Juha Kannisto wrote:
There's been no announcement of discontinuation at least in Cosina's site but Zeiss might not allow them to make such announcements even if production has actually ended... Sometime in the past Cosina made a number of discontinuation announcements for classic Zeiss SLR lenses (that were being replaced by Milvus) and then retracted those announcements shortly after...
In Japan it seems that this lens has limited availability in shops now as well, a few have limited stock but many are out of stock with statuses like "direct order from the maker". It might just mean that the previous production run has almost run out but there might still be future production runs later...
I can't find it for sale in any major US store and even on Ebay, it's mainly from Japanese stores.
Another alternative is to shoot landscapes with the Zeiss Batis 85/1.8. It's superb at f/4 across the entire image field and pretty light.
Both are not that easy to exactly nail the focus to get the most out of them sharpness wise.
But the ZM is very very compact and is my non-AF 85mm travel lens of choice.
The 90CV is excellent both at infinity and up close in semi-macro mode.
I would also say, the 90CV is the most non-APO APO lens I have as it definitely shows a lot of PF in bright specular highlights as I recall. But under normal circumstances it's very very good.
Fred Miranda wrote:
I can't find it for sale in any major US store and even on Ebay, it's mainly from Japanese stores.
Another alternative is to shoot landscapes with the Zeiss Batis 85/1.8. It's superb at f/4 across the entire image field and pretty light.
Yes and I think the Batis 85 is a touch contrastier than the ZM too.
But otoh it’s much bigger, a bit heavier, and the ZM has nice sunstars.
jhinkey wrote:
Well, it turns out that since I own both the 85/4ZM and 90/3.5 CV I shot them against each other a year ago.
Thanks John! That saved me a lot of work. I know how good the 85/4 ZM is, especially when stopped down a bit, so the 90/3.5 does look impressive on your crops. At f/6.3-7.1, I don't see any difference between the 85/4 ZM and Loxia 85, except for the extra CA for the ZM.
I had the 85/4 ZM, and found it needed to be stopped down to at least f5.6. Also, it doesn't encode distance information for maximizing the body image stabilization. I sold it and bought the 85 Batis and am much happier with the Batis. It is bigger, obviously, but not that big, and it doesn't do sunstars, but the Batis is an excellent all around lens. Minimal flare when sun is in the frame. Mine is sharp across the frame and into the corners at f2.8 and improves slightly at f4, on an A7RIV.
Fred Miranda wrote:
Thanks John! That saved me a lot of work. I know how good the 85/4 ZM is, especially when stopped down a bit, so the 90/3.5 does look impressive on your crops. At f/6.3-7.1, I don't see any difference between the 85/4 ZM and Loxia 85, except for the extra CA for the ZM.
I'll put them both on the A7RIII and take some pics later on tonight.
httivals wrote:
I had the 85/4 ZM, and found it needed to be stopped down to at least f5.6. Also, it doesn't encode distance information for maximizing the body image stabilization. I sold it and bought the 85 Batis and am much happier with the Batis. It is bigger, obviously, but not that big, and it doesn't do sunstars, but the Batis is an excellent all around lens. Minimal flare when sun is in the frame. Mine is sharp across the frame and into the corners at f2.8 and improves slightly at f4, on an A7RIV.
Yes, same here. The Batis 85/1.8 is an amazing lens. At f/4 is perfect across the field. (optimal) but as you wrote, f/1.8 is already sharp from center to extreme corners. I've tested many Sony FE 85/1.8 copies against it and the Zeiss does noticeably better despite many reviews saying they are basically the same. There is also negligible CA for the Batis which is not the case with the Sony.
It's bigger/wider than the 85/4 ZM but it's not heavy at 450g. (only 50g heavier than my Loxia 21). I will give it a try for landscapes.
Comparing the size of the Batis to the ZM 85, I had the Zeiss hood for the ZM 85, which unfortunately couldn't be reversed. So the ZM 85 ends up being very long if you keep the hood on it. And my experience (didn't do alot of testing of this, but it was my impression) is that the ZM 85 does need a hood. In terms of size, with the ZM85 having the hood attached and the Batis having the hood reversed, the Batis is quite a bit shorter and a lot fatter. Shorter and fatter is easier to back in a bag in my experience than long and thin. . . . Other than sunstars the Batis is much more compelling, IMHO. I don't like sunstars with every lens anyways, but I have ordered the Voigtlander 50mm f2 APO, which creates nices sunstars fromabout f4, and none until f3.2 (per Fred's testing).
Fred Miranda wrote:
Yes, same here. The Batis 85/1.8 is an amazing lens. At f/4 is perfect across the field. (optimal) but as you wrote, f/1.8 is already sharp from center to extreme corners. I've tested many Sony FE 85/1.8 copies against it and the Zeiss does noticeably better despite many reviews saying they are basically the same. There is also negligible CA for the Batis which is not the case with the Sony.
It's bigger/wider than the 85/4 ZM but it's not heavy at 450g. (only 50g heavier than my Loxia 21). I will give it a try for landscapes.
The Sony 85/1.8 is certainly not that great of a lens off - center until you stop way down. I actually shot my 85/1.8 Sony against the 85/4ZM and 90/3.5 CV and it wasn't even close getting anywhere near the corners. Great AF travel lens though.
jhinkey wrote:
The Sony 85/1.8 is certainly not that great of a lens off - center until you stop way down. I actually shot my 85/1.8 Sony against the 85/4ZM and 90/3.5 CV and it wasn't even close getting anywhere near the corners. Great AF travel lens though.
I've tried 4 FE 85/1.8 lenses (one perfectly centered. two well centered and another with a little tilt but not bad). Even at center, the Batis is better compared to the Sonys. Higher contrast (micro-contrast) and higher resolution, It's noticeable at 1:1.
Stopping down to about f/4 makes them closer but off-axis, the Batis still performs better all the way to f/8. The giveaway for the Sony is the higher CA at infinity which robs some resolution.
The 85/4 ZM is great wide open and amazing at f/6.3 on the A7R3 (Some CA as well). Never tested on the A7R4. Perhaps the Loxia 85 will do better with 60MP.
I picked one up at the time of shooting the Zeiss ZE 100 macro planar and found the 90 to be a great option in a much smaller package. I picked up one of the last ones when they got discontinued but have since sold it on to ffordes.
Gee, imagine how many they could sell if they put a native Sony E-mount (with CPU) on it? That would be heaven for me. Probably too hard to read the aperture position w/o totally re-designing the mechanics to accommodate the necessary electronics.
jhinkey wrote:
Gee, imagine how many they could sell if they put a native Sony E-mount (with CPU) on it? That would be heaven for me. Probably too hard to read the aperture position w/o totally re-designing the mechanics to accommodate the necessary electronics.
^^ YES!
What's up with Zeiss? That would be a great light alternative to the Loxia 85/2.4. It has no issues with Sony's thicker sensor stack.
It just needs to be ported to a new housing + E-mount electronics.
Call it: ZEISS Loxia 4/85.
Include a built-in profile for LaCA. Done!
I know how good the 85/4 ZM is, especially when stopped down a bit, so the 90/3.5 does look impressive on your crops. At f/6.3-7.1, I don't see any difference between the 85/4 ZM and Loxia 85, except for the extra CA for the ZM.
