Approve the Cookies
This website uses cookies to improve your user experience. By using this site, you agree to our use of cookies and our Privacy Policy.
OK
Index  •   • New posts  •   • RTAT  •   • 'Best of'  •   • Gallery  •   • Gear  •   • Reviews
Guest
New posts  •   • RTAT  •   • 'Best of'  •   • Gallery  •   • Gear  •   • Reviews
Register to forums    Log in

 
FORUMS Canon Cameras, Lenses & Accessories Canon EF and EF-S Lenses 
Thread started 07 Oct 2013 (Monday) 09:08
Search threadPrev/next
sponsored links
(this ad will go away when you log in as a registered member)

Zeiss Otus 1.4/55

 
Xyclopx
Goldmember
1,714 posts
Gallery: 33 photos
Best ofs: 6
Likes: 202
Joined Jul 2008
Location: San Jose, CA
     
Oct 09, 2013 01:47 |  #31

SunTsu wrote in post #16357330 (external link)
Honest question...if manual is so good, then why don't Formula 1 cars use it?

Skip gears: main reason to do this is to conserve gas
Full launch control with torque selection right at the balls of your feet: I am not sure but most likely the cars either have optimal launch control programming or are tuned to allow them to be optimally launched when need be
Feeling the locking of the clutch through your toes: not necessary
Not worrying about the trans overheating doing lap after lap: they have ways of cooling their transmissions
Knowing you passed someone on the track because of you and not some overly-artificially-intelligent computer: don't give a sht. just need to win
...Clutch... ...Kick...: this is for drifting mainly

but the main answer is that they only care about one thing in f1: winning. and they have plenty of money to spend towards that. the computer-controlled-clutch systems they use are faster than a human, and they've built them to be invincible cause they can.

I personally have an evo mr, which has one of those fancy dual clutch transmissions, and I kick all kinds of butt on the track, but it overheats in 5 laps. also, I feel the car is winning for me--it's too good. that car is god mode, and it sux. I've also owned plenty of other cars in the past including a corvette z06, but despite having far faster cars, my s2000 with a simple manual transmission is the best and the only one I take to the track now.

so to tie this in with the zeiss lens: I suppose that lens is sorta the equivalent of a manual-transmission Ferrari (which they don't make anymore sadly.) one thing that hasn't been said too much but I think is one reason people get manual lenses: fun. I have a canon a-1 myself with some fd lenses, and shooting with it is much more fun than with my dslr. if I had the money, I would have enjoyed a manual Ferrari when they still made them, and likewise I think it would be a blast to use this lens.

k... I need to wake up in 5 hours to drive to the track tomorrow (seriously), so.... good night. ;)


Dean Chiang (external link) | Facebook (external link) | Blog (external link) | Gear (external link)
My Photos (external link)
Instagram @xyclopx (external link) @feetandeyes (external link) @gastramour (external link)

  
  LOG IN TO REPLY
sponsored links
(this ad will go away when you log in as a registered member)
pyrojim
Goldmember
1,882 posts
Likes: 4
Joined Jan 2010
Location: San Jose, CA
     
Oct 09, 2013 02:42 |  #32

SunTsu wrote in post #16357330 (external link)
Honest question...if manual is so good, then why don't Formula 1 cars use it?

They use a sequential, single clutch automated transmission with a KERS device.


Everyone is loosing sight of a few facts(and car enthusiasts are guilty too).


1. People in general think they know better than everyone else. You do not know better than Canon(or BMW), or anyone with a research budget. If you are complaining about the inability to change a focusing screen, you are missing the point entirely AND continue choose to operate in a way that is less than optimal(hello manual focus die hards! )

2. A modern automated transmission is more capable of all of the things that were listed above. Again, see number one. Possible explanation: there must exist some emotional component.

3. Skipping gears doesn't realllly save gas unless you happen to have an extremely powerful motor and a light body and a low redline(hint: corvette)

4. If a driver is far and above a different driver is it only due to transmission choice? You still have to point the car correctly

Hey wait a minute, the zeiss 55/1.4 doesn't promise perfect composition! Ha.

My camera has only one button and two control knobs(shutter speed and aperture). that over priced zeiss could buy me two NEW medium format lenses and have enough left over for a vacation...


