As many of you are certain to understand, I am a massive gearophile.
I love experimenting with different lenses, bodies, systems and processing softwares, lately though I've had a certain notion that nothing could ever really scratch, and for some ungody reason, I am lusting after the Otus 28mm. It's huge, unwieldy and my favourite focal length, taken to optical perfection, most images I have seen from that lens seem really nice, but I am wondering if it would truly represent enough if an upgrade compared to my Zeiss ZF 28mm/2 or even a Leica R 28mm V2, which is slightly less expensive, lighter and optically amazing.
Any takers? Input? 28mm options I forgot about?
I rented the Sigma (Nikon mount) and I was pretty impressed, although I ended up buying the Nikon 28mm f/1.4 instead. Speaking of which, you ought to take a look at the Nikon 28mm f/1.4 thread here on FM if you haven't already. It's pretty sweet too.
I can't really contribute to the Otus lens in question, but here are my 2 Cents regarding lens "perfection": I totally stopped going after new and admittedly optically better lenses with all kind of lens groups and elements leading to excellent corner sharpness, high sharpness and micro-contrast. I found that it doesn't improve my photography at all - in fact I find photos with these kind of lenses look sterile without character and nearly indistinguishable from other excellent lenses as mentioned earlier. An often used reasoning for going after the latest and best are the supposedly more demanding higher resolving camera sensors. Technically this is certainly correct, but I can tell from my experience shooting with a 36 MP FF sensor that I have never seen an issue using adapted lenses from the 1930s and 1940s with much less lens elements and without lens coatings. But the photos taken with this kind of lenses have something I don't get with newer ones: character. Yes, there is some more flaring going on, photos have much less contrast and are less sharp in the corners, but this is well balanced out by a beautiful smooth rendering or bokeh not available with newer lenses.
You need simply to ask yourself if this Otus lens gives you something another lens you might already have in the same FL doesn't. Some collect lenses and it's seen as a paper weight just to have it - understood. In case you would use this lens to take photos with, I would ask myself if I needed an absolute image perfection for a very large print. Otherwise I find sharpness important but also easily overrated and outdone by the composition itself.
I own the Otus 55/1.4. For me, it all came down to liking the drawing style of the lens. From a strictly technical pow there are other lenses that comes close and are much cheaper (Sigma ART 50/1.4) but the rendering is different. Also, all Otus lenses seems to be very good for shooting video.
Situation should be similar for the 28/1.4. Otus will of course be a lot better wide open than the Zeiss ZF 28/2 but buy the Otus if you like the rendering rather than looking for the CA that is not there :-)
BTW: I also like the Otus 28/1.4 and have been close to getting one. However, it's just too big.
Gricoh wrote:
As many of you are certain to understand, I am a massive gearophile.
I love experimenting with different lenses, bodies, systems and processing softwares, lately though I've had a certain notion that nothing could ever really scratch, and for some ungody reason, I am lusting after the Otus 28mm. It's huge, unwieldy and my favourite focal length, taken to optical perfection, most images I have seen from that lens seem really nice, but I am wondering if it would truly represent enough if an upgrade compared to my Zeiss ZF 28mm/2 or even a Leica R 28mm V2, which is slightly less expensive, lighter and optically amazing.
Any takers? Input? 28mm options I forgot about?...Show more →
Agree with retrofocus. A “28” you may have forgotten about is the Zeiss ZF2 25/2. Sharp until the deep corners makes a very good “28”. Certainly not as expensive as the Otus. It is different from the ZF28 (I have both.) The way I approach these 2 lenses at this point is I like the ZF28/2 for landscape focused at infinity, and the ZF2 25/2 for everything else. Love to try an Otus 28, though.
I have the Otus 55 and 85, and had considered the 28 for awhile. I like having a variety of different renderings available, and I use the 55 and 85 if the image calls for perfection rather than character.
The 28 is excellent, but not quite at the level of the others (there is a little more purple fringing visible in certain conditions). It's also huge and cumbersome, and what I decided was to get the Milvus 25 and 35/1.4 rather than the Otus 28. It gives me two focal lengths instead of one, and their quality is nearly as good as an Otus. The main difference I see is that the 28 is a bit more evenly sharp from corner to corner, whereas there is slightly reduced sharpness toward the corners with the two Milvus lenses. That's not to take away anything from them, however, as both are superb and the best I've seen at their focal lengths. I'm happy with my choice and would do the same again.
retrofocus wrote:
I can't really contribute to the Otus lens in question, but here are my 2 Cents regarding lens "perfection": I totally stopped going after new and admittedly optically better lenses with all kind of lens groups and elements leading to excellent corner sharpness, high sharpness and micro-contrast. I found that it doesn't improve my photography at all - in fact I find photos with these kind of lenses look sterile without character and nearly indistinguishable from other excellent lenses as mentioned earlier. An often used reasoning for going after the latest and best are the supposedly more demanding higher resolving camera sensors. Technically this is certainly correct, but I can tell from my experience shooting with a 36 MP FF sensor that I have never seen an issue using adapted lenses from the 1930s and 1940s with much less lens elements and without lens coatings. But the photos taken with this kind of lenses have something I don't get with newer ones: character. Yes, there is some more flaring going on, photos have much less contrast and are less sharp in the corners, but this is well balanced out by a beautiful smooth rendering or bokeh not available with newer lenses.
