Any thoughts on how the performance of the Zeiss 85mm 1.4 ZE will stack up against the 85mm 1.2 L II? I read somewhere that the optical formula of the Zeiss ZE lens will be slightly modified from the the ZF version. Apparently the Zeiss ZF version was somewhat inferior to the 85mm 1.2 L on a test done on the 16.9 website. http://www.16-9.net/lens_tests/zeiss_85mm/index.html
The tester needs to get his facts straight...One minute he says:
"Across the frame, the Zeiss ZF 85mm renders slightly stronger contrast and perhaps the merest whisker more resolution, as supported by the file sizes.
Note also that, although the Zeiss has conspicuously better control over chroma aberration, it isn't quite entirely blameless."
Which strongly suggests that the Zeiss is the sharper lens and that is has less CA, but then he goes on to state:
"Despite a fraction more vignetting in the extreme corners, the wide-open Zeiss draws its colours with greater solidity and presence than the Canon L, but it isn't quite as sharp"
How can it have more resolution that the Canon but not be a sharp!
It seems like he meant across the frame except for at the corners... it is a bit odd.
I believe the reviewer is an FM member, so maybe he'll chime in. Overall I think 16-9 is one of the best lens review sites. What is with all the broken links on this site? They really need to use a CMS with caching instead of these hard .html pages.
Alf - the main reason is that initial impression was done on one image and one area...once adapter issues were ironed out and he got a flat field of focus, he did more rigorous tests, which show the 85L with far more resolution in many of the shots, especially in the corners (and even in the center at wider apertures). Read through the whole review, not just the first and last page, and you'll see the crop comparisons that led to his conclusion.
"Despite a fraction more vignetting in the extreme corners, the wide-open Zeiss draws its colours with greater solidity and presence than the Canon L, but it isn't quite as sharp"
-Even if that last part is / were true, would it matter? We're talking about portrait lenses, and both are plenty sharp enough. If these were 50mm and under, or macro lenses, then OK, maybe a little pixle-peepage is justified, but c'mon already.
It's the color, the drawing style, the overall look that matter is an 85. - And to that end, you obviously need both!
Pixel Perfect wrote:
IMO not that's it's worth much on this issue, if the ZE is better than the old C/Y Planar T*, then it'll be superb and push the L very hard.
If you believe the MTF's for the ZE/ZF, and see the benefit of a 9-bladed aperture vs the Contax's 6 blade aperture, then is almost certainly is better.
One thing about the Zeiss 85mm 1.4 ZE is that it seems to be a continuation of an old design. Canon uses a precision aspheric element in it's 85mm 1.2 L and Leica has even gone a step further by incorporating both aspherical and apochromatic technology in the optical formula of the 90mm 2 Apo-Asph R. Why couldn't Zeiss update it's optical formula for the ZE to this standard? Perhaps Sigma might come to the fore with their innovative optical designs and produce an 85mm 1.4 Apo-Asph at a price less than what is proposed for the Zeiss ZE?
knodl wrote:
Perhaps Sigma might come to the fore with their innovative optical designs and produce an 85mm 1.4 Apo-Asph at a price less than what is proposed for the Zeiss ZE?
knodl wrote:
One thing about the Zeiss 85mm 1.4 ZE is that it seems to be a continuation of an old design. Canon uses a precision aspheric element in it's 85mm 1.2 L and Leica has even gone a step further by incorporating both aspherical and apochromatic technology in the optical formula of the 90mm 2 Apo-Asph R. Why couldn't Zeiss update it's optical formula for the ZE to this standard? Perhaps Sigma might come to the fore with their innovative optical designs and produce an 85mm 1.4 Apo-Asph at a price less than what is proposed for the Zeiss ZE?
Well, look at the price of the 85L, and the Leica. One could argue that they're different market segments. The Zeiss is aimed to be good, solid performance that's affordable for people that buy old-fashioned manual lenses. The 85L is for professionals that want speed and AF, and the Leica is for people with money to burn that want the very best money can get.