PhaseOne H25
Camera agnostic

  
  LOG IN TO REPLY
mag10
Senior Member
357 posts
Likes: 8
Joined Apr 2011
Location: CA Bay Area and Taiwan
     
Oct 09, 2013 02:58 |  #33

SunTsu wrote in post #16357330 (external link)
Honest question...if manual is so good, then why don't Formula 1 cars use it?

F1 uses sequential gear boxes because they simply work faster and more efficiently than a human could. so in that way, there is no question it is better. As xyclopx said, n F1, their main goal is to win, so this is a no brainer choice for them. However, for car enthusiasts and weekend track warriors, it's not always about getting the fastest lap time - it's also about enjoying your car too. I much prefer driving manual transmission because you just feel more engaged in the driving experience and it's just more fun. There is also a sense of being more in control of the car and feeling more accomplished when you get a fast time on the track because you didn't have some computer help you shift, as xyclopx also mentioned. This is why I will buy a manual transmission car, even if the same car is available with auto transmission.

As for AF v. MF, I would have to say that all else being equal, I'd prefer a lens with AF over one that is MF any day. That's because with an AF lens, you can still put the lens in MF mode! So, it is too bad that Zeiss does not offer AF lenses for Canon. That said, I recently got a Zeiss 21mm and am loving it. I bought it, and plan to keep it, because despite the fact that it is MF, it produces images that I prefer over any other wide angle lens I have used. It seems to me, that's what it comes down to with the Zeiss lenses for Canon - is the image quality good enough to you for you to have to deal with MF?


Canon EOS 5D Mark III | Sony DSC-RX100M3 | Canon EF 16-35 f/4 L IS USM EF 24-70mm f/2.8L II USM EF 70-200mm f/2.8L IS II USM EF 100mm f/2.8L Macro IS USM EF 100-400mm f/4.5-5.6L IS II USM | Sigma 50mm F1.4 DG HSM ART | Canon Speedlite 600EX-RT Dedicated flash ST-E3 RT controller

  
  LOG IN TO REPLY
Doc ­ Fluty
Goldmember
Avatar
1,762 posts
Likes: 35
Joined Jan 2010
Location: Gulfport, Ms
     
Oct 09, 2013 04:45 |  #34

I have a few of the Zeiss ZE lenses, including the new 135mm, but I wont be looking for this one anytime soon.

over $4000 for a 50MMish prime?

maybe if it was like 17mm, 200mm... something deep on the ends.... or 16-40mm 1.8...


My Facebook Fan Page (external link) - My Gear

  
  LOG IN TO REPLY
davidfarina
Goldmember
Avatar
3,357 posts
Gallery: 52 photos
Best ofs: 2
Likes: 1033
Joined May 2013
     
Oct 09, 2013 04:52 |  #35

Someone made a typo and said it was 400$, so i didnt understand all those comments, until i realized its ten times more so now my part:

I would never pay more than 500 bucks for a manual focus lens lol


Sony A7RII | Sony A7S
EF 40 | EF 70-300L | FD 35 Tilt-Shift
FE 16-35 | FE 28 | FE 90
CV 15 4.5 III | CV 40 1.4 MC | Summilux 50 ASPH
Website (external link) | 500px (external link)

  
  LOG IN TO REPLY
elleana
Member
155 posts
Joined Sep 2013
     
Oct 09, 2013 05:15 |  #36

davidfarina wrote in post #16357543 (external link)
Someone made a typo and said it was 400$, so i didnt understand all those comments, until i realized its ten times more so now my part:

I would never pay more than 500 bucks for a manual focus lens lol

Call me lazy, but I would never pay more than nothing for a manual focus lens.. Well maybe a coupla bucks if I needed a fancy paperweight.


6D | EF 17-40mm f/4L USM | EF 24-70mm f/2.8L II USM | Sigma 35mm f/1.4 ART | EF 85mm f/1.8 USM

  
  LOG IN TO REPLY
davidfarina
Goldmember
Avatar
3,357 posts
Gallery: 52 photos
Best ofs: 2
Likes: 1033
Joined May 2013
     
Oct 09, 2013 05:28 |  #37

elleana wrote in post #16357565 (external link)
Call me lazy, but I would never pay more than nothing for a manual focus lens.. Well maybe a coupla bucks if I needed a fancy paperweight.

Well, i mean if its really that an amazing lens concurring medium format quality id not pay more than 500.

For just a usual MF lens i see no desire...


