phototiimo wrote:
Probably because of the close focus ability, which seems like something nobody asked for.
The Batis line's diameter is large unnecessarily. It seems to be for aesthetics, LCD electronics and to keep the same filter thread size. (except for the 18mm)
Some believe it's related to the focus motor but they use the same Sony's electromagnetic linear focusing system. Zeiss likes manipulating their lenses' design for match filter size and that's also the case with the Loxia line.
For me personally, this can be all forgiven if the lens delivers!
Fred Miranda wrote:
The Batis line's diameter is large unnecessarily. It seems to be for aesthetics, LCD electronics and to keep the same filter thread size. (except for the 18mm)
Some believe it's related to the focus motor but they use the same Sony's electromagnetic linear focusing system. Zeiss likes manipulating their lenses' design for match filter size and that's also the case with the Loxia line.
For me personally, this can be all forgiven if the lens delivers!
This is driving me nuts. I really want to want this lens but there seems to be no reason apart from aesthetics for its width. Also concerned about the bokeh balls as others mentioned - not to the point of measurebating but honestly wondering what the setting sun would look like at f/2 when I shoot photos of my daughter at the beach with the sun over her shoulder. Hopefully big and bright enough that would be a clean circle rather than a nonogram on the smaller light points.
Waiting for hands-on reviews and hope they convince me otherwise but, until then, keeping money in my pocket and waiting for a proper 35-40mm f/1.8-2 lens for the FE mount.
ecarlino wrote:
uuuuuhhhhh, OOF rendering is actually a rather significant criteria when evaluating a lens.
not sure why you're so dismissive on this topic.
i think it's far more valid and affects the final quality of an image more than pixel peeping for sharpness in the corners, etc.
there are some lenses that were otherwise perfect for my use case, but particularly onion rings are a non-starter.
cats eyes, depending on how much and where in the frame are less of a nuisance.
but what they're showing above with angular bokeh, not very pleasing and depending on how much it occurs, a valid reason to pass on a lens (or if it is copy variation, return and try a new copy)....Show more →
OOF rendering goes way beyond rendition of point light sources. Moreover, pretty much any lens won't give circles once stopped down 1/3 of a stop. In my experience I've never been bothered by it and vast majority of photographs don't even have point light sources that are so significantly out-of-focus.
I'm not even saying it's not important, just given way too much attention. And I'm pretty confident that Batis 40mm will have fully opening aperture in most of samples because it's not something new (there was a thread about Batis 25mm sample having the same issue)
I find that harsh doubling in slight OOF areas has a much stronger negative effect on image perception. And of course, both purple fringing and loCA fringing that's annoying to correct. Both are the reasons why Batis 40mm is better than FE 55 1.8 for example.... Along with a much more versatile focal length that's 3 times as close to 35mm than it is to 55mm.
And speaking of uniform sharpness, I don't enjoy soft faces with off-center portraits or mushy landscapes. Having excellent primary lens qualities is the reason to bother with such cameras in the first place. Otherwise I'd use something like RX100 for everything and call it a day, enjoying portability and price along the way.
that's great, and i respect what is important to you, but you come across as quite dismissive to what are valid concerns for other people.
when a new lens comes out, everyone has certain things that stick out to them (either good or bad) and as more examples are available, a consensus (or several) begins to form - but everyone has their own set of qualities that are important to them and bokeh from point light sources is certainly a common criteria.
and as far as some of the examples from the B40 so far, those are some strange shapes in the bokeh balls, hopefully it was just a bad copy, but if not, i'll be passing on that basis alone.
maratus wrote:
OOF rendering goes way beyond rendition of point light sources. Moreover, pretty much any lens won't give circles once stopped down 1/3 of a stop. In my experience I've never been bothered by it and vast majority of photographs don't even have point light sources that are so significantly out-of-focus.
I'm not even saying it's not important, just given way too much attention. And I'm pretty confident that Batis 40mm will have fully opening aperture in most of samples because it's not something new (there was a thread about Batis 25mm sample having the same issue)
I find that harsh doubling in slight OOF areas has a much stronger negative effect on image perception. And of course, both purple fringing and loCA fringing that's annoying to correct. Both are the reasons why Batis 40mm is better than FE 55 1.8 for example.... Along with a much more versatile focal length that's 3 times as close to 35mm than it is to 55mm.
And speaking of uniform sharpness, I don't enjoy soft faces with off-center portraits or mushy landscapes. Having excellent primary lens qualities is the reason to bother with such cameras in the first place. Otherwise I'd use something like RX100 for everything and call it a day, enjoying portability and price along the way....Show more →
True, really bad balls.
A good reason to pass on.
The combo of this plus the 135 requires around 3000 euro.
For a 2.0 and a 2.8. Quality shoud be perfect. Nothing less.
Here are all the questions I asked myself about the B40:
Will I like the rendering better than the FE 35 2.8/55 1.8? Almost certainly yes.
