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 11 Apr 2016 (Monday) 18:07
Search threadPrev/next
sponsored links
(this ad will go away when you log in as a registered member)

Got an Otus

 
icor1031
THREAD ­ STARTER
Senior Member
935 posts
Gallery: 14 photos
Likes: 264
Joined Jan 2015
Post edited over 3 years ago by icor1031. (2 edits in all)
     
Apr 25, 2016 16:50 |  #31

I hate my focusing screen.

First, the circle never lines up with the built-in AF points / circle.

Second, no matter how I use the included shims or even if I use both, the prism is lined up when backfocused. I assume I'm supposed to remove the included copper shim, but I probably won't.

Third, the split prism is distracting. The AF confirmation is more accurate than my eyes - even if it didn't backfocus.

--------

Notes:

AF still works, regardless of shimming.

I'm still using center weighing, seems to be reasonably accurate so far - need more shooting.

I think I would have enjoyed a matte screen, without prism.


(2) Canon 6D || Zeiss Sonnar 135/2 || Zeiss Otus 85/1.4 || Sigma ART 85/1.4 || Sigma ART 50/1.4 || Tamron SP 35/1.4 || (2) Eg-S Focusing Screen
Ideal Portraits (external link)

  
  LOG IN TO REPLY
sponsored links
(this ad will go away when you log in as a registered member)
icor1031
THREAD ­ STARTER
Senior Member
935 posts
Gallery: 14 photos
Likes: 264
Joined Jan 2015
     
Apr 25, 2016 18:06 |  #32

Although I really like how it shows the DoF, I took the screen out.

With it backfocusing, I can't discern when the subject goes OOF - because he's always OOF (slightly).

It seems the included copper shims aren't intended to be removed, and that's the direction I apparently need to move my screen (removing shims instead of adding.)


(2) Canon 6D || Zeiss Sonnar 135/2 || Zeiss Otus 85/1.4 || Sigma ART 85/1.4 || Sigma ART 50/1.4 || Tamron SP 35/1.4 || (2) Eg-S Focusing Screen
Ideal Portraits (external link)

  
  LOG IN TO REPLY
John ­ Koerner
Senior Member
734 posts
Likes: 68
Joined Jun 2011
Location: San Dimas, CA
Post edited over 3 years ago by John Koerner.
     
Apr 25, 2016 21:15 |  #33
bannedPermanent ban

icor1031v2 wrote in post #17978424 (external link)
Still wish Zeiss did (good) AF, lol. At least the focus ring is obviously lighter/easier on this one than on my sonnar.

Why oh why would you wish "autofocus" on such an instrument?

AF would ruin the whole thing.

The entire point of being a connoisseur's lens is lack of autofocus, intimacy with the lens, the focusing, and the connection of your movements to that which you want in-focus on your image.

AF is lame by comparison, dis-connected, too machinated.


icor1031v2 wrote in post #17978424 (external link)
I even think it's easier than the sigma's ring, but the travel is significantly longer.

Exactly. The focus throw is smooth, dampened, and much more precise.

AF = cheesy focus ring, short degree of focus throw, and no real precision when you want to MF.

Enjoy what you have and learn to appreciate it for what it is ... and never wish "AF" on it again :-)




  
  LOG IN TO REPLY
icor1031
THREAD ­ STARTER
Senior Member
935 posts
Gallery: 14 photos
Likes: 264
Joined Jan 2015
Post edited over 3 years ago by icor1031. (3 edits in all)
     
Apr 25, 2016 21:31 |  #34

John Koerner wrote in post #17985103 (external link)
Why oh why would you wish "autofocus" on such an instrument?

AF would ruin the whole thing.

The entire point of being a connoisseur's lens is lack of autofocus, intimacy with the lens, the focusing, and the connection of your movements to that which you want in-focus on your image.

AF is lame by comparison, dis-connected, too machinated.

Exactly. The focus throw is smooth, dampened, and much more precise.

AF = cheesy focus ring, short degree of focus throw, and no real precision when you want to MF.

Enjoy what you have and learn to appreciate it for what it is ... and never wish "AF" on it again :-)


I'm just a tool guy, I gave up caring about nostalgia etc when I gave up my car. Now life's just about whatever works, to me.

AF works better than MF for certain shots, and worse for others. If it had AF, I could use it for both scenarios.

The long throw is beneficial, of course. I kind of dislike it because I have carpal tunnel - but, it's not too bad because it has low tension .. UNLIKE SONNAR! That's an unpleasant lens to focus.

What bothers me most about MF is that I have to use live view to nail all my shots. (you can see why in my last post.)

..... edit: you don't have any zeiss lenses???


(2) Canon 6D || Zeiss Sonnar 135/2 || Zeiss Otus 85/1.4 || Sigma ART 85/1.4 || Sigma ART 50/1.4 || Tamron SP 35/1.4 || (2) Eg-S Focusing Screen
Ideal Portraits (external link)

  
  LOG IN TO REPLY
John ­ Koerner
Senior Member
734 posts
Likes: 68
Joined Jun 2011
Location: San Dimas, CA
     
Apr 25, 2016 21:43 |  #35
bannedPermanent ban

icor1031v2 wrote in post #17985124 (external link)
I'm just a tool guy, I gave up caring about nostalgia etc when I gave up my car. Now life's just about whatever works, to me.

I can't comment on your life.

However, a guy buying an Otus, and wishing for AF, seems like a monkey playing with a Swiss watch :-P


icor1031v2 wrote in post #17985124 (external link)
AF works better than MF for certain shots, and worse for others. If it had AF, I could use it for both scenarios.

AF cancels-out ultra-precision-focus. It cancels out the tactile pleasure of using the elite instrument that you have.

I am pretty sure that's why Zeiss doesn't offer it.


icor1031v2 wrote in post #17985124 (external link)
The long throw is beneficial, of course. I kind of dislike it because I have carpal tunnel - but, it's not too bad because it has low tension .. UNLIKE SONNAR! That's an unpleasant lens to focus.

Sorry about your handicap.

AF is for people who need something fast on the draw.

MF is for people who take their time, and enjoy the sensual experience of really being connected to what they're doing.

They're two completely different approaches.


icor1031v2 wrote in post #17985124 (external link)
What bothers me most about MF is that I have to use live view to nail all my shots. (you can see why in my last post.)

That is the unfortunate reality of our AF/AA world: the viewfinders suck compared to old school cameras.

What helps me is opening both eyes when I manual focus ... somehow this allows me to see when I've achieved the right focus better than when I have 1 eye shut.




  
  LOG IN TO REPLY
icor1031
THREAD ­ STARTER
Senior Member
935 posts
Gallery: 14 photos
Likes: 264
Joined Jan 2015
Post edited over 3 years ago by icor1031. (3 edits in all)
     
Apr 25, 2016 21:45 |  #36

John Koerner wrote in post #17985132 (external link)
However, a guy buying an Otus, and wishing for AF, seems like a monkey playing with a Swiss watch :-P

Nah, I said sometimes MF is better. The shots I bought the lens for will mostly do fine with MF.

John Koerner wrote in post #17985132 (external link)
AF cancels-out ultra-precision-focus.

Explain, please?


(2) Canon 6D || Zeiss Sonnar 135/2 || Zeiss Otus 85/1.4 || Sigma ART 85/1.4 || Sigma ART 50/1.4 || Tamron SP 35/1.4 || (2) Eg-S Focusing Screen
Ideal Portraits (external link)

  
  LOG IN TO REPLY
icor1031
THREAD ­ STARTER
Senior Member
935 posts
Gallery: 14 photos
Likes: 264
Joined Jan 2015
     
Apr 25, 2016 21:47 |  #37

John Koerner wrote in post #17985132 (external link)
That is the unfortunate reality of our AF/AA world: the viewfinders suck compared to old school cameras.

You read above about my experience with split prism, right?