Sony A7RII | Sony A7S
EF 40 | EF 70-300L | FD 35 Tilt-Shift
FE 16-35 | FE 28 | FE 90
CV 15 4.5 III | CV 40 1.4 MC | Summilux 50 ASPH
Website (external link) | 500px (external link)

  
  LOG IN TO REPLY
Hogloff
Cream of the Crop
7,606 posts
Likes: 415
Joined Apr 2003
Location: British Columbia
     
Oct 09, 2013 06:13 |  #38
bannedPermanent ban

elleana wrote in post #16357565 (external link)
Call me lazy, but I would never pay more than nothing for a manual focus lens.. Well maybe a coupla bucks if I needed a fancy paperweight.

Back focus, front focus, mis focus, micro focus adjust, play the put the little red rectangle onto what you want in focus game....

Try manual focus with a lens built for it...you just might like it.




  
  LOG IN TO REPLY
Doc ­ Fluty
Goldmember
Avatar
1,762 posts
Likes: 35
Joined Jan 2010
Location: Gulfport, Ms
     
Oct 09, 2013 07:03 |  #39

elleana wrote in post #16357565 (external link)
Call me lazy, but I would never pay more than nothing for a manual focus lens.. Well maybe a coupla bucks if I needed a fancy paperweight.

as an owner of nothing but manual focus lenses... you're lazy ;)


My Facebook Fan Page (external link) - My Gear

  
  LOG IN TO REPLY
kin2son
Goldmember
4,546 posts
Likes: 3
Joined May 2011
Location: Sydney, Australia
     
Oct 09, 2013 07:12 |  #40
bannedPermanent ban

Although I don't use my Zeiss 50 MP as much as it deserves, I find it FUN whenever I use it.

It's more engaging, makes you slow down, think and work harder for the shot.

It basically makes you feel more accomplished and rewarding when you produce a stunning shot with MF :)


5D3 Gripped / 17-40L / Σ35 / 40 Pancake / Zeiss 50 MP / Σ85 / 100L Macro / 70-200 f2.8L II IS / 430 EX II / 580 EX II / Canon 2xIII TC / Kenko Ext. Tubes
EOS M / EF-M 18-55 / EF-M 22f2 / Ricoh GR aka Ultimate street camera :p
Flickr (external link) | My Images on Getty®‎ (external link)

  
  LOG IN TO REPLY
sjones
Goldmember
Avatar
2,225 posts
Likes: 188
Joined Aug 2005
Location: Chicago
     
Oct 09, 2013 07:17 as a reply to  @ Doc Fluty's post |  #41

As for the general issue of manual focus, I enjoy using it more than autofocus. As a hobbyist, I can afford to actually have fun. The first time I attached my US$200 Zeiss Jena manual focus on my 350D, I knew that autofocus would be a thing of the past.

Consequently, a lens that is designed for manual focus, one that has a well dampened long-throw focusing ring (a tactile joy if there ever was one) and a depth-of-field scale (something sadly missing from most modern lenses), is a premium, not a deficit.

If one doesn't want to pay much for a lens (and I'm not just referring to the exorbitant Zeiss 55mm) without autofocus, that's fine. An important feature is missing. But from my side, I don't want to pay more for the inclusion of autofocus, especially if the manual focus function is subpar.

My point being that any notion that one or the other type of lens holds the universal title as 'most optimal' is ludicrous.

For my style of photography, I use zone focusing for moving objects, which is faster than any autofocus system will likely ever be. Lift the camera to my eye without having to first target and then recompose. As for static subjects, I don't need the speed of autofocus to improve the overall process or experience.

If I were involved in a different style or genre, then maybe autofocus would be the better choice. But I'm quite sure that no one on this site is qualified (knows better) to tell me what's best or most optimal in regards to my personal preferences.

Christ, you'd think that decent photography was impossible until the advent of autofocus, when as far as I'm concerned, my favorite period in photography generally stretches from the 1930s into the 1960s (up from the 1950s).

I get it; for a sports or bird-in-flight photographer shooting wide open, autofocus is the choice. But then again, and as unbelievable as it might seem, not everyone has the same demands. Besides, good luck putting an autofocus lens on my rangefinder.

And by the way, the only time on this site that I was ever able to identify a lens by just looking at the photo was one that involved a Zeiss; yep, it was that 3D thingy effect. I generally agree, L-lens, non-L lens, can't really tell the difference most of the time. But nor is it difficult to imagine that lenses made from different manufacturers would possess different rendering characteristics, however subtle or inconsequential they might be.

And Leica glow; my 1934 Summar glows, but we would generally refer to this as lens flare.

Choice, it's a good thing.

Said my bit, I'm out, but PM's always welcome.


Sept 2017-July 2018 (external link)
Manual Focus; only for street photography amateurs...
It's the Photographer (external link) | God Loves Photoshop (external link)

  
  LOG IN TO REPLY
ZoneV
Goldmember
1,644 posts
Gallery: 5 photos
Best ofs: 1
Likes: 235
Joined Dec 2010
Location: Germany
     
Oct 09, 2013 08:14 |  #42

pyrojim wrote in post #16357401 (external link)
...1. People in general think they know better than everyone else. You do not know better than Canon(or BMW), or anyone with a research budget. If you are complaining about the inability to change a focusing screen, you are missing the point entirely AND continue choose to operate in a way that is less than optimal(hello manual focus die hards! ) ...

So you think companys know whatis best for every single one of us?
And make the best for everyone in their cameras?
I don´t agree - and I am working in a camera company R&D. Customers have different needs, and we for example build cameras optimized for these special needs.

With manual focus and the EE-S screen in my EOS 5D I choose the point which I want to be foccused - and need no recomposing after AF. And I need not to choose an AF point.

Furthermore I have no problem to manual focus with a 1.2 lens full open with extension tubes. I read several people writing that with AF lens this is not so easy, the Ef 50/1.2lens is not intented for extension ring use...

Ah, extension tubes, Canon only have the 12mm thick as smallest extension tube. For me this is to thick, I want use tubes with shorter focal lengths, so I build an 6mm thin Canon extension tube (external link).

I have not much knowledge about manual versus automatic transmission. But I still love to drive manual gear - not synchronized. Partly with the need to double-clutch.


DIY-Homepage (external link) - Image Gallery (external link) - Gear List

  
  LOG IN TO REPLY
Tmuussoni
Senior Member
330 posts
Likes: 4
Joined Oct 2011
Location: .FI
     
Oct 09, 2013 09:13 |  #43

pyrojim wrote in post #16356068 (external link)
How did it hurt you? You buy a 35mm camera with the largely reasonable expectation that you are buying into an ecosystem of products. Then you act like you know better than the [large]company that put the whole thing together?


So either you DO know better than canon, or you are just choosing to utilize something in way that does NOT optimize the feature set of what you are using...

Im not too sure why you would even consider manually focusing a lens in "fast situations." Isnt that what autofocus is for anyway? And most L lenses have really nice manual focusing rings. There is no hard stop on the focus ring at infinity...because of how the lens was made.

I don't really understand what you are trying to say here? I said I was disappointed that officially Canon and 5DmkIII doesn't allow you to change the focus screen for more suitable one. Are you saying it would have been impossible? I find it hard to believe, since you can do it already on 5Dc, 5D II, 1DX 6D, and on bunch of other older bodies. I would gladly even pay Canon something extra to have a precision matte screen installed as default. Autofocus makes people lazy. I had some pretty good success rate manual focusing even fast moving objects. Such as squirrels, nothing quite moves as fast or as unpredictably as those cute little furballs :). And you are right that most L-lenses do have nice manual focus rings. However, I'm just saying there are so much better manual focus ones as well. For example the 135L is considered to have one of the finest L-series focus rings. However, compared to the new Zeiss 135, i'd have it's focus ring any day of the week, thank you :).

SunTsu wrote in post #16355925 (external link)
Hrm....you have me a bit curious and interested now. :rolleyes: I'm interested in your comment, "designed to precise manual focusing". Your explanation makes sense. I have a bit of an OCD personality so my problem with manual focusing is that I would always go past focus and then back again to make sure focus couldn't get better. I know I'm going to get flamed for this, but nowadays, I mostly use my gear to take photos of my 4 year old and 2 year old, but still, I want the best IQ even if most of the shots are just snapshots. Do you feel that you could manually focus fast enough to take photos of fast and erratic moving children?

