I got 2 Batis. Not a lot of dust, but I can see how it could be sticky to some materials it comes into contact with. Zeiss did make these a bit futuristic design wise. I like them, they really have the Zeiss color and contrast.
LBJ2 wrote:
I wonder why. Not that you two are the only ones to complain about this on the forums. Just that I'm not experiencing any unusual dust magnet experience with my Batis focus rings--and as I wrote the non traditional material focus ring so many warned about on the forum, has held up for me very well and I have never had to clean the Batis focus rings more than any of my other lenses of varying materials.
Interestingly, I notice white dust specs most often on my Leica M lenses all-metal focus rings.
My guess is that since it is purely flat....no ridges, no patterns, it stands out to me. Meaning I haven't done some in depth scientific measurement of dust volume between the tons of lenses I have. Maybe it collects less dust than other lenses. But visually, when I look at mine, it "looks" like it has dust on it. If I take an actual tape lint roller and roll the ring, it "looks" cleaner. Frankly the smoothness of the Batis design in general may make it stand out to me more.
At the end of the day, it's not a huge concern....in other words I don't clean them regularly, but if I were to sell one, I'd definitely roll it with a lint roller before putting it in the box. It doesn't affect the use of the lens. It just a perception I have, maybe not founded in reality.
Lee Saxon wrote:
FWIW that's not quite accurate, they probably phrased it that way for expediency. Only the 35, 50, and 85 were literal redesigns, while the 18/2.8 and 25/1.4 were new models that didn't have a "Classic" predecessor.
Well, there was the Classic 18mm/f3.5 (with 13 lenses, 11 elements). To me the Milvus 18mm/f2.8 (with 14 lenses, 12 elements) is a classic case of redesigning a lens to higher specs. The new Milvus 18mm replaced the old Classic 18mm.
Shrouded in mystery, AZS. After a pretty deep look for more than the weights, apertures (12 blades), very little was said at their release. Some qualitative snippets for you, some hints there, some are well known to MF portrait shooters:
'The optical design...the first trade-off is making it with a shorter flange depth—because then you simplify the design. Nano has fewer lens elements. You have less glass, you simplify the design. We had a very international team. The optical and mechanical designs were done in Oberkochen. ..coordinated design in Germany and manufacturing in Japan. We worked with our long-time manufacturing partner in Japan to keep the price at an acceptable level.'
'The focus fall-off is also very smooth and “slow.” Slow focus fall-off means that the transition from being sharp and in focus to where you begin to go out of focus is gentle. Because the fall-off is so smooth and slow, you have the impression it’s in focus. You don’t need to stop down to have the whole face in focus as the contrast goes down.'
'Skin textures are a big topic for all DPs. It is one of the characteristics that they look at right from the beginning of working with new lenses. And therefore, it is important to us. The T* coatings are the same as with the Supremes. We did not sacrifice performance to get the cost down.'
'Besides the advantages of the E-mount that I mentioned, one of the best options you have in optical design to reduce size and weight are aspheres. When I started my career as an optical designer more than 15 years ago, maybe one or two aspherical surfaces were acceptable in a cine lens because of complexity and cost. Today we have access to much cheaper asphere production capabilities. Therefore, multiple double-sided aspherical lenses are possible without horrendous cost.'
Thoughts on the body design as we near announcement.
Notable with Otus and Milvus were fluted designs with interesting features like a friction focus gear and even stepless iris adjustments. Back then, the discussion of what a hybrid stills and motion lens was a big topic in the industry.
So far being a Sony E-Mount lens, that we know of, it's certainly possible autofocus will exist similar to Batis. However, I am hoping greatly that these will work on other mounts natively.
Back to the body, Zeiss usually excels at fit and finish, but I also suspect some cost cutting efforts and a more "normal" form factor were the goal here.
I read through the whole interview. It appears the optical performance is essentially identical to the Supremes. Housings are less luxurious.
I hope it means identical to the new Supremes and not the old Supremes. The old Supremes are those that used the Otus layouts. For those focal lengths not covered by Otus, they came up with new layouts. Those are extremely remarkable in mtf as tested by lensrentals.
philip_pj wrote:
Shrouded in mystery, AZS. After a pretty deep look for more than the weights, apertures (12 blades), very little was said at their release. Some qualitative snippets for you, some hints there, some are well known to MF portrait shooters:
'The optical design...the first trade-off is making it with a shorter flange depth—because then you simplify the design. Nano has fewer lens elements. You have less glass, you simplify the design. We had a very international team. The optical and mechanical designs were done in Oberkochen. ..coordinated design in Germany and manufacturing in Japan. We worked with our long-time manufacturing partner in Japan to keep the price at an acceptable level.'
'The focus fall-off is also very smooth and “slow.” Slow focus fall-off means that the transition from being sharp and in focus to where you begin to go out of focus is gentle. Because the fall-off is so smooth and slow, you have the impression it’s in focus. You don’t need to stop down to have the whole face in focus as the contrast goes down.'
'Skin textures are a big topic for all DPs. It is one of the characteristics that they look at right from the beginning of working with new lenses. And therefore, it is important to us. The T* coatings are the same as with the Supremes. We did not sacrifice performance to get the cost down.'
'Besides the advantages of the E-mount that I mentioned, one of the best options you have in optical design to reduce size and weight are aspheres. When I started my career as an optical designer more than 15 years ago, maybe one or two aspherical surfaces were acceptable in a cine lens because of complexity and cost. Today we have access to much cheaper asphere production capabilities. Therefore, multiple double-sided aspherical lenses are possible without horrendous cost.'
p.8 #10 · ZEISS Otus ML line officially announced!
They aimed them at the top end for use on B cameras and the burgeoning midmarket Sony presence, so it seems so yes, you are indeed right and may get your wish. They are touting "gentle sharpness, the aesthetic focus fall-off, and elegant bokeh" but some may find the creamy bokeh a bit expressive, 'showy'. If you are right and they do go ahead with the Nanos, how will the 'perfection' be received in the stills world, perfect corners and outer frame fall-off? Many will probably love it.
I got the impression they put three years into the Nanos. It's great to see them back, come what may. And excellent to see another high end 75mm optic if that comes to pass. Focus fall-off looks rapid, but they talk up the smoothness - it's a judgment call, taste. Will the full cine look attract modern users if they lenses are f1.4?
Current tastes are very much influenced by YT, Tik Tok, music, small productions, and that look is more gritty. If I may say, the Zeiss contrast look can be a little brutal and big screen, not quite intimate. We'll know soon enough. How much per unit? Too much and they may get swamped by the Chinese/Japanese 'intruders' (like the EV market).
p.8 #11 · ZEISS Otus ML line officially announced!
kotmj wrote:
I hope it means identical to the new Supremes and not the old Supremes. The old Supremes are those that used the Otus layouts. For those focal lengths not covered by Otus, they came up with new layouts. Those are extremely remarkable in mtf as tested by lensrentals.
Care to explain this a bit more? As far as I know, there are only one Supreme lenses, and not 'old' and 'new' ones. At least Zeiss makes a lot of effort to explain that Supreme lenses all share same rendering characteristics. Maybe you are mixing Supremes and Master Primes?
p.8 #13 · ZEISS Otus ML line officially announced!
I’ve since done more research into my statement about old and new Supremes.
Maybe I should restate it. Zeiss likes to reuse optical layouts. The double Gauss Planar it just never wants to stop using. (Until Sony showed them the light with the 1,8/55.) The 2/28 Classic had a very similar optical layout to their Contax 2/28 from the 70’s.
There is well-founded speculation that several of the Supremes were ported over from the Otus or other prior Zeiss lenses. Because they have similar MTFs to the Otus.
Then we have the curious case of the 65mm Supreme. A focal length Zeiss did not have in their recent catalogue and therefore had to design from scratch. Look at its amazing contrast! But the 100mm Supreme is also palpably high performing. The 100mm was the last lens Zeiss brought out for photo in the Otus line.
Sorry my retarded iPhone can’t copy urls right now. Google “Just the Cinema MTF Charts: Zeiss Cine Lenses” for the mtfs
Kalainen wrote:
Care to explain this a bit more? As far as I know, there are only one Supreme lenses, and not 'old' and 'new' ones. At least Zeiss makes a lot of effort to explain that Supreme lenses all share same rendering characteristics. Maybe you are mixing Supremes and Master Primes?
p.8 #15 · ZEISS Otus ML line officially announced!
Unlike other manufacturers, Zeiss is perfectly comfortable with very different levels of performance within a single lens family. Compare Loxia 2/35 to Loxia 2,4/85.
p.8 #18 · ZEISS Otus ML line officially announced!
ustjwenew wrote:
The price for the 50 is rumoured to be 4000. For that price it should be more than excellent and better than all excellent options already available.
The size looks promising, but that's about it so far. Going after the Leica consumer might be a tough sale.
p.8 #19 · ZEISS Otus ML line officially announced!
ustjwenew wrote:
The price for the 50 is rumoured to be 4000. For that price it should be more than excellent and better than all excellent options already available.
Let's see the final specs, performance, size and price, but indeed it would be a mistake to think that they can successfully release, like in the old days, a few high performance monster lenses at 4000 $
Not in a world where Cosina, and even Canikonsony and Sigma, have so many high performing lenses.
p.8 #20 · ZEISS Otus ML line officially announced!
Alan Parker wrote:
The size looks promising, but that's about it so far. Going after the Leica consumer might be a tough sale.
Hard for me to tell in that photo, ( why are rumored lens/camera photos often blurry? ha ha) But yes, that 50/1.4 lens in the SAR photo appears Much smaller than I expected based upon the lens we saw in the first video Zeiss leaked on instagram with the photographer in China. Does this point to more than one focal length for this new Zeiss system?
