Also, No way I am buying a 35 1.2 as big as that monsters either!!! I feel like wait a few months, they are gonna be all over the buy/sell forum due to the size.
I don't think the size of Nikon lenses is all due to AF since Sony made smaller and faster focusing comparable primes - there's probably other factors at play. Either way, prime lenses of this size category are generally a pass for me too.
I do wish Zeiss came up with a top notch 35mm Loxia lens before they gave up - I would've kept my Loxia set if they did. The 21mm, 25mm and 85mm were stellar but the 35mm and 50mm clearly showed their age. A 35mm or 50mm f1.4 or f2 APO would've been nice.
I’m wondering how much better an Otis 85/1.4 could be (at almost double the weight if it is the same size)than the Sony 85GMII? And at probably 2.5X the price? No thanks.
The Z Nikon lenses have to carry extra weight added to their rear end as a result of the wider mount throat introduced in the Z cameras. And you will see the Z cameras are not small for the same reason - they have to carry the mount with sufficient body strength to enclose it.
And sure enough, Sony's a7rV is noticeably smaller than the Zf, despite having a real grip and better EVF implementation, at much the same weight.
Canon already used a wide throat from EF days. Both believe it assists with lens design, and there is some truth to that. But lenses made for different mounts (for example Voigtlander and Thypoch and maybe Zeiss now, and others) have had to be designed to be compatible with the narrowest throat mount cameras, in this case Sony, which uses a throat diameter of 46mm. Canon and Nikon use 54mm and 55mm respectively. Leica M uses the very common and time-proven diameter of 44mm.
This big mount move by C/N is touted as delivering faster lenses with less refraction needed in the rear of the lenses, easier outer frame performance design (more degrees of freedom) plus some AF advantages.
I think maybe glass technology improved so fast that we see many equally fast and high performing lenses even in the M system - high refraction index (HRI) glass is now commonplace in high end lenses and cine applications as well. The other factor is the radical gains made in aspherical element shaping, pushed along by phone element tech. Sony and Leica are masters in this field with optical glass as used in photographic applications.
The downsides to wide throat mount cameras: you won't see smaller or lighter lenses in these C/N cameras, all other things being equal. Canon are adopting plastic (PMO) radically aspherical elements in many lenses even up to middle tier. Ironically enough, this move is a fix for mirrorless's greater lens-to-sensor angles of incidence in the new short flange cameras. Resin is more economic, easy to work and probably much lighter than their high end glass.
Lens weight is increased not only from the extra lens body material but also the wider rear elements needed to secure the lens speed advantage, which the others can now do too. By this quirk of fate, the same thing happened with the Otus lenses because their performance was purchased at the cost of weight and size.
Another factor is that many want more character and smaller lenses in full knowledge of the trade-off in aberration control, which can be well-balanced with enough design skill. You don't need perfect for compelling images, and pleasing lens signatures will come to be seen as vital, quite a different set of criteria than for technical performance. And the perfection in high end lenses is actually the reason for this shift in buyer sentiment.
Zeiss may actually be interested to design for mirrorless because of the rise of super quality short flange 'run and gun' video/cine cameras that are needed for more authentic and impromptu footage than giant PL mount setups.
Sony's FX3 and similar cameras are changing how the business works at the bottom to mid end. Flange Focal Distances: Panavision is 57mm; ARRI Pl FFD is 52mm; RED is 27mm; E-mount is 18mm. Sony's very high end Venice offers E-mount support. FX9 is closely integrated to the E system. Their FX3 is tiny and weighs 1000 grams wet.
Like them or not, Sony is a leader. More than merely a competitor, if you get my drift. They develop trends and directions as well as products that fit inside these contexts.
I agree, I love the Loxia form factor and I wish they updated their 35 and 50 models, but before releasing any lenses for the E mount, they need to address the Loxia bugs people are reporting. Zeiss has been silent about a solution to the aperture and manual focus magnification issues. This lack of commitment to their previous e-mount platform gives me pause.
Zeiss sent me the 28 and 85 otus lenses in exchange for some sample images for their use. Still have them fortunately and they get adapted to a7r2 and GFX regularly
With manufacturers like Viltrox and their new LAB series, with aperture 1.2 35mm, 50mm, 85mm all on the way, and possibly the sharpest 135 1.8 out now... What's the allure of Zeiss now a day? Name? Image/Build quality? Is it a status symbol?
Genuine question, as a recent Sony convert from Canon.
BigBabyMoses06 wrote:
With manufacturers like Viltrox and their new LAB series, with aperture 1.2 35mm, 50mm, 85mm all on the way, and possibly the sharpest 135 1.8 out now... What's the allure of Zeiss now a day? Name? Image/Build quality? Is it a status symbol?
Genuine question, as a recent Sony convert from Canon.
Zeiss lenses can and do often render in a way that others don't, at least that was certainly true in days gone by. A Modern day example of this is the 50mm f1.4 Planar for emount which has an incredible amount of 3d pop (if you can see it) it will be interesting to see what they release after all this time. Hopefully it acts a high end alternative to Sony's GM line.
p.3 #10 · ZEISS Otus ML line officially announced!
Zeiss is a flavor. Doesn't have to be the sharpest. It is simply a paint brush that paints a certain way. That is what makes Zeiss still credible. I suppose Zeiss badge is a status symbol if you want it to be.
p.3 #11 · ZEISS Otus ML line officially announced!
I am definitely excited to see signs of life from Zeiss for new photography lenses. I would be very surprised to see the original Otuss lenses with just a mirrorless mount added. If Zeiss was going to do that, they would have done it 5 years ago, when there was a market for such lenses.