You need simply to ask yourself if this Otus lens gives you something another lens you might already have in the same FL doesn't. Some collect lenses and it's seen as a paper weight just to have it - understood. In case you would use this lens to take photos with, I would ask myself if I needed an absolute image perfection for a very large print. Otherwise I find sharpness important but also easily overrated and outdone by the composition itself. ...Show more →
Points well made, and as far as the rendering part goes, that is precisely what kept me away from the Art lenses. The Otus lenses though I have found to have a very pleasant rendering, especially the 28mm version, which is why I am lusting a bit.
In regards to printing: I have found myself printing very large a few times by now, and especially the landscapes profit from great lenses in that regard. Though one of my favourite images is a very large print from my Ricoh GR, taken under terrible lighting conditions at ISO 12800 or higher, and it still looks great on my wall.
carlitos wrote:
Agree with retrofocus. A “28” you may have forgotten about is the Zeiss ZF2 25/2. Sharp until the deep corners makes a very good “28”. Certainly not as expensive as the Otus. It is different from the ZF28 (I have both.) The way I approach these 2 lenses at this point is I like the ZF28/2 for landscape focused at infinity, and the ZF2 25/2 for everything else. Love to try an Otus 28, though.
Personally, I can't replace a 28mm with a 25mm, but that's on me, seeing as I "grew up" on nothing but the Ricoh GR for two years and that focal length is now deeply engrained in the way I shoot.
What will your subjects be? A lot of shooting wide open at starscapes or close-up flowers? Middle distance street photography? Wide open, the only lenses that will come close to the otus are the sigma 1.4 28 and the summilux-m 28 1.4 asph, and if you're not shooting the m lens on an m or sl2 body there may be microlens color cast issues.
The sigma is sharp, but color-wise falls behind zeiss and leica, and one cannot fix in post what was not recorded in the first place. I prefer the leica colors to the otus colors, but the otus is arguably much more highly corrected for aberrations wide open, hence the size differences. Even stopped down the otus bests the leica.
The zeiss classic 28 and the leica r you have are both great, ( the zeiss distagon 25/2 is sharper than the zeiss 28, though. the milvus 25 1.4 would be on my list to try. ) but not corrected to the degree of the otus or the summilux-m. I would guess that stopped down all would give great performance, but the older generations would not measure up by a large percentile to the modern zeiss, leica & sigma for sharpness and corrections. Rendering of colors is generational, quite distinct and personal preference is highly subjective.
The zeiss zf.2 and leica m mount are manually controlled for aperture and focus. otus focusing is the best in class, the only more precise I have found is arca r mount, and that is only more precise, otus is better damped.
I have piles of gear here that I thought would help me get the kinds of images I envisioned were possible, and for the most part I was wrong, as I brought the images into lightroom or capture one and was disappointed.
I was wrong in expecting high performance out of gear that was not top-tier. If I add up the cost of all the lenses I have tried and the adapters and all the imperfect mechanisms it far exceeds the high cost of doing it right the first time. Oh to have bought the otus 85 first, before all the others I tried. The pentax 67, mamiya rz and leica m glass I will keep, but so much else trying to save a buck and it never works.
Other than buying the right item used.
For shooting stuff at wide open at 1.4, 28mm full-frame ( or even 33x44 sensor ) nothing will do what the otus does for now. If that's what you want, there it is. An sl2 with the summilux-m 28 1.4 asph would be next closest. ( so, at about 2x the cost of the otus 28, haha. )
For stopped down landscapes there are a few challengers. All are medium format and none do 28mm at f1.4.
The otus will make you work for it. It's easy to miss focus even with focus peaking on. But it's so rewarding when it all works.
On the other end of resolution, the newer sensors' diffraction limited depth of field is decreasing rapidly. The diffraction limits we are coming up on are: 33x44 50mp sensor = f/7.6, 100mp 40x54 sensor = f/6.6, z7 = f/6.3, 150mp 40x54 sensor = f/5.5, a7r4 = f/5.4. So a highly corrected fast lens like the otus 28 zf.2 will go along way into the coming future of photography between the system limits of aberrations and diffraction.
I have a thing for 28mm as well. I like the ZF 28/2, and also dig the Otus 55/85.
Whenever I wonder about the 28 Otus, I go out with my Nikon 1.4E. It's hard to argue with lovely images it produces. A well-balanced physical package too.
The Otus 55/1.4 has been my walk around lens during thne past three years. since I own Zeiss 25/2 and 35/2, I see no need for the very heavy Otus 28/1.4.