Is it small/light enough to serve as a primary travel/street lens? Yes, lighter than FE 35 1.4, ZM 35 1.4, FE50 1.4
Will it get me out of the clown show that can be TAP in the field? Hell yes.
Will it be part of a system that is more versatile/flexible than settling on an RX1R II? For me, Yes.
Can I live with the fact that it is 40 and not 35? Yes and the CF ability will be a bonus, one I think I'll really like.
Have I lived with greater compromises to stay full frame and compact with an interchangeable lens mount? Yes.
I feel like I didn't know the meaning of compromise until I regularly shot with TAP and rangefinders (I focus faster and more accurately with a rangefinder than manual focus through an EVF). I'm more than ready to embrace a native AF lens and reap the benefits of a modern Sony alpha body, and if I have to sell the B40 at a later date because a more desirable 35 f2 or 1.8 comes out, so be it, but considering how long I've been in the A7 series, I think the wait is over.
Well said, Jack. I'm just waiting on pre-order links. I have enough in credit card rewards to cover the cost of the lens when it ships so it's not costing me a dime. Looking forward to it.
Jonathan Brady wrote:
Well said, Jack. I'm just waiting on pre-order links. I have enough in credit card rewards to cover the cost of the lens when it ships so it's not costing me a dime. Looking forward to it.
Thanks Jonathan. I'm looking forward to it as well.
Jack Thompson wrote:
Here are all the questions I asked myself about the B40:
Will I like the rendering better than the FE 35 2.8/55 1.8? Almost certainly yes.
Is it small/light enough to serve as a primary travel/street lens? Yes, lighter than FE 35 1.4, ZM 35 1.4, FE50 1.4
Will it get me out of the clown show that can be TAP in the field? Hell yes.
Will it be part of a system that is more versatile/flexible than settling on an RX1R II? For me, Yes.
Can I live with the fact that it is 40 and not 35? Yes and the CF ability will be a bonus, one I think I'll really like.
Have I lived with greater compromises to stay full frame and compact with an interchangeable lens mount? Yes.
I feel like I didn't know the meaning of compromise until I regularly shot with TAP and rangefinders (I focus faster and more accurately with a rangefinder than manual focus through an EVF). I'm more than ready to embrace a native AF lens and reap the benefits of a modern Sony alpha body, and if I have to sell the B40 at a later date because a more desirable 35 f2 or 1.8 comes out, so be it, but considering how long I've been in the A7 series, I think the wait is over.
"Will it get me out of the clown show that can be TAP in the field? Hell yes."
I had a few of those days myself with TAP. But just recently experienced unexpectedly high AF hit rates when testing Voigt 50 1.2 and Lux 50 ASPH w/TAP. Even Eye AF. Not sure why it was so much better that particular day than others.
Jack Thompson wrote:
Here are all the questions I asked myself about the B40:
Will I like the rendering better than the FE 35 2.8/55 1.8? Almost certainly yes.
Is it small/light enough to serve as a primary travel/street lens? Yes, lighter than FE 35 1.4, ZM 35 1.4, FE50 1.4
Will it get me out of the clown show that can be TAP in the field? Hell yes.
Will it be part of a system that is more versatile/flexible than settling on an RX1R II? For me, Yes.
Can I live with the fact that it is 40 and not 35? Yes and the CF ability will be a bonus, one I think I'll really like.
Have I lived with greater compromises to stay full frame and compact with an interchangeable lens mount? Yes.
I feel like I didn't know the meaning of compromise until I regularly shot with TAP and rangefinders (I focus faster and more accurately with a rangefinder than manual focus through an EVF). I'm more than ready to embrace a native AF lens and reap the benefits of a modern Sony alpha body, and if I have to sell the B40 at a later date because a more desirable 35 f2 or 1.8 comes out, so be it, but considering how long I've been in the A7 series, I think the wait is over.
Very good points Jack. the Batis 40/2 seems to be well corrected for LoCA and that will be a big advantage compared to alternatives.
Also, bokeh balls seem pretty much free of onion ring pattern even though there are many asphericals in its design. I'm hoping the specular highlights' odd shape from the initial images is sample variation. (aperture blades not fully retracting)
OOF rendering compared to the 55/1.8 ZA is a question mark though and we can't really compare its size/weight to f/1.4 lenses.
Personally, I think its major advantage will be silent, fast and reliable AF. I've given up on TAP a long time ago.
I preordered from Adorama.
I accidentally chose 7- business day free shipping :-(. (I did not take attention, thought it was free expedited shipping). Did they really ship a $1300-value item by that slow mail? Really? Or they would upgrade free 3-day UPS shipping? Does anyone know? I mostly (95% of my gears) ordered from BH which gives me free 3-day shipping.
I may cancel and wait BH to open their pre-order.
How do you intend to transport it? I mean, if you carry two batis maybe 5 l bag is enough but three... Actually how are you carrying the other batises? backpack? are you people happy with summicron, because is the same speed... but not the same size
