+John Campbell I have not used the Batis yet, but around the Zeiss booth at PPE people (including zeiss' spokespeople) were calling it the "Baby Otus" I think the nickname speaks for itself and you'll be very pleased with the combo. -Joe
@SLR Lounge. Hello, What is the difference between Zeiss Milvus 15mm f/2.8 vs ZEISS Otus 1.4/28 ?? I am really undecided.. Which one is better? Thank you kindly.
Mr. Cha, you've convinced me to get the otus lenses - what adapter is the best to use with the a7sii in order to avoid any distortion to focal length? I really want to keep the 55mm at 55mm and the 80mm at 80mm
Please someone explain to me how can you manually focus this lens on a Canon 5d mk3 (or DSR) body at 1.4 without switching to live view? .. the matte screen in my 5d mk3 is non replaceable and as I understand it is laser etched to an aperture of 2.8 .. is it replaceable on the 5dsr? Another note at the comparison .. just wanted to point out the canon 50 1.2 is not a landscape lens but a portrait lens and in portraits there is no need for corners to be sharp ; ) Help me out with my manual focusing question .. i would love to be able to see through my viewfinder if my 50 1.2 is in focus or not at 1.2.
+GravityHazard I think you can change the focusing screen to split screen one, but you probably gonna lose AF because no focus point in the focusing screen (my friend use it), I heard there's hybrid one, where you can still have focusing point with your OVF but only center point, I think it's better to stick with live view+zakuto. Check focusingscreen dot com
The price of the Zeiss Otus 55mm is at the price edge of medium format lenses. So there is a dilemma for someone who wants to invest in such an expensive lens. Medium format lenses are bigger more sharp . They demand very expensive medium format cameras which are perfect for portraits and landscape but don't have the big telephoto lenses, fast focusing and fast shooting bursts of full format cameras. Medium format cameras shoot 16bit raw photos instead of the common 14bit. I believe that Zeiss Otus 55mm brings medium format quality to full format users without the extra cost. Zeiss is nice and since Zeiss and Sony are friends why Zeiss didn't create Otus with e-mount? It is an important omission.
The Otus 55mm is a horrible lens. Its only sharp, it has horrible rendition, color saturation , and epic bad microcontrast due to EXTREME high element count. But people that know what a GREAT lens is, are few and far between Most people suffer the delusions that a "very sharp lens" is always = best lens. same failure here.
Follow your own advice, Nimrod! The. Otus is a twelve element design, not six ! And yes, that’s overkill for a 55mm lens. The one I tested was not as good as my 48 year old Canon FL 55mm f1.2.
I cant stand this mope Theoria either, Armando. But he is correct about the high element count. This can, and DOES have a negative impact on this lens.
PS Armando...... He’s also correct about the poor micro contrast and color saturation with the OTUS. I have comparison files against my 49 year old Canon FL which reveal this to be the case. My comparison images were taken with a full frame Sony A7R3 outdoors at infinity on a tripod. There may be a decent 55mm OTUS out there, but the one I tested SIMPLY SUCKED! Beware who you claim doesn’t know what they are talking about. HAVE YOU EVER USED ONE OR COMPARED IT TO ANYTHING ELSE? I HAVE, and Theoria is correct in this case....
Hogwash........ (at least from what I have seen). I compared one sample of this lens against my 48 year old Canon FD f 1.2. The Otus was DISTINCTLY SOFT along the left third of the image. Otherwise, it was on par with the Canon from f 4 upwards. The Otus did have better image quality wide open, though still blurry along one edge. IF ONE DEFECTIVE LENS WAS MISSED DURING INSPECTION, HOW MANY OTHERS LIKE IT ARE THERE?
Great samples, nice job. Thanks. I'm considering an a7rII and a Batis 85 for tight head-shot work. Ever tried that combo?
+John Campbell I have not used the Batis yet, but around the Zeiss booth at PPE people (including zeiss' spokespeople) were calling it the "Baby Otus" I think the nickname speaks for itself and you'll be very pleased with the combo. -Joe
+John Campbell DigitalRev did a review on that exact combo, and it is glorious. It's laser sharp and the Bokeh is delicious!
Sami
Thanks Sami, I'll go check it out.
This lens is what dreams are made of!
Great review.
@SLR Lounge.