I'm a big fan of CZ and high performance but Otus is a bridge too far in cost and weight. They also believe that 2% linear distortion is okay and even brand it (Distagon). Like OP, I consider 28mm a key FL and have the D28/2.8 C/Y and Leica Elmarit 28 ASPH. I wanted a fast version for available darkness and was pleasantly surprised when Nikon stepped up to the plate. AF is really handy, too, in dynamic situations:
I had the otus but moved on as new lenses come out. All I can say it is unmatched by any . Truly amazing. BUT, it is manual focus and you better have a good EVF or super bright viewfinder.
Otus 28 is my default lens on my A7R4. I'm really light and weak but I don't find it heavy at all.
I say do it. Sigma Art 28 is pretty close though, so if you need AF that is the smarter option, only weakness is slightly less perceived DoF and flaring. Otus 28 has the high-end cine flare if you can induce it.
I Otused, as part of a retirement self-gifting. I had planned to buy a super-telephoto, for birds, but was still healing from a left rotator cuff injury, which can take some time to heal, so would not be shooting hand-held with long lenses, for a while. I was really enjoying the focus accuracy of my then-new D5, with my other manual-focus lenses, so turned my attention to the Otus and Milvus lines. I already had 28mm to 60mm well-covered, by other favored prime lenses, including an excellent Nikkor 28/1.4E.
Plus, I was developing an interest in trying short telephoto landscapes, and found some images, on-line, of landscapes shot with the Otus 85mm. I did not yet have a D850, but reckoned I would add one, sooner or later. So, when I Otused, it was the 1,4/85mm ZF.2, for Nikon mount.
Of course, a 28mm lens nicely complements an 85mm lens, so, well, I may start dreaming of an Otus 28mm, someday.
rico wrote:
I'm a big fan of CZ and high performance but Otus is a bridge too far in cost and weight. They also believe that 2% linear distortion is okay and even brand it (Distagon). Like OP, I consider 28mm a key FL and have the D28/2.8 C/Y and Leica Elmarit 28 ASPH. I wanted a fast version for available darkness and was pleasantly surprised when Nikon stepped up to the plate. AF is really handy, too, in dynamic situations:
Beautiful example, of what the Nikkor 28/1.4E can do, in capable hands!
In early 2018, as part of self-gifted upgrades, after I retired, I added a Nikkor 28/1.4E, a Canon EF 35/1.4L II, and my 1,4/85mm Otus. (This was the time when I was shifting to Nikon, for birds, but I was still healing from a left shoulder injury, so postponed plans to acquire a long telephoto prime.) The 28E lived almost full-time, on my D5, until I added the D850, in July, and then, the 28E stayed on the D850, almost full-time, for months.
rico wrote:
I'm a big fan of CZ and high performance but Otus is a bridge too far in cost and weight. They also believe that 2% linear distortion is okay and even brand it (Distagon). Like OP, I consider 28mm a key FL and have the D28/2.8 C/Y and Leica Elmarit 28 ASPH. I wanted a fast version for available darkness and was pleasantly surprised when Nikon stepped up to the plate. AF is really handy, too, in dynamic situations:
Beautiful example, of what the Nikkor 28/1.4E can do, in capable hands!
In early 2018, as part of self-gifted upgrades, after I retired, I added a Nikkor 28/1.4E, a Canon EF 35/1.4L II, and my 1,4/85mm Otus. (This was the time when I was shifting to Nikon, for birds, but I was still healing from a left shoulder injury, so postponed plans to acquire a long telephoto prime.) The 28E lived almost full-time, on my D5, until I added the D850, in July, and then, the 28E stayed on the D850, almost full-time, for months.
I took the 28 Otus to Everest for EBC trek. I also had it for a fair amount of street photography in Chennai India. Incredible lens. Loves being on my Sony a7r2. Also does well on the GFX50s understanding that the corner vignetting will need to be addressed. A lot of this lens is also about the audacity of it...
carlitos wrote:
Agree with retrofocus. A “28” you may have forgotten about is the Zeiss ZF2 25/2. Sharp until the deep corners makes a very good “28”. Certainly not as expensive as the Otus. It is different from the ZF28 (I have both.) The way I approach these 2 lenses at this point is I like the ZF28/2 for landscape focused at infinity, and the ZF2 25/2 for everything else. Love to try an Otus 28, though.
The Otus 28mm is one I pondered, but very briefly due to the cost and weight. I had a Milvus 85mm that was superb, but sold it once I realized what Canon's new RF primes were like for rendering. But the Milvus gave me an idea what carrying an all manual Otus may seem like. I also think the new Milvus and Otus lenses are butt-ugly designs, even though optics are most important.
But the two lenses you noted, the Zeiss 25mm and 28mm f/2 ... Distagon ... are both on my preferred to-buy list. The design is nice, and much less weight.
Imagine what an Otus would be like if auto focus were added !!
Like OP, I consider 28mm a key FL and have the D28/2.8 C/Y and Leica Elmarit 28 ASPH. I wanted a fast version for available darkness and was pleasantly surprised when Nikon stepped up to the plate. AF is really handy, too, in dynamic situations:
