Enri wrote:
Fred, at first sight, do you think it could be better than the CV 40 1.2 generally speaking... if it does make any sense. Or, even better, for what kind of applications could it be better than the CV? I know I am asking almost for a prophecy
For my use, street and travel photography, I need AF...so the Batis it is...or wait...maybe the CV 40 / 50 with tap.
Wow.... just wow. Honestly, they should've called it APO-Distagon. Image samples are very impressive! Like I felt, this and 135mm Batis are two ultimate Zeiss AF lenses and are enough to justify having E-mount camera.
And I appreciate how Zeiss took their time to provide a large sample gallery themselves instead of relying on reviewers who often even struggle with exposure triangle and proper camera handholding technique
Sep 27, 2018 at 03:28 PM
Steve Spencer Online • • • • • • • Upload & Sell: On
This looks like exactly what I expected including the price. I think even though it is kind of fat, it is a great addition. I think it will be a very nice walk around for Sony cameras. Very nice image quality, can shoot it well at any distance including quite close. Fairly fast aperture. I will be adding it at some point to my wife's AF set of lenses.
I'm still not 100% convinced that the 40mm FL is for me, but this lens has definitely piqued my interest. For trips when photography isn't the main goal or MF becomes challenging, a wide AF lens would come in handy. However, 40mm is somewhat close to my beloved 55 1.8, hence I the 24 GM might gap better.
Initially I didn't quite understand Fred's and others' strong interest in a 28mm, but thinking about these FL gaps, I now get it: A 28mm prime sized like the 24 GM or smaller (while being better than the 28 2) would pair neatly with the 55 1.8.
darrellc wrote:
In press release (and in Fred's original post above) says delivery in Nov 2018. I don't see pre-orders up at any of the retailers I checked yet.
Thanks. I'm not sure why it posted my question in triplicate nor why I can't delete them. Best I can do is 'hide' the posts
Chris_88 wrote:
I'm still not 100% convinced that the 40mm FL is for me, but this lens has definitely piqued my interest. For trips when photography isn't the main goal or MF becomes challenging, a wide AF lens would come in handy. However, 40mm is somewhat close to my beloved 55 1.8, hence I the 24 GM might gap better.
Initially I didn't quite understand Fred's and others' strong interest in a 28mm, but thinking about these FL gaps, I now get it: A 28mm prime sized like the 24 GM or smaller (while being better than the 28 2) would pair neatly with the 55 1.8. ...Show more →
I have been going through this same dilemma...and am leaning towards the 24 GM/55 1.8 combo. Yes, I already have an 85mm which some would call "too close" to the 55, however when traveling the size/performance combo between the 24 & 55 will make sense. My 85 & 135 seem to be used more for planned portrait outings, and am happy with them. So really I see 24/55 and 85/135 being my "prime combo's" depending on what I'm up to. Oh, and the Batis 18 for wide stuff, but it's kind of in it's own UWA category to me.
Hard to believe how far the FE lens lineup has come in the past couple years.
1. Might be the last Batis, or at least across the critical middle focal lengths - several hints in the PR blurb:
"The lens *bridges the current gap* between the ZEISS Batis 2/25 and the ZEISS Batis 1.8/85”
"We have made the entire ZEISS Batis lens family even more attractive by *offering the complete range of focal lengths*”
2. Another pointer also to the intention to normalize 40mm as the 'next wider than 50mm' FL we see across several makers at present; it's an attempt at shaping consumer preference by certain makers. It's very likely C/N/Sony (and indeed CZ in the Supreme Primes) have this right by sticking with traditional FLs, that is 35mm/50mm.
"If you’re traveling light and decide to opt for *just one lens, then this would be it*” says Pollmann.
Fred Miranda wrote:
The Batis 25's MTF shows lower resolution wide open but it's flatter throughout the image field.
Just comparison MTFs, the Zeiss 40/2's resolution/contrast seems to have more in common with the 85/1.8 than with the 25/2.
Yes it's very good. But the Lox 25 is better; which is maybe a touch surprising for 25 v 40. I'm sure it's plenty good enough but part of me was hoping for a resolution monster which has MTF40 wandering about 80%....but maythat's unrealistic for an only slightly chubby AF lens. I'd rather this MTF than a SigMonster.
But can't we have something compact with the MTF of the Leica APO Summicron 2/50 (really the only Leica lens I have GAS for)
It’s one lens I had my eye on. Just been busy so I’ll catch up on all the details. Regardless it’s prettycool Sony is getting a lot of attention lately. As a end user you gotta love it.
Rendering is good but not great at mid-distance to my eyes. As someone mentioned, it seems match the contrast and color signature of the other Batis lenses, especially the 85/1.8.
Fred Miranda wrote:
chez,
Why do you prefer AF for travel and street? Obviously this is a personal choice but I'm just curious.
Busy markets, lots of commotion everywhere, crowded alleys...I just don't have the time to manually focus. Many of my shots are instantaneous environmental / cultural portraits that happen very quickly. I've tried to use a manual lens but I just found I spent too much of my time concentrating on trying to be in focus and less on getting the image at the right time.
philip_pj wrote:
1. Might be the last Batis, or at least across the critical middle focal lengths - several hints in the PR blurb:
"The lens *bridges the current gap* between the ZEISS Batis 2/25 and the ZEISS Batis 1.8/85”
"We have made the entire ZEISS Batis lens family even more attractive by *offering the complete range of focal lengths*”
2. Another pointer also to the intention to normalize 40mm as the 'next wider than 50mm' FL we see across several makers at present; it's an attempt at shaping consumer preference by certain makers. It's very likely C/N/Sony (and indeed CZ in the Supreme Primes) have this right by sticking with traditional FLs, that is 35mm/50mm.
"If you’re traveling light and decide to opt for *just one lens, then this would be it*” says Pollmann.
I have noticed on Zeiss' homeoages that the mirrorless and DSLR lenses have switched places, the mirrorless lenses first, then the DSLR lenses. This puts the Batis series of lenses first, which is not a way of saying that Zeiss has ended the Batis line. Far from it. There'll be more Batis lenses.
chez wrote:
Busy markets, lots of commotion everywhere, crowded alleys...I just don't have the time to manually focus. Many of my shots are instantaneous environmental / cultural portraits that happen very quickly. I've tried to use a manual lens but I just found I spent too much of my time concentrating on trying to be in focus and less on getting the image at the right time.
I reserve manual focus for my landscapes.
and the fact that Eye focus works well, and/or aging eyes, ect. There arent many lenses that I would consider MF these days, gotta have my video AF. Only wide angles with massive DOF, I am ok with that being MF.
Enri wrote:
I've inspected the official images bunch (mostly f/2 and really not specially good photos) and found them sharp throughout the whole frame (when the photo is not misfocused) but nothing to write home about (like the Batis 25), allso quite clean of color aberrations (cleaner than the 25 mm) and with a smooth OOF rendering... Other opinions?
The samples posted so far remind me quite a bit of the early samples we got from the 35L II Canon. It is a very well corrected lens that doesn't scream "character" but I like the samples so far as they have a certain clarity to them; it all looks very neutral and I think there will be no surprises, good or bad, beyond what one would expect from a 40mm lens with an f/2 aperture. A bit like the 135 2.8 - if it's a focal length and aperture combination you want I imagine there won't be much better if you want autofocus.
