I finally got around to uploading my pictures from 2 weeks ago while in New York City testing my Batis 40 and my Sony 24 GM lenses. I'll post some here for the Batis 40 and post some of the Sony 24 GM on that thread later.
I took with me the following 4 lenses; CV 15, Sony 24 GM, Batis 40, & Batis 85. My most used lens was the Sony 24 GM, next was the Batis 40.
I really enjoyed using both of these lenses and they both have found a home in my AF prime kit. The Batis handled very well and I enjoyed using the close focusing capabilities. I didn't test the Eye-AF but the AF in general both normal and close focus were very fast and accurate.
Fred Miranda wrote:
Definitely a high resolution lens Chuck. What are your initial impressions on rendering?
Fred,
I'm very pleased with the overall rendering of the Batis 40. The close focus capabilities came in handy and I was pleased with the results. I can see using this lens a lot while doing travel or general photography paired with my CV 15 and Sony 24 GM or with my 16-35 GM. I will take it out and test the rendering against my CV 40 f/1.2. I'm very pleased with the Sony 24 GM and if the rendering of the Batis 40 is as good or better than the CV 40 I will have a tough time deciding on which Landscape kit I will favor. I had been using my CV 12, CV 15, Loxia 25, CV 40, Batis 85, Batis 135 as my primnary landscape kit. However, the Sony 24 GM has me really thinking that my CV 12, 16-35 GM, Sony 24 GM, Batis 40, Batis 85, Batis 135 may make a great 6 lens Travel and Landscape kit.
Need more testing to determine which way I'll go but I really enjoyed shooting with these new lenses.
Chuck
This Fire truck had it's siren blaring at full volume and people just casually crossed the intersection like nothing was going on around them
I'm very pleased with the overall rendering of the Batis 40. The close focus capabilities came in handy and I was pleased with the results. I can see using this lens a lot while doing travel or general photography paired with my CV 15 and Sony 24 GM or with my 16-35 GM. I will take it out and test the rendering against my CV 40 f/1.2. I'm very pleased with the Sony 24 GM and if the rendering of the Batis 40 is as good or better than the CV 40 I will have a tough time deciding on which Landscape kit I will favor. I had been using my CV 12, CV 15, Loxia 25, CV 40, Batis 85, Batis 135 as my primnary landscape kit. However, the Sony 24 GM has me really thinking that my CV 12, 16-35 GM, Sony 24 GM, Batis 40, Batis 85, Batis 135 may make a great 6 lens Travel and Landscape kit.
Need more testing to determine which way I'll go but I really enjoyed shooting with these new lenses.
For landscapes with the A7RIII (or newer bodies) + AF lenses, there is a very helpful feature I'm using a lot:
"AF in Focus Mag."
You can magnify your subject at 12.4x and use a very precise AF (+) sign cursor to focus your subject. It is VERY precise and never missed focus for me. So, AF lenses are definitely an option for accurate focus when shooting landscapes with newer Sony bodies.
Fred Miranda wrote:
Thanks for your thoughts Chuck!
For landscapes with the A7RIII (or newer bodies) + AF lenses, there is a very helpful feature I'm using a lot:
"AF in Focus Mag."
You can magnify your subject at 12.4x and use a very precise AF (+) sign cursor to focus your subject. It is VERY precise and never missed focus for me. So, AF lenses are definitely an option for accurate focus when shooting landscapes with newer Sony bodies.
Have you used this feature in stars?
Fred Miranda wrote:
Thanks for your thoughts Chuck!
For landscapes with the A7RIII (or newer bodies) + AF lenses, there is a very helpful feature I'm using a lot:
"AF in Focus Mag."
You can magnify your subject at 12.4x and use a very precise AF (+) sign cursor to focus your subject. It is VERY precise and never missed focus for me. So, AF lenses are definitely an option for accurate focus when shooting landscapes with newer Sony bodies.
Fred I agree, I've been shooting with the AF Mag assist especially in critical focus situations. I have it assigned to my Down Button on the back Control Wheel so it is an easy press to 6.2 x magnification then Center press once to 12.4 x magnification.
Works great!
Chuck Coyne wrote:
Fred I agree, I've been shooting with the AF Mag assist especially in critical focus situations. I have it assigned to my Down Button on the back Control Wheel so it is an easy press to 6.2 x magnification then Center press once to 12.4 x magnification.
Works great!
I keep mine on the joystick itself. Two clicks on the joystick and I'm at 12.4x.
Basically I use the joystick for MF and AF focus magnification.
Fred Miranda wrote:
Thanks for your thoughts Chuck!
For landscapes with the A7RIII (or newer bodies) + AF lenses, there is a very helpful feature I'm using a lot:
"AF in Focus Mag."
You can magnify your subject at 12.4x and use a very precise AF (+) sign cursor to focus your subject. It is VERY precise and never missed focus for me. So, AF lenses are definitely an option for accurate focus when shooting landscapes with newer Sony bodies.
Fred,
Add this item to your checklist when you get the Batis. Lloyd specifically mentioned this feature did not work with the Batis to ensure critical focus.
eyal wrote:
Fred,
Add this item to your checklist when you get the Batis. Lloyd specifically mentioned this feature did not work with the Batis to ensure critical focus.
That makes no sense! How could Zeiss overlook this? "AF in Focus Mag." is so helpful with applications that require a tripod. It's also a great workaround for lenses with bad manual focus-by-wire implementations. The Batis line is among those with not so great focus by wire compared to the latest Sony lenses, so "AF in Focus Mag." is almost a necessity for them.
My Batis 135 allows "AF in Focus Mag." and I remember that the 25mm and 85mm lenses also did.....
Zeiss can't just take this feature away. Isn't it just software?
I think it 'works' but his point was it did not ensure critical focus and he had to switch to completely manual focus.
I can't find his comments now
Luckily it still sounds like software. If the Eye-AF and now this can be fixed with a firmware update, it will be fine but how would it be done? Send the lens to Zeiss? I've never seen Zeiss releasing any firmware upgrade for any E-mount lens. Hopefully it's possible to do through the camera.
Found the quote buried in this thread that I had copied from his site. I think this is the same issue as what you are talking about and agree it seems to be related to the EyeAF issue:
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.
I looked at AF in focus mag and posted on Nov 21, back on page 32 of this thread... what I found was the problem is between approx 1 foot and 8 feet distance. Below that (close focus) and beyond that looks pretty good.
Have not further investigated since however.
Fred Miranda wrote:
Luckily it still sounds like software. If the Eye-AF and now this can be fixed with a firmware update, it will be fine but how would it be done? Send the lens to Zeiss? I've never seen Zeiss releasing any firmware upgrade for any E-mount lens. Hopefully it's possible to do through the camera.
Fred,
see my previous post at the previous page. Zeiss is planning to release a firmwire upgrade for the Batis 2/40 and users will be able to upgrade the lens via camera (no need to send the lens). 'Eye-AF' and 'AF in magnified view' are known issues and Zeiss is working to find a solution for them. I know that the firmwire upgrade will, at least, change the aperture behavior at close distances, but I'm sure that *if Zeiss has progressed with these issues* the upgrade will solve them too. The upgrade is planned at early 2019, Jan or Feb I would guess.
C-137 wrote:
I looked at AF in focus mag and posted on Nov 21, back on page 32 of this thread... what I found was the problem is between approx 1 foot and 8 feet distance. Below that (close focus) and beyond that looks pretty good.
Have not further investigated since however.
I somehow overlooked your previous post. Thanks for confirming.
