to now get a 7 stop ND filter.
The Otus is big but I think the images are lovely from it. As I said above, I think the Otus at f/5.6 is pretty close to perfect in these shots. No CA, wonderful micro contrast, very nice colors. It is pretty unwieldy to use it however. I have a 1-6 stop Variable ND filter for this lens and it works well. It was not cheap, but when you pony up for this lens getting good filters just seems to make sense. I also have a 95mm Lee adapter ring, that I haven't used with the lens yet. If you are interested I can let you know if it works. I'm not sure I might need the wide angle adapter and I just have the regular one.
I love my Otus 28 and can't imagine a lens beating it in sharpness across the frame wide open. I was very impressed with that when I took shots of Stanford's MemU church, a good planar subject with lots of detail. Things are super busy at work so don't have time to post some shots yet. The 95mm filter size is pretty massive. I bought a polarizer with it but need to now get a 7 stop ND filter.
The Otus is big but I think the images are lovely from it. As I said above, I think the Otus at f/5.6 is pretty close to perfect in these shots. No CA, wonderful micro contrast, very nice colors. It is pretty unwieldy to use it however. I have a 1-6 stop Variable ND filter for this lens and it works well. It was not cheap, but when you pony up for this lens getting good filters just seems to make sense. I also have a 95mm Lee adapter ring, that I haven't used with the lens yet. If you are interested I can let you know if it works. I'm not sure I might need the wide angle adapter and I just have the regular one.
Nov 02, 2016 at 08:22 AM
p.2 #19Comparison of Zeiss Otus 28 f/1.4 APO vs Leica M 28 f/1.4 ASPH
I bought the Leica 28/1.4 in large measure due to the size difference. The Otus is so big that it seems like it should have a tripod collar on the lens. I have no doubt that the Otus is better corrected than the Leica, but for me, I am equally confident that any difference in technical excellence is more than compensated by the size and weight difference.
Nov 02, 2016 at 10:48 AM
p.2 #20Comparison of Zeiss Otus 28 f/1.4 APO vs Leica M 28 f/1.4 ASPH
Exellent comparison--thank you. 28 and 85 are my favorite FL's. I wouldn't even consider the Otus based on sheer size and for me 28 must be a very portable lens. But everyone's needs are different. I'd love to see Zeiss take a shot at some very high IQ is a very small size...something like the Contax G line.
Nov 02, 2016 at 12:27 PM