zeitlos wrote:
That's what's really disturbing and disappointing. They told me in the mail quoted above that there's no need to fix anything. If you read it carefully they kind of say it's not the lens having a problem with the camera, it's the camera having a problem with the lens.
"Consisting" doesn't mean that all pictures taken with eye-af aren't sharp. Yesterday I took 43 different pictures, 18 fo them were really sharp. You can even see the problem when just looking through the viewfinder. The focus behaves very nervously, even when the motive dosen't move at all. It jumps from the center of the eye to the eyebrow or start with detecting the nose first as the eye before jumping to the eye.
When using other lenses the subject can even move and it's liked glued to the eye. This one's horrible.
Zeiss doesn't see a problem that's the problem. I will return mine tomorrow. If it were a 200 Euro lens I would accept a (possible) workaround, but not for a lens that expensive and bearing this name (Zeiss!!!!!!!!) which I thought is about quality.
As I said, I appreciate them answering that fast, but it's a "there's no problem" mail which is funny since I got lots of other lenses and not a single one of them once behaved like this.
I still hope that lots of people pop up over the time saying that there copy works perfectly so I can buy again. But reading German forums and also international forums, all of them are pretty unanimously stating the same problem, so I'm not that confident for the moment, especially since the speaker of the company who answered my mail seems to say "that's it".
I'm sad since I have been waiting for this one for a long time and bought it the very first second it was available. Marketing won't be able to boost sales if people who own(ed) it say you can't use it properly. Quiet disastrous. ...Show more →
I'm pretty sure the e-mail you got is just a bad communication (not you, maybe inside the company). When they realize the problem, they will jump on it, no question about it. So far someone, perhaps a single person, is just too sure that there isn't a problem. Bring in a systematic showcase and they will knowledge it.
My limited experience with Zeiss on a problem also found them quite reluctant to conclude that there was any issue with my lens (which was under warranty). I eventually gave up sending them sample pics, sent the lens to the retailer instead, and then Zeiss did a great job fixing the lens and the note included with the lens indicated they found it was out of spec. My point is only that it may not be in Zeiss' corporate culture to want to admit that there is an issue with the functioning of the lens. I had already decided not to order this one and if I were on the fence, I would not buy it until this is sorted out. The greatest advantage of Sony for autofocus lenses to my way of thinking is the eye autofocus feature. If that is not working reasonably well for a particular autofocus lens, then I would look at other options.
Jannik Peters wrote:
I have the eye AF issue with my FE 1.4/50 too and it also gets worse the closer I get. Are you both wure that it is really ok with the other lenses?
If you're using an A73 there was a batch with this problem (you can find threads about it on both DPR and TP) but if it were that problem it would happen no matter what lens you have attached. I've compared it to a Sony 50/1.4 and Batis 85/1.8, no problems with focus on either but then the Batis 40mm in the same conditions will consistently front focus.
I'm perfectly willing to accept I could be doing something wrong but given I can repeatedly reproduce the problem and there's been several reports from different sources of the same behaviour I can't easily accept user error at this point.
zeitlos wrote:
That's what's really disturbing and disappointing. They told me in the mail quoted above that there's no need to fix anything. If you read it carefully they kind of say it's not the lens having a problem with the camera, it's the camera having a problem with the lens.
"Consisting" doesn't mean that all pictures taken with eye-af aren't sharp. Yesterday I took 43 different pictures, 18 fo them were really sharp. You can even see the problem when just looking through the viewfinder. The focus behaves very nervously, even when the motive dosen't move at all. It jumps from the center of the eye to the eyebrow or start with detecting the nose first as the eye before jumping to the eye.
When using other lenses the subject can even move and it's liked glued to the eye. This one's horrible.
Zeiss doesn't see a problem that's the problem. I will return mine tomorrow. If it were a 200 Euro lens I would accept a (possible) workaround, but not for a lens that expensive and bearing this name (Zeiss!!!!!!!!) which I thought is about quality.
As I said, I appreciate them answering that fast, but it's a "there's no problem" mail which is funny since I got lots of other lenses and not a single one of them once behaved like this.
I still hope that lots of people pop up over the time saying that there copy works perfectly so I can buy again. But reading German forums and also international forums, all of them are pretty unanimously stating the same problem, so I'm not that confident for the moment, especially since the speaker of the company who answered my mail seems to say "that's it".
I'm sad since I have been waiting for this one for a long time and bought it the very first second it was available. Marketing won't be able to boost sales if people who own(ed) it say you can't use it properly. Quiet disastrous. ...Show more →
WTF kind of answer is that. You build your lenses to the dang system your building them for. You don’t blame the system as the problem. This is 1400 bucks and frankly I’m not sure we are not better off looking somewhere else. I’m seriously considering going back to the Sony 501.4 as I think it’s one if the best 50s made. No Ca gorgeous bokeh and sharp with a great look to it. Probably almost the same size too. Gotta look
Seriously I’ve been doing this too long to hear a company make excuses on a new product out of the gate. I’m shocked to be honest. What kills me is there other Batis lenses are quite good .
