Rumor of Zeiss Otus coming to Mirrorless Mounts

[Del Paso]

My guess is, that these lenses will be pretty good.
Build for mirrorless cameras, there are no longer the restrictions of the DSLR/SLR-Systems, especially the flange focal distance. And the manual focus eliminates the restrictions from the AF-Lensgroup. The optic-designer is free to do what he wants, no limits except cost.

+ 1
But will they come in RF mount?

 

[Bonich]

You are right. They are so much more heavy than a smartphone, it sure is impossible to travel with them. Even worse, they are so bulky that they don't fit into the pockets of my trousers any more.

Makes me wonder how I'm able to travel to Scandinavia with them every winter, that should not be possible according to irrefutable internet opinion.

Now that I look at my 600mm f4, I wonder how I managed to take polar bear pictures with it. It is even more heavy and more bulky. Sure all people are right that told me my pictures have been taken in a zoo and I just misremember.

I like your approach to travel light! Did you ever hike the Everest's summit with the Nikkor Z Noct?

 

[Bonich]

You’re not likely to travel or hike with just one of these prime lenses, are you ? You’ll be wanting to take at least two, maybe three. That’s where the weight kicks in.

Changing lenses in the wild sucks anyway ....

 

[Bonich]

Color rendition is something quite subjective, and depends on many factors. Monitor, exposure, color temperature etc...
When for instance comparing Leica M and Zeiss ZM lenses, I tend to prefer Leica colors, less saturated. Yet, I nevertheless like the Zeiss ZM colors very much...But this can change from lens to lens, some ZM are more, some are less saturated . And it also depends on which software you use, LR or else.
Zeiss EF lenses have -for me- very pleasant colors, but nicer than Canon's EFs? Hard to say.I wouldn't go so far.
I do believe what you wrote, but would I see the same advantage for Zeiss? Possibly, but not certain.
One fact is a certainty: Zeiss produce some of the very best lenses around. But, just like my Leica R lenses, I don't use them wide open, unless for static motives. Lack of AF is for me, a serious drawback.
PS: To be clear, I use only Zeiss ZM and Classic, neither Otus nor Milvus. If I did, my statement could differ.
But maybe, the next Otus will be AF? Then I might very tempted...

I did test by comparing shot on fired clay pots:
The difference you can see instantly is the vibrance in variations of brown/orange tones, there is simply much more in it with the Zeiss Milvus compared to the EF and RF. This is no matter of color temperature or used software.

But you can make pleasing photos with all as long as you do not compare side by side.

Regarding AF:
I love the AF and IS of i.e. the RF135, great to shoot people and much more.
But when it comes to static motives like i.e. plant and mushroom portraits the precision and joy of use together with pleasant rendering is still unmatched with the Milvus 135.
So I did not trade in the Milvus when I purchased the RF.

The good thing with those new new Otus is the reduced weight and size. How great they are in optical performance we have to wait and see.

 

[Sporgon]

Changing lenses in the wild sucks anyway ....

In practice - that is true.

 

[Del Paso]

In practice - that is true.

Especially on narrow paths, or in windy, snowy conditions. I'm thinking of replacing more and more often, when in the mountains, my primes with the latest excellent zooms.
Like, for instance, the RF 15-35 on body "A", the 70-200 on body "B". The 100mm macro, 50mm, 24 TSE and 100-500 waiting in the backpack. These 2 lenses should cover 90% of the situations. (The 24 TSE, 50mm and macro 100mm are optional). I'm no longer 20 years old..

 

[Sporgon]

I did test by comparing shot on fired clay pots:
The difference you can see instantly is the vibrance in variations of brown/orange tones, there is simply much more in it with the Zeiss Milvus compared to the EF and RF. This is no matter of color temperature or used software.

Did you know which was from which lens before hand ?
Have you ever been working in an editing suite and made an adjustment, let’s say brighten an image, and seen the image get brighter as you move the slider, only to later realise that the preview was off ? Your brain sees what it expected to see.
I can see what you describe from my Zeiss lenses, until the images are randomly mixed and I don’t know which is from which lens and then I don’t see the difference anymore.
The only true test is to have a third party assess the images without knowing what they are taken on.
If you compare the resolution on the edges of the frame at wider apertures on these Milvus lenses I do do agree they are excellent and a cut above most other lenses.

