zeitlos wrote:
Maybe they will have to lower the price if people don't buy it in sufficient numbers
I bet that happens soon, in the form of semi permanent rebates at least. I would be sweating it if I were the Zeiss product manager for this lens... The “optics” around this lens in most of the online coverage aren’t that great.
I really want to like (buy) the lens as it would fit my preferences well. Hopefully more real world pictures and a lower price will resolve things satisfactorily!
Since I owned it for a couple of days I can say for sure that I would never consider it for wedding photography. But this is maybe just my personal take of wedding photography – smooth and shining portraits... this would only work with a very limited amount of backgrounds. Traveling or - as it has been mentioned - „photojournalism“ seem to be conceivable fields of application.
Since I do mainly exactly this I still consider buying it. For beautiful portraits I would use my 85mm portrait lens or maybe adapt an old manuell 50mm Pemtax lens. Or even use the cheap 50/1.8 which does a decent and insuspicious job.
zeitlos wrote:
Since I owned it for a couple of days I can say for sure that I would never consider it for wedding photography. But this is maybe just my personal take of wedding photography – smooth and shining portraits... this would only work with a very limited amount of backgrounds. Traveling or - as it has been mentioned - „photojournalism“ seem to be conceivable fields of application.
Since I do mainly exactly this I still consider buying it. For beautiful portraits I would use my 85mm portrait lens or maybe adapt an old manuell 50mm Pemtax lens. Or even use the cheap 50/1.8 which does a decent and insuspicious job.
For wedding I was more referring to like reception and cocktail hour images. Maybe even some wide groupings. Bride and Groom i would be reaching for 85 or something of that nature
Very sad, but I think it's unacceptable to design a lens for Sony E with eye-AF issue. Since Eye-AF is a unique character that can be found from Sony only and many people including me want it.
Plus mid-field sharpness issue and automatic aperture stop down, I think Zeiss failed to deliver this lens.
Here are some more pictures I took for testing purposes. They are by no means meant to be artistic or so. As I said just for testing. I intended to upload them some weeks ago but when some people started to deride my intentions I stopped posting more. Maybe some of them are of any help to some people now. Didn't really check them for auto focus accuracy. It's mainly to give you an idea on background bokeh. I'd still say (to me) it's fine in lots of circumstances (what's your take?) Just when the background is "demanding" they get busy. I didn't post process them which adds to their "dullness". If they are interfering with this thread, just let me know and I'll take them out.
1. The midfield dip looks nothing like I had with my copy. Fred’s picture looks like it’s essentially out of focus, while I could hardly see the difference with the center. Of course there’s a bit, but nothing like that. Difficult to say what could cause this as I trust Fred’s testing methodology. My testing here: https://30daysofbatis.com/blog/?offset=1541885036914&reversePaginate=true
(F8 is not totally correctly focused, otherwise should be good).
2. The MTF shown earlier is mislabelled. It’s not f/4 it’s really MTF at f/2. The mid field dip is pretty much corrected already at f/4.
3. Very surprised to see the color difference between VG. Again, does not reflect my real world experience. For me, the Batis lenses in general have one of the best colors out there. Not just the Batis 2/40 but, for example, the Batis 2/25 which is known to have great colors. And the colors between the Batis 25 and 40 are spot on, so surprised to see almost a color tint in Batis pictures (but cooler the Zeiss might be). Stupid question, but does the LR show same color temperature for both files? Would love to see what happens Fred would shot a graycard with studiolights with known color temperature. The Zeiss should be either very close or spot on. My experience is that the Zeiss is pretty much industry leader here (cine lenses, film industry applications, global awards, etc.); difficult to believe that the Batis 40 would be off the specs where as every other Zeiss lens released are very tightly controlled.
4. The LoCA looks just like with my copy, essentially less than with Batis 25 but more than with Batis 85. Onion rings look familiar as well.
5. In my experience the bokeh in mighty fine and I think this also shows in Fred’s shot (it renders smooth background). Of course we can focus on the transition zone, but really the bokeh needs more than just one shot. Zeitlos examples showcase the bokeh better.
6. Did you compare lenses at f/2? Would be interesting to see that as well.
So all in all, looks somewhat different what I thought of the Batis 40, but I have high respect for Fred’s testing as well. It’s difficult to judge the lens from just one test (mine included), I just think not everything here reflects my experience and I hate to see people jumping on conclusions too quickly. And of course, nothing against the Voigtlander, actually pretty impressed by the closed down performance as it looks higher than I thought. A solid lens indeed that reserves all the praise.
I have the feeling the ZA 55/1.8 will have better rendering. It may show a bit more axial CA but I'm certain OOF rendering is smoother. At infinity distance, it should do better than the Batis as well, especially at mid and corners. (I am comparing older tests)
Today, I will try testing the 55/1.8 ZA vs Batis 40/2 side-by-side today for resolution at infinity and also rendering at close and mid-distance with different backgrounds. It's also safe to say that the Batis will win on contrast compared to the ZA.
So it really depends on the setting/surroundings. It’s still a capable lens I’d say. You need to know it’s strengths and limitations. Then it still can be an enrichment. It reminds me of my former Pentax FA43 1.9 Limited. Curse and blessings at once depending on the situation. I’m looking forward to reading your comparison between the 55 and the 40mm. However, even if the 55mm should be superior in certain areas, it’s still a different focal length.
Here is a quick rendering test. Both lenses at f/2. I tried to frame the subject as close as possible as 40mm and 55mm are very different focal lengths.
Same Lightroom settings (CA correction turned off but both lenses have built-in profiles)
Scene side by side. (Batis on top)
axial CA correction. Both look similar here
OOF rendering is smoother with the 55/1.8 ZA
Both sharp wide open. The Batis 40/2 has slightly higher contrast
Extreme corner resolution comparison between Batis 40/2 CF and Sony 55/1.8 ZA:
Here the 55/1.8 ZA performs better until f/4.
At f/4 and smaller, both lenses performed similarly. More LaCA for the Sony but I like its color better. (Again, same settings for both lenses)
The Sony is great at f/2.8 but superb at f/4 which is the optimal aperture for the corners..
In the case of Batis, it also performs better at f/4, matching the ZA but at f/2 and f/2.8, it's a little behind.
So, for landscapes, I'd say the Batis performs really well across the field at f/4-5.6. It's a very versatile lens as high IQ is maintained at all distances.
Aside from the slight onion ring and outlining on specular highlights, Zeiss needs to fix the EyeAF performance and f/4 aperture at close distances.
Here is an Eye AF comparison between the Batis 40 vs FE 55. Best of three for each and all results similar to below:
Eye-AF performance. Took 7 images with each lens. All Batis samples were not in focus. The 55/1.8 ZA got all 7 images in focus.
What a damn shame... Even the Canon 40mm f/2.8 with MC-11 works great with eye-AF, although it's restricted to mostly the centermost 40 ~ 50% of the frame.
Every manufacture can screw up...it's how they handle the screwup that is important. Let's give Zeiss time to address the AF issue and then make judgement on them.
I'm awaiting to see how Zeiss acts before deciding on the Batis 40 or the Voigtlander 40 1.2 M with tap.