Hello, What is the difference between Zeiss Milvus 15mm f/2.8 vs ZEISS Otus 1.4/28 ?? I am really undecided..
Which one is better? Thank you kindly.
Mr. Cha, you've convinced me to get the otus lenses - what adapter is the best to use with the a7sii in order to avoid any distortion to focal length? I really want to keep the 55mm at 55mm and the 80mm at 80mm
I plan on using the otus lens for landscapes, what do you think?
I think you’re nuts to spend that kind of money on this lens. Just my two cents worth.....
I use this lense at my A7RII and at my Sony FS100 for Filming and i love it so much.
The best, unequaled Zeiss!!!
Not from my experience.......
Yes more Joe Cha! Knew if it was an Otus it was going to be Joe Cha reviewing it.
I know it's an older lens but could you review the 135 f2 apo?
Please someone explain to me how can you manually focus this lens on a Canon 5d mk3 (or DSR) body at 1.4 without switching to live view? .. the matte screen in my 5d mk3 is non replaceable and as I understand it is laser etched to an aperture of 2.8 .. is it replaceable on the 5dsr?
Another note at the comparison .. just wanted to point out the canon 50 1.2 is not a landscape lens but a portrait lens and in portraits there is no need for corners to be sharp ; )
Help me out with my manual focusing question .. i would love to be able to see through my viewfinder if my 50 1.2 is in focus or not at 1.2.
+GravityHazard I think you can change the focusing screen to split screen one, but you probably gonna lose AF because no focus point in the focusing screen (my friend use it), I heard there's hybrid one, where you can still have focusing point with your OVF but only center point, I think it's better to stick with live view+zakuto. Check focusingscreen dot com
May i ask what camera you are filming on?
Considering this for my D800.. It's such a sharp lens
Not the one I tested! A waste of money....
The price of the Zeiss Otus 55mm is at the price edge of medium format lenses. So there is a dilemma for someone who wants to invest in such an expensive lens.
Medium format lenses are bigger more sharp . They demand very expensive medium format cameras which are perfect for portraits and landscape but don't have the big telephoto lenses, fast focusing and fast shooting bursts of full format cameras. Medium format cameras shoot 16bit raw photos instead of the common 14bit.
I believe that Zeiss Otus 55mm brings medium format quality to full format users without the extra cost. Zeiss is nice and since Zeiss and Sony are friends why Zeiss didn't create Otus with e-mount? It is an important omission.
wat a sharp lens!!!!
#zeiss you need to send these guys that 28mm lens
For that price i would rather go for medium format.
Bring back gear talk!
I will never buy a high megapixel camera nor will I ever get this lens.. I'm not the target demographic for this video.
The Otus 55mm is a horrible lens. Its only sharp, it has horrible rendition, color saturation , and epic bad microcontrast due to EXTREME high element count.
But people that know what a GREAT lens is, are few and far between
Most people suffer the delusions that a "very sharp lens" is always = best lens.
same failure here.
You have no idea what you're talking about.
Ken from the past coming to buzzkill my youtube searches lol
Follow your own advice, Nimrod! The. Otus is a twelve element design, not six ! And yes, that’s overkill for a 55mm lens. The one I tested was not as good as my 48 year old Canon FL 55mm f1.2.
I cant stand this mope Theoria either, Armando. But he is correct about the high element count. This can, and DOES have a negative impact on this lens.
PS Armando......
He’s also correct about the poor micro contrast and color saturation with the OTUS. I have comparison files against my 49 year old Canon FL which reveal this to be the case. My comparison images were taken with a full frame Sony A7R3 outdoors at infinity on a tripod. There may be a decent 55mm OTUS out there, but the one I tested SIMPLY SUCKED! Beware who you claim doesn’t know what they are talking about. HAVE YOU EVER USED ONE OR COMPARED IT TO ANYTHING ELSE? I HAVE, and Theoria is correct in this case....
For having NOT AF you should give it 1 star instead of 4.
Hogwash........ (at least from what I have seen). I compared one sample of this lens against my 48 year old Canon FD f 1.2. The Otus was DISTINCTLY SOFT along the left third of the image. Otherwise, it was on par with the Canon from f 4 upwards. The Otus did have better image quality wide open, though still blurry along one edge. IF ONE DEFECTIVE LENS WAS MISSED DURING INSPECTION, HOW MANY OTHERS LIKE IT ARE THERE?