Re: Zeiss "Batis" AF lens line to be released for FF E-mount
Jman13 wrote:
The 35/1.4 is not soft wide open at ALL.
actually, i\'ve been reviewing as many images from the 35/1.4 as possible as i am going to either get it or the Batis 25 - and my personal view is that i\'d probably never shoot it at f/1.4 because
(a) the DoF is razor thin and its not my style and
(b) it seems to sharpen up considerably by f/2
LC notes that at f/1.4 there is considerably less of micro contrast compared to f/2 most likely due to LOCA - and that may be what people are noticing wide open - or it may be that DoF is so shallow that focus may be slightly off and that is what is sometimes being seen.
while i started out thinking of getting either the 35/1.4 or the 25/2 - they\'re so different, i may end up with both. the 35 has more than a bit of field curvature and its not equally sharp from corner to corner. but for central subjects and near to medium distances, its rendering is pleasing, IMHO. meanwhile, the 25/2 seems like its goal was corner to corner sharp and minimal field curvature. haven\'t seen enough to evaluate its rendering and bokeh, although i\'m not expecting anything close to the 35/1.4
even though i\'d prefer greater spacing between lenses, it\'s feeling like the 25/2 and 55/1.8 are going to be my landscape/streetscape lenses for flat field and edge to edge sharpenss but with perhaps second in class bokeh whereas the 35/1.4 and 85/1.8 are going to have beautiful rendering and bokeh, but perhaps more useful with central subjects.
these are all great lenses, so please don\'t mistake my emphasis on their strengths as a criticism of their weakness because in all 4 of these, their \'weaknesses\' really don\'t seem that weak. in this class, it\'s really splitting hairs.
Re: Zeiss "Batis" AF lens line to be released for FF E-mount
Jman13 wrote:
The 35/1.4 is not soft wide open at ALL.
actually, i\'ve been reviewing as many images from the 35/1.4 as possible as i am going to either get it or the Batis 25 - and my personal view is that i\'d probably never shoot it at f/1.4 because
(a) the DoF is razor thin and its not my style and
(b) it seems to sharpen up considerably by f/2
LC notes that at f/1.4 there is considerably less of micro contrast compared to f/2 most likely due to LOCA - and that may be what people are noticing wide open - or it may be that DoF is so shallow that focus may be slightly off and that is what is sometimes being seen.
while i started out thinking of getting either the 35/1.4 or the 25/2 - they\'re so different, i may end up with both. the 35 has more than a bit of field curvature and its not equally sharp from corner to corner. but for central subjects and near to medium distances, its rendering is second to none, IMHO. meanwhile, the 25/2 seems like its goal was corner to corner sharp and minimal field curvature. haven\'t seen enough to evaluate its rendering and bokeh, although i\'m not expecting anything close to the 35/1.4
even though i\'d prefer greater spacing between lenses, it\'s feeling like the 25/2 and 55/1.8 are going to be my landscape/streetscape lenses for flat field and edge to edge sharpenss but with perhaps second in class bokeh whereas the 35/1.4 and 85/1.8 are going to have beautiful rendering and bokeh, but perhaps more useful with central subjects.
these are all great lenses, so please don\'t mistake my emphasis on their strengths as a criticism of their weakness because in all 4 of these, their \'weaknesses\' really don\'t seem that weak. in this class, it\'s really splitting hairs.
Re: Zeiss "Batis" AF lens line to be released for FF E-mount
Jman13 wrote:
The 35/1.4 is not soft wide open at ALL.
actually, i\'ve been reviewing as many images from the 35/1.4 as possible as i am going to either get it or the Batis 25 - and my personal view is that i\'d probably never shoot it at f/1.4 because
(a) the DoF is razor thin and its not my style and
(b) it seems to sharpen up considerably by f/2
LC notes that at f/1.4 there is considerably less of micro contrast compared to f/2 most likely due to LOCA - and that may be what people are noticing wide open - or it may be that DoF is so shallow that focus may be slightly off and that is what is sometimes being seen.
while i started out thinking of getting either the 35/1.4 or the 25/2 - they\'re so different, i may end up with both. the 35 has more than a bit of field curvature and i don\'t think it\'s sharp from corner to corner. but for central subjects and near to medium distances, its rendering is second to none, IMHO. meanwhile, the 25/2 seems like its goal was corner to corner sharp and minimal field curvature. haven\'t seen enough to evaluate its rendering and bokeh, although i\'m not expecting anything close to the 35/1.4
even though i\'d prefer greater spacing between lenses, it\'s feeling like the 25/2 and 55/1.8 are going to be my landscape/streetscape lenses for flat field and edge to edge sharpenss but with perhaps second in class bokeh whereas the 35/1.4 and 85/1.8 are going to have beautiful rendering and bokeh, but perhaps more useful with central subjects.
these are all great lenses, so please don\'t mistake my emphasis on their strengths as a criticism of their weakness because in all 4 of these, their \'weaknesses\' really don\'t seem that weak. in this class, it\'s really splitting hairs.
May 27, 2015 at 01:53 PM
Previous versions of ecarlino's message #13033387 « Zeiss "Batis" AF lens line to be released for FF E-mount »