GMPhotography wrote:
WTF kind of answer is that. You build your lenses to the dang system your building them for. You don’t blame the system as the problem. This is 1400 bucks and frankly I’m not sure we are not better off looking somewhere else. I’m seriously considering going back to the Sony 501.4 as I think it’s one if the best 50s made. No Ca gorgeous bokeh and sharp with a great look to it. Probably almost the same size too. Gotta look
I think they're very comparable lenses, I have both and prefer to use the Batis as you'll always know the Sony is attached by how much it drags on the front of the body but the Batis has faster AF, much better handling, better corners and then there's that fantastic close focus, the 50mm just can't focus close enough for me. Saying that when I compared photos I always did slightly prefer the background rendering on the Sony but only by the very slimmest of margins (I'm not bothered about the nonagonal bokeh).
So that's what's killing me about this lens, I want to keep it as it's just about perfect for my needs but I don't think I can ignore such a glaring flaw.
GMPhotography wrote:
I’m seriously considering going back to the Sony 501.4 as I think it’s one if the best 50s made. No Ca gorgeous bokeh and sharp with a great look to it. Probably almost the same size too. Gotta look
Just looked it up on BH website...
50/1.4 ZA is 83.5x108mm and 778g
40/2 is 91x93 and 361g
So the ZA is narrower, longer, and twice as heavy.
135/2 is 81x120 and 614g so that's actually a better physical comparator in the Batis line. It's just a little longer and noticeably, but not substantially lighter.
On page 1 of this thread I wrote "Already a spot reserved in my bag. The 40 I've been waiting for. Now where is that preorder link?" After reading through to page 20...😅😢😳
killermac wrote:
Thank god that my dealer will take the Batis back. Maybe I buy it again once the issue is solved.
That's how I handle the issue as well. Hopefully my dealer also takes it back as he normally should. If Zeiss is willing to fix the problem, I may give them a second chance. But first they have to address the issue.
Kalainen wrote:
I'm pretty sure the e-mail you got is just a bad communication (not you, maybe inside the company). When they realize the problem, they will jump on it, no question about it. So far someone, perhaps a single person, is just too sure that there isn't a problem. Bring in a systematic showcase and they will knowledge it.
Ps. Nice Flickr account.
First of all, thanks! Glad if you like some of my Flickr pictures! That's what this should all be about - not front focusing lenses
Second, I really hope they will address the issue. I WANT THIS LENS. But right now it's a no-brainer. Unfortunately in the negativ way. I've just answered their mail. Don't think it will change something in the near future but maybe someday... hopefully.
I had a similar experience with my Batis 25. When I bought it, I noticed a non linearity with depth of field from left side to right side. I had an a7R III on order and they suggested I wait until I get that camera to test again. They said they hadn't had any issues with the Batis 25 and suggested it was an issue with my camera. (Which really didn't make sense because I had no issues with other lenses.)
After getting the a7R III and seeing the same behavior, I finally got them to accept me shipping it back to them for testing. After they received the lens, they told me they didn't have the test equipment in the US to test the lens. (But would soon.) After a few weeks of not hearing anything, I contacted them again. They decided to ship me a new replacement as they were still unable to test the lens properly.
The replacement they sent me is utterly perfect. Had I not pushed a little, I would have had a paperweight. It would have been hard to sell it (I'd have to disclose the issue) and I didn't feel comfortable using it for anything important with the weird depth of field issue.
-Tim
Luvwine wrote:
My limited experience with Zeiss on a problem also found them quite reluctant to conclude that there was any issue with my lens (which was under warranty). I eventually gave up sending them sample pics, sent the lens to the retailer instead, and then Zeiss did a great job fixing the lens and the note included with the lens indicated they found it was out of spec. My point is only that it may not be in Zeiss' corporate culture to want to admit that there is an issue with the functioning of the lens. I had already decided not to order this one and if I were on the fence, I would not buy it until this is sorted out. The greatest advantage of Sony for autofocus lenses to my way of thinking is the eye autofocus feature. If that is not working reasonably well for a particular autofocus lens, then I would look at other options....Show more →
Jonathan Brady wrote:
Considering the same, now. And I HATE adapters. How's the AF performance? Anything to be aware of?
A7III and A7RIII with the latest firmware
Metabones IV also with latest firmware
Autofocus is outstanding, really not even noticeably different than native. Surprised how much I like the lens, I already loved the 40mm focal length. Even with all the good reviews I was skeptical.
maestrofilms wrote:
A7III and A7RIII with the latest firmware
Metabones IV also with latest firmware
Autofocus is outstanding, really not even noticeably different than native. Surprised how much I like the lens, I already loved the 40mm focal length. Even with all the good reviews I was skeptical.
Eye-AF works!
Tiny even with the adapter. 100 bucks. Just sayin
I'm debating it now,for sure. I've owned the 40 STM and an adapter, but never at the same time and I don't have either now. Looking at the MC-11 as an option as well so if anyone has experience with that combo, let me know!
Sony could eliminate this problem if they'd just release a damn 35 or 40mm f/1.4, 1.8, or 2 GM like the new 24GM!
Fred Miranda wrote:
I don't think my ZA 55/1.8 is going anywhere...
I’m thinking about it. With the 24 than in crop it’s a 36 than 55,85. Question for me does this cover the Tammy which is nice but not my kind of lens. It’s a PR lens for me