I would say I most certainly can manual focus and take pictures of fast and erratic moving children. But then again I have done it for years as practise. Initially your keepers' rate is most surely going to drop. Manual focus takes some practise to master it, and people with poor eye sight might be more restrained of having a decent keepers' rate. You can improve your success rate by installing a some technical helpers, such as a precision focus screen and Magic Lantern in 5D II (I see you have the same body). With time you also learn how to predict where the subject is moving, as you don't normally think about those things when you are just blazing away with an autofocus lens. And with a lens with really well dampened focus ring and long focus throw in my opinion is the best result for most precise focusing experience. On the other hand, the overall image quality in your pictures can also improve, since thing with the autofocus lenses is that you are generally "married" to focus confirm points and you compose accordingly to used focus points. Focus and recompose is not always an option if the DoF is razor thin. On 5D II I find myself always using the center AF-point as it's by far the most precise one. With manual focus I find myself much less dependant on focus points and therefore compositions might actually improve and become more interesting when you take the actual shot.

MNUplander wrote in post #16355234 (external link)
Geez, 2.27 lbs? The moniker for this one should be the hefty fifty.

Oh dear, somehow I missed the weight earlier. But you are right, that is one hefty lens; 1030 g or 2.43 lbs. :shock:


Flickr (external link)
Gear list

  
  LOG IN TO REPLY
David ­ Arbogast
Cream of the Crop
Avatar
11,459 posts
Gallery: 36 photos
Likes: 8246
Joined Aug 2010
Location: West Point, Georgia
     
Oct 09, 2013 17:57 |  #44

pyrojim wrote in post #16356068 (external link)
I have never seen the "zeiss look." everyone who claims to see it is crazy. same with the leica glow.

I really like the Zeiss lenses I own and have used, and have thus become a Zeiss fan. However, each Zeiss lens has a unique rendering quality. For instance the Zeiss Planar 1.4/50mm renders very differently than the Makro Planar 2/50mm. The same can be said of the two 35mm Zeiss lenses. So, I agree there is not a consistent "zeiss look" that one can readily discern from viewing photos.

However, often Canon-mount Zeiss lenses outperform competing lenses from, say, Canon. So I do like them for that reason.

The sad thing about this $4000 55mm is that it is a terribly boring focal length for my interests. If, as has been rumored, Zeiss will develop/release a 28mm in the new series, then I would seriously consider that. Guess I better start saving now. ;)


David | Flickr (external link)
Sony α7R II | CV 12mm, FE 12-24mm, Loxia 21mm, Loxia 35mm, Sigma 35mm F/1.2, Loxia 85mm, Batis 85mm, Batis 135mm

  
  LOG IN TO REPLY
Pepe ­ Guitarra
Senior Member
Avatar
800 posts
Joined Jul 2012
Location: Southern California
     
Oct 09, 2013 18:14 as a reply to  @ David Arbogast's post |  #45

I think, this (external link) would be a better deal.


It's not a photo until you print it! :cool:
Click here (external link), this is myflickr (external link) gallery

  
  LOG IN TO REPLY
sponsored links
(this ad will go away when you log in as a registered member)

14,080 views & 0 likes for this thread
Zeiss Otus 1.4/55
FORUMS Canon Cameras, Lenses & Accessories Canon EF and EF-S Lenses 
AAA
x 1600
y 1600

Jump to forum...   •  Rules   •  Index   •  New posts   •  RTAT   •  'Best of'   •  Gallery   •  Gear   •  Reviews   •  Member list   •  Polls   •  Image rules   •  Search   •  Password reset

Not a member yet?
Register to forums
Registered members may log in to forums and access all the features: full search, image upload, follow forums, own gear list and ratings, likes, more forums, private messaging, thread follow, notifications, own gallery, all settings, view hosted photos, own reviews, see more and do more... and all is free. Don't be a stranger - register now and start posting!


COOKIES DISCLAIMER: This website uses cookies to improve your user experience. By using this site, you agree to our use of cookies and to our privacy policy.
Privacy policy and cookie usage info.


POWERED BY AMASS forum software 2.1forum software
version 2.1 /
code and design
by Pekka Saarinen ©
for photography-on-the.net

Latest registered member is gardenchefs
839 guests, 307 members online
Simultaneous users record so far is 15144, that happened on Nov 22, 2018

Photography-on-the.net Digital Photography Forums is the website for photographers and all who love great photos, camera and post processing techniques, gear talk, discussion and sharing. Professionals, hobbyists, newbies and those who don't even own a camera -- all are welcome regardless of skill, favourite brand, gear, gender or age. Registering and usage is free.