(2) Canon 6D || Zeiss Sonnar 135/2 || Zeiss Otus 85/1.4 || Sigma ART 85/1.4 || Sigma ART 50/1.4 || Tamron SP 35/1.4 || (2) Eg-S Focusing Screen
Ideal Portraits (external link)

  
  LOG IN TO REPLY
Alveric
Goldmember
Avatar
4,598 posts
Gallery: 38 photos
Likes: 1053
Joined Jan 2011
Location: Canada
Post edited over 3 years ago by Alveric. (2 edits in all)
     
Apr 25, 2016 22:22 |  #38
bannedPermanent ban

John Koerner wrote in post #17985132 (external link)
[..]

AF cancels-out ultra-precision-focus. It cancels out the tactile pleasure of using the elite instrument that you have.

I am pretty sure that's why Zeiss doesn't offer it.

Incorrect, I'm afraid. Zeiss does not offer AF because, due to patents and legalese, only Japanese companies can manufacture AF lenses for Canon and Nikon cameras. That's why Sigma lenses sport AF but Zeiss's do not.


'The success of the second-rate is deplorable in itself; but it is more deplorable in that it very often obscures the genuine masterpiece. If the crowd runs after the false, it must neglect the true.' —Arthur Machen
Why 'The Histogram' Sux (external link)

  
  LOG IN TO REPLY
John ­ Koerner
Senior Member
734 posts
Likes: 68
Joined Jun 2011
Location: San Dimas, CA
Post edited over 3 years ago by John Koerner.
     
Apr 26, 2016 07:53 |  #39
bannedPermanent ban

icor1031v2 wrote in post #17985133 (external link)
Nah, I said sometimes MF is better. The shots I bought the lens for will mostly do fine with MF.

Agreed.


icor1031v2 wrote in post #17985133 (external link)
Explain, please?

Have you ever shot macro?

No one uses AF to get ultra-ultra precise shots.

Instead, they use MF (or a macro-rail) to achieve ultra-precise micro-focus.

The two greatest macro lenses made, the Voigtlander 125 f/2.5 APO-Lanthar, and the Leica APO f/2.8 Macro-Elmarit, each have such precision MF that their focus throws are 630° and 720° respectively. For precision.

If you compare the build quality and the smooth-turning, well-dampened focus throw on these two lenses to the ridiculous, touchy, 150° focus throw of the Canon 100mm f/2.8L, the latter feels like a toy by comparison.

Jack




  
  LOG IN TO REPLY
icor1031
THREAD ­ STARTER
Senior Member
935 posts
Gallery: 14 photos
Likes: 264
Joined Jan 2015
     
Apr 26, 2016 07:56 |  #40

John Koerner wrote in post #17985523 (external link)
Have you ever shot macro?

No one uses AF to get ultra-ultra precise shots.

Instead, they use MF (or a macro-rail) to achieve ultra-precise micro-focus.

The two greatest macro lenses made, the Voigtlander 125 f/2.5 APO-Lanthar, and the Leica APO f/2.8 Macro-Elmarit, each have such precision MF that their focus throws are 630° and 720° respectively. For precision.

If you compare the build quality and the smooth-turning, well-dampened focus throw on these two lenses to the ridiculous, touchy, 150° focus throw of the Canon 100mm f/2.8L, the latter feels like a toy by comparison.

Jack

Okay, but you said having AF cancels precision.. IOW, if Otus had AF, even if it retained the same throw, it would suck.
That's why I doubted. ;)

Do you happen to know how makro-planar 100 compares to sonnar 135 or otus 85, as far as the MF tension and throw, etc?


(2) Canon 6D || Zeiss Sonnar 135/2 || Zeiss Otus 85/1.4 || Sigma ART 85/1.4 || Sigma ART 50/1.4 || Tamron SP 35/1.4 || (2) Eg-S Focusing Screen
Ideal Portraits (external link)

  
  LOG IN TO REPLY
John ­ Koerner
Senior Member
734 posts
Likes: 68
Joined Jun 2011
Location: San Dimas, CA
     
Apr 26, 2016 07:56 |  #41
bannedPermanent ban

Alveric wrote in post #17985164 (external link)
Incorrect, I'm afraid. Zeiss does not offer AF because, due to patents and legalese, only Japanese companies can manufacture AF lenses for Canon and Nikon cameras. That's why Sigma lenses sport AF but Zeiss's do not.

