Juha Kannisto wrote:
I don't think the described behavior is a SW bug, seems too complex to implement to be happening by accident.
It's lens responsibility to tell camera about effective F-stop decrease. That's how macro lenses with CPU behave. There could be a function in lens FW that calculates effective F-stop. At MFD it'll be almost 1 stop (f2.6 vs f2.0) according to your calculations. If this function is applied to actual aperture value by mistake, the lens will stop it down by that amount, doubling the light loss. And camera won't get correct aperture reading and will display f2 instead.
If you combine effective aperture decrease (1 stop) and accidental aperture stop-down (1 stop) it matches Lloyd's observations (2 stop less light).
I've been refreshing Lloyd's website hoping for more info and saw this posted tonight:
"The Zeiss Batis 40mm f/2 CF is an outstanding lenses that absolutely has to be in my bag. At about $1299 it is very reasonably priced for its performance, and the close focus capability (high performance at close range) only adds to its appeal. At this point, I’d have to call it the best available ~35mm lens option for Sony with only one caveat: 40mm is significantly less wide than 35mm."
Interesting observation given the confirmation of the nonagon bokeh balls as well as his issue with autofocus thus far...
I can't wait to get this lens to use with Batis 25. I ordered it right in the first hour from Adorama. I'm not pixel peeper so don't care much about rectangular or perfectly round bokeh balls. This is the only AF 40mm I can get plus Zeiss quality. 40mm is so versatile! Sony made a big mistake that didn't make a 40mm 1.4 GM.
Me too, I can't wait to get my hands on this. I love the Batis Line and a lightweight 40mm walkaround with added close focus versatility is a very welcome lens in my bag. The Zony 50/1.4 is awesome but it's 1.7Lbs!
Dude - you’ve got huge nonagon balls in this photo, what were you thinking!
Bro this is a great composition but I can’t get past those nonagon balls on top of the head.
😂
eyal wrote:
I've been refreshing Lloyd's website hoping for more info and saw this posted tonight:
"The Zeiss Batis 40mm f/2 CF is an outstanding lenses that absolutely has to be in my bag. At about $1299 it is very reasonably priced for its performance, and the close focus capability (high performance at close range) only adds to its appeal. At this point, I’d have to call it the best available ~35mm lens option for Sony with only one caveat: 40mm is significantly less wide than 35mm."
Interesting observation given the confirmation of the nonagon bokeh balls as well as his issue with autofocus thus far......Show more →
“Autofocus Error in 100% Live View
Update: Zeiss confirms that the lens I am testing does not have production firmware. Accordingly, take this page as examples of what might happen with lenses in general. Further testing will all use manual focus, to concentrate only on optical performance.
...
This page shows only crops comparing what the Sony A7R III + Zeiss Batis 40mm f/2 CF delivers with contrast detect autofocus (CDAF) in magnified Live View at 100%, versus manual focus. In every case, I found that the autofocus result was visibly blurred of a magnitude requiring f/5.6 to f/8 to get back what was lost. This page does NOT evaluate autofocus accuracy in non-magnified Live View.”
It varies but they're usually right next to each other...
In a 2 body/lens scenario,the 50 is better for me on the short end,outside. The 40 is too close to 50 to spend the money on it. I go 24/50 indoors,50/135 outdoors. I'm sure it'll be great though,til the next one.
I’m not in the group of people who care the shapes of bokeh balls more than anything else :-). No lens is perfect.
As I said, if you don’t need a AF 40mm, pass it. If you do, then there is no other choices.
Makten wrote:
Huh? That's one of the characteristics of a lens that will show eve when NOT pixel peeping.
umsl12 wrote:
I’m not in the group of people who care the shapes of bokeh balls more than anything else :-). No lens is perfect.
As I said, if you don’t need a AF 40mm, pass it. If you do, then there is no other choices.
Yes, but at the same time, I'm sure you would prefer if its specular highlights were rounded when shooting wide open. The odd effect will be visible even on resized web images so, no pixel peeping needed,
Sure, currently there aren't 40/2 AF options but I think it's helpful to discuss the pros and cons.
For me personally, I really hate that it's so big for its moderate speed, but will try it out because I love the 40mm FL as a one-lens solution.
Oct 27, 2018 at 10:07 AM
Steve Spencer Offline • • • • • • • Upload & Sell: On
Fred Miranda wrote:
Yes, but at the same time, I'm sure you would prefer if its specular highlights were rounded when shooting wide open. The odd effect will be visible even on resized web images so, no pixel peeping needed,
Sure, currently there aren't 40/2 AF options but I think it's helpful to discuss the pros and cons.
For me personally, I really hate that it's so big for its moderate speed, but will try it out because I love the 40mm FL as a one-lens solution.
While I don't like the nonanogal bokeh balls at f/2, my CV 40 f/1.2 that I use most often at f/2 show a very similar look and I learn to live with it. It is nice when a lens has round bokeh balls wide open, but almost all FF35 lenses have cat's eye shaped bokeh at least toward the corners wide open. Basically we almost always have some sort of compromised bokeh balls in one way or another (e.g., onion rings, cat's eyes, polygonal shapes, bright highlights on the edges) we have to find out what we can tolerate and not tolerate. Yes, it would be better if this lens had a round aperture shape wide open, but let's keep that in perspective. I understand why for some that may be a deal breaker, but if it isn't for somebody else I can totally get that too.
For myself this is a PR work lens so won’t really affect me when I’m doing stuff where bokeh counts but still could be a issue in some circumstances. It just won’t make it out to do the great outdoors images. I got the CV 50 for that
I think the balls are not perfectly rounded but not too bad IMO. I can live with that. In exchange, minimum focus distance 24cm is really nice for me. I Always love micro-contrast of Zeiss lenses but I cannot do MF, so this is the best choice for me at this time, until Sony releases a 40mm/1.4 GM, may be.
Steve Spencer wrote:
While I don't like the nonanogal bokeh balls at f/2, my CV 40 f/1.2 that I use most often at f/2 show a very similar look and I learn to live with it. It is nice when a lens has round bokeh balls wide open, but almost all FF35 lenses have cat's eye shaped bokeh at least toward the corners wide open. Basically we almost always have some sort of compromised bokeh balls in one way or another (e.g., onion rings, cat's eyes, polygonal shapes, bright highlights on the edges) we have to find out what we can tolerate and not tolerate. Yes, it would be better if this lens had a round aperture shape wide open, but let's keep that in perspective. I understand why for some that may be a deal breaker, but if it isn't for somebody else I can totally get that too....Show more →
Is the Batis 40/2 free of onion ring and cat's eye shaped bokeh?
Fred Miranda wrote:
Yes, but at the same time, I'm sure you would prefer if its specular highlights were rounded when shooting wide open. The odd effect will be visible even on resized web images so, no pixel peeping needed,
Sure, currently there aren't 40/2 AF options but I think it's helpful to discuss the pros and cons.
For me personally, I really hate that it's so big for its moderate speed, but will try it out because I love the 40mm FL as a one-lens solution.
I completely agree with you, Fred.
For this size, they should have made a 40/1.4 or at least 1.8. It's not heavy, fortunately.
Personally, I don't like the idea that keeps 67mm filter on all Batis lenses. Not necessary.
My balls aren't perfectly round. Thankfully, my wife saw fit to use them anyway and we have two great kids as a result.
Work with the tools you've got, fellas.
Oct 27, 2018 at 11:26 AM
Steve Spencer Offline • • • • • • • Upload & Sell: On