Also, nearly all 50mm and 85mm lenses are based on a Double Gauss design, and various variations thereupon. So in this case, "continuation of an old design" simply means that it's a lens design that works and has been used for over a century.
knodl wrote:
One thing about the Zeiss 85mm 1.4 ZE is that it seems to be a continuation of an old design. Canon uses a precision aspheric element in it's 85mm 1.2 L and Leica has even gone a step further by incorporating both aspherical and apochromatic technology in the optical formula of the 90mm 2 Apo-Asph R. Why couldn't Zeiss update it's optical formula for the ZE to this standard? Perhaps Sigma might come to the fore with their innovative optical designs and produce an 85mm 1.4 Apo-Asph at a price less than what is proposed for the Zeiss ZE?
Considering the Zeiss is 40% or so of the cost of the L and maybe 25% of the cost of the Leica, I don't think there's much to complain about design-wise. I'm sure Zeiss could produce a lens that outperforms either the L or the Leica, but it's going to be similar in cost and I don't see much for a market for that. Otherwise I'm sure they'd have done an updated version of the 85/1.2 Anniversary (which is an exotic design)
mawz wrote:
Considering the Zeiss is 40% or so of the cost of the L and maybe 25% of the cost of the Leica, I don't think there's much to complain about design-wise. I'm sure Zeiss could produce a lens that outperforms either the L or the Leica, but it's going to be similar in cost and I don't see much for a market for that. Otherwise I'm sure they'd have done an updated version of the 85/1.2 Anniversary (which is an exotic design)
I thought the ZE mount was in excess of $1,000 USD?! Perhaps your talking about the Contax mount, which is around $500.00....?
European prices are very skewed, especially with VAT.
Looking at actual prices in either USD or Yen, the Zeiss lenses are rather cheaper than in Europe.
For example, I'm seeing the ZF85 listing for US$1000 and some change, whereas the Canon 85L is about US$1800 and some change, with the Leica 90mm f/2 APO Summicron-R is listing for about US$3900. These are brand new prices, on Adorama. If you shop in Japan, you can get the ZF lenses even cheaper, including shipping.
If Zeiss priced the lens at several thousand, they could include many aspherical and exotic glass elements, and raise the bar. Would it sell? A few, to collectors. Worth the design and assembly cost? Probably not. Think of the Leica Vario-Elmarit-R ASPH 2.8/35-70.
maxima302 wrote:
I thought the ZE mount was in excess of $1,000 USD?! Perhaps your talking about the Contax mount, which is around $500.00....?
The ZE is around $1100, I was a little off on the L, last I'd seen a price on the L it was around $2200, it's around $1900 now. The Leica is just under $4k.
shiwan wrote:
European prices are very skewed, especially with VAT.
Looking at actual prices in either USD or Yen, the Zeiss lenses are rather cheaper than in Europe.
For example, I'm seeing the ZF85 listing for US$1000 and some change, whereas the Canon 85L is about US$1800 and some change, with the Leica 90mm f/2 APO Summicron-R is listing for about US$3900. These are brand new prices, on Adorama. If you shop in Japan, you can get the ZF lenses even cheaper, including shipping.
If Zeiss priced the lens at several thousand, they could include many aspherical and exotic glass elements, and raise the bar. Would it sell? A few, to collectors. Worth the design and assembly cost? Probably not. Think of the Leica Vario-Elmarit-R ASPH 2.8/35-70....Show more →
pricewise the EF 1.8 85mm is the best deal out there.
IMO Zeiss has lost some of their reputation with the ZF line because they did not raise the bar. Its hard to justify Zeiss prices when you know what outstanding glass we have seen from Nikon and Canon these days.
Andi Dietrich wrote:
pricewise the EF 1.8 85mm is the best deal out there.
IMO Zeiss has lost some of their reputation with the ZF line because they did not raise the bar. Its hard to justify Zeiss prices when you know what outstanding glass we have seen from Nikon and Canon these days.
Well, except for the fact that Zeiss isn't charging outrageous prices for their kit. The few lenses in the ZF/ZK/ZE line that are significantly more expensive (the 35/2, the 100/2, the 50/2) than the CaNikon equivalents also significantly outperform those equivalents. Others, like the 85/1.4 are actually cheaper than the similar products (the ZF 85 is the cheapest 85 on the market that's faster than f1.8) and the ZF 50/1.4 is only moderately more expensive than the Nikon or Canon, while also being a moderately better lens.
Note the truly outstanding glass coming from Canon and Nikon with only a couple exceptions costs more than any of the Zeiss lenses.
How can it have more resolution that the Canon but not be a sharp!