I did not know that. Do you have any references on that?

The Zeiss macro lens is manufactured by Cosina, in Japan ...




  
  LOG IN TO REPLY
icor1031
THREAD ­ STARTER
Senior Member
935 posts
Gallery: 14 photos
Likes: 264
Joined Jan 2015
     
Apr 26, 2016 07:56 |  #42

John Koerner wrote in post #17985526 (external link)
I did not know that. Do you have any references on that?

The Zeiss macro lens is manufactured by Cosina, in Japan ...

We're posting at the same time, we could almost have a live chat. :p


(2) Canon 6D || Zeiss Sonnar 135/2 || Zeiss Otus 85/1.4 || Sigma ART 85/1.4 || Sigma ART 50/1.4 || Tamron SP 35/1.4 || (2) Eg-S Focusing Screen
Ideal Portraits (external link)

  
  LOG IN TO REPLY
John ­ Koerner
Senior Member
734 posts
Likes: 68
Joined Jun 2011
Location: San Dimas, CA
Post edited over 3 years ago by John Koerner.
     
Apr 26, 2016 07:59 |  #43
bannedPermanent ban

icor1031v2 wrote in post #17985525 (external link)
Okay, but you said having AF cancels precision.. IOW, if Otus had AF, even if it retained the same throw, it would suck.
That's why I doubted. ;)

Do you happen to know how makro-planar 100 compares to sonnar 135 or otus 85, as far as the MF tension and throw, etc?

It cancels because, in order to have AF, you have to have short focus throw and flimsy tension.

The faster the AF = the lighter the touch on the AF of the focus ring.

It is simply easier for an electronic button to rotate a touchy, 150° focus ring ... than to rotate a smooth, somewhat tensile 630° focus ring.

Therefore, again, the quicker the AF, the lamer the MF, thereby cancelling true precision focus.




  
  LOG IN TO REPLY
icor1031
THREAD ­ STARTER
Senior Member
935 posts
Gallery: 14 photos
Likes: 264
Joined Jan 2015
Post edited over 3 years ago by icor1031.
     
Apr 26, 2016 08:00 |  #44

John Koerner wrote in post #17985531 (external link)
It cancels because, in order to have AF, you have to have short focus throw and flimsy tension.

The faster the AF = the lighter the touch on the AF of the focus ring.

It is simply easier for an electronic button to rotate a touchy, 150° focus ring ... than to rotate a smooth, somewhat tensile 630° focus ring.

Therefore, again, the quicker the AF, the lamer the MF, thereby cancelling true precision focus.

Ah, no dual gearing? Darn. Assumed it was, because the ring (external) doesn't move along with the AF.
Thanks for the info.


(2) Canon 6D || Zeiss Sonnar 135/2 || Zeiss Otus 85/1.4 || Sigma ART 85/1.4 || Sigma ART 50/1.4 || Tamron SP 35/1.4 || (2) Eg-S Focusing Screen
Ideal Portraits (external link)

  
  LOG IN TO REPLY
John ­ Koerner
Senior Member
734 posts
Likes: 68
Joined Jun 2011
Location: San Dimas, CA
     
Apr 26, 2016 08:05 |  #45
bannedPermanent ban

icor1031v2 wrote in post #17985525 (external link)
Do you happen to know how makro-planar 100 compares to sonnar 135 or otus 85, as far as the MF tension and throw, etc?

The Zeiss macro has a 360° focus throw compared to all other commercial macro lenses, which range between 150°-270°.

By contrast, the Voigtlander and Leica APO macros (which are better than even the Zeiss) have 630° and 720° focus throws.

No way can AF deal with such a huge focus throw ... AF would be incredibly sluggish.

AF mandates a short, touchy focus throw ... which itself thereby cancels out the ability for truly fine-tuned, precision focus.

They are almost mutually-exclusive, conceptually.




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

7,994 views & 3 likes for this thread
Got an Otus
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 Iulia Tucma
855 guests, 295 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.