The fact they are hinting at Otus lenses, though, makes me think these will be large, heavy, expensive MF lenses. Personally, I am more interested in seeing a mirrorless version of the ZF2 line. High quality lenses that are more reasonable in size, weight, and price.
p.3 #12 · ZEISS Otus ML line officially announced!
Desmolicious wrote:
Were the Otus lenses the ones that the elements could easily be knocked out of spec if the lens took any kind of impact?
I don't remember how easily that would happen but I do recall that a couple people faced ~$2000 repairs for what outwardly appeared to be minor damage.
philip_pj wrote:
Resin is more economic, easy to work and probably much lighter than their high end glass.
Resin allows the creation of lens designs that would be prohibitively expensive for the target market that resin facilitates. A Canon example is the $300 RF 28/2.8 pancake with 'gull-wing' resin aspherical surfaces. It's a lens that has been reviewed as punching above its price point and optically outperforms Nikon's similar but more traditionally designed pancake.
So like anything, it's a compromise.
Otus will be a compromise of size, weight and price to achieve high optical performance within the constraints of whatever mount system the new lenses will be available.
p.3 #14 · ZEISS Otus ML line officially announced!
DWOfPaul wrote:
I am definitely excited to see signs of life from Zeiss for new photography lenses. I would be very surprised to see the original Otuss lenses with just a mirrorless mount added. If Zeiss was going to do that, they would have done it 5 years ago, when there was a market for such lenses.
The fact they are hinting at Otus lenses, though, makes me think these will be large, heavy, expensive MF lenses. Personally, I am more interested in seeing a mirrorless version of the ZF2 line. High quality lenses that are more reasonable in size, weight, and price.
p.3 #15 · ZEISS Otus ML line officially announced!
Canon knew the very notion of PMO was something they had to handle carefully in the marketplace, in the context of an informed photographic community that is naturally averse to cheap materials, processes and end products adopted due to expediency - even if (narrowly defined) performance is equal or better. How many will be around in 20 years time?
Canon kept it quite secret according to Gordon Laing, before letting him do a video about it.
Zeiss took pains to point out that the Otus series were 'no compromise' lenses, in design and performance terms at least. Ironically, Otus and Milvus were the turning point for Zeiss, as they tried to foist ARRI sized lenses on the stills market.
They had plenty of company in the old companies that encouraged (D)SLR platforms to grow egregiously huge and heavy - it was a steady increase of bloatware until Sony arrived and saw immediately what needed to be done. The first a7r weighs almost exactly half the Nikon D850 - 465g against 915g.
Asking Cosina to dust off the Otus doco and fire up the production lines is a non-starter, in my opinion. Including the phone tech Canon lenses, we have seen so much new technology over the post-Otus decade that a new line is necessary for CZ to prove themselves as they try to rise a second time.
Unless they have already begun behind closed doors, they are looking at a very lengthy delay to develop just one full set of lenses to market readiness. It takes years, and they took seven years to do just four Otuses - 2012 to 2019.
I sincerely doubt they can do something like the Leica 35/2 APO-Summicron-M, based on their poor effort in all the mini lens ranges made this century: ZM, Loxia, Batis, Touit, and Otus. They knock off work too early after just 4-5 lenses! Only Milvus got their full attention. THey wanted to position themselves as the pros' friends, making these studio lenses.
They are already irrelevant, in many ways, so unless they can move fast, much faster than they have shown before, it will be too little, too late. A full range of 15-18-21-28-35-50-85-100-135 of 500 gram lenses - it's very doubtful, isn't it? Maybe they should stay as a beacon of past glory rather than embarrass themselves further.
p.3 #16 · ZEISS Otus ML line officially announced!
DWOfPaul wrote: [...]Personally, I am more interested in seeing a mirrorless version of the ZF2 line. High quality lenses that are more reasonable in size, weight, and price.
chez wrote: The Batis line fits that need.
For me the 40mm Batis could have been interesting. Weight? OK. Price? No. Size? No. That's one out of tree.
But, wht, let's see what happens. I'll keep breathing though.
p.3 #17 · ZEISS Otus ML line officially announced!
Jonas B wrote: DWOfPaul wrote: chez wrote:
For me the 40mm Batis could have been interesting. Weight? OK. Price? No. Size? No. That's one out of tree.
But, wht, let's see what happens. I'll keep breathing though.
I suppose everyone is different when it comes to weight, size and price…but like anything else, if you want light, small and great…you won’t get cheap.
p.3 #18 · ZEISS Otus ML line officially announced!
chez wrote:
I suppose everyone is different when it comes to weight, size and price…but like anything else, if you want light, small and great…you won’t get cheap.
I like the Batises...Batii? They're all optically excellent and I think I'm one of the few who like the build...light but still solid. Add an aperture ring and I'm there
p.3 #19 · ZEISS Otus ML line officially announced!
Dave Sanders wrote:
I like the Batises...Batii? They're all optically excellent and I think I'm one of the few who like the build...light but still solid. Add an aperture ring and I'm there
I had 3 Batii over the years and sold them all. The 18mm because I never really used it, 40mm because it was a bit too slow and its AF was not super reliable (the 35GM was a better fit for me), and the 135mm because I needed something faster. Nice lenses, for sure... light, yes, but also pretty bulky for what their relatively slow speeds and with a borderline-useless little display that I turned off on all mine. They're definitely a bit of a niche option IMO.
p.3 #20 · ZEISS Otus ML line officially announced!
Hmmm. Maybe they should get into sports and wildlife lenses. There is currently no competition for Sony beyond 200mm besides the excellent sigma 500.
Feel like primes are a dime a dozen already, and paying an extreme premium for a heavily competitive prime market doesn't make sense to me. But what do I known.
Gimme a 100 - 300 competitor. Or come out with something totally new. 70 - 300 2.8.