 

[Del Paso]

Did you know which was from which lens before hand ?
Have you ever been working in an editing suite and made an adjustment, let’s say brighten an image, and seen the image get brighter as you move the slider, only to later realise that the preview was off ? Your brain sees what it expected to see.
I can see what you describe from my Zeiss lenses, until the images are randomly mixed and I don’t know which is from which lens and then I don’t see the difference anymore.
The only true test is to have a third party assess the images without knowing what they are taken on.
If you compare the resolution on the edges of the frame at wider apertures on these Milvus lenses I do do agree they are excellent and a cut above most other lenses.

Same here!
When I knowingly compare my Leica M 35mm pictures with the identical or similar ones taken with the EF 35mm f/1,4, I "automatically" prefer the Leica pictures.
Yet, when I asked my son to organise a random slide show, despite having adjusted contrast, colour temperature etc... it suddenly was far less easy to distinguish which was what.
Prior to any colour adjustment, the Summilux pictures look far better. But the EF 35 L II catches up easily after a bit of fine tuning.
PS: the EF lens was on a 5 D IV (30MP), the Leica on an M 240 (24MP).
PPS: Im can also confirm your analogy with the slider, how often have I experienced this...

 

[EOS 4 Life]

+ 1
But will they come in RF mount?

Yeah, I can use SLR lenses across multiple systems.

 

[EOS 4 Life]

Especially on narrow paths, or in windy, snowy conditions. I'm thinking of replacing more and more often, when in the mountains, my primes with the latest excellent zooms.
Like, for instance, the RF 15-35 on body "A", the 70-200 on body "B". The 100mm macro, 50mm, 24 TSE and 100-500 waiting in the backpack. These 2 lenses should cover 90% of the situations. (The 24 TSE, 50mm and macro 100mm are optional). I'm no longer 20 years old..

If it were not for higher aperture, I would replace all my primes with zooms.

 

[Del Paso]

If it were not for higher aperture, I would replace all my primes with zooms.

Me too!
Zooms used to be optically optically second or third choice, not too long ago.
The first sharp zooms were the tele-zooms, while the WAs lagged far behind. If you wanted corner-sharp landscapes, they were no option.
Times have changed for the better, fortunately. For Canon, if I'm not mistaken, it started with the EF 16-35 f/4 L.
It's so nice, in some environments, no longer having to change lenses to get a sharp and contrasty picture!

 

[Del Paso]

Yeah, I can use SLR lenses across multiple systems.

DSLR lenses, ok.
But I'd far prefer Zeiss Otuses with RF bayonet! I'm sure the new ones will be designed exclusively for mirrorless. A DSLR Otus with RF_EF adapter is not only long, but also heavier. And it's been said or rumored that the new generation will be noticeably lighter and smaller.

 

[Berowne]

Me too!
Zooms used to be optically optically second or third choice, not too long ago.
The first sharp zooms were the tele-zooms, while the WAs lagged far behind. If you wanted corner-sharp landscapes, they were no option.
Times have changed for the better, fortunately. For Canon, if I'm not mistaken, it started with the EF 16-35 f/4 L.
It's so nice, in some environments, no longer having to change lenses to get a sharp and contrasty picture!

The EF 16-35/4L IS was in my Opinion one of the first WA-Zooms, which was (at 16mm) truely amazing, especially for the price - around 1000€.

 

[Sporgon]

The EF 16-35/4L IS was in my Opinion one of the first WA-Zooms, which was (at 16mm) truely amazing, especially for the price - around 1000€.

And even more amazing on the used price: a mint one in the UK about £370

 

[Del Paso]

And even more amazing on the used price: a mint one in the UK about £370

Which means a miserable resale value for mine. I better keep it in my backpack for "risky" trips, along with the EF 70-200 f/4 L II and the 5 D IV...

 

[Sporgon]

Which means a miserable resale value for mine. I better keep it in my backpack for "risky" trips, along with the EF 70-200 f/4 L II and the 5 D IV...

Not good for reselling, but yes, there are some really good deals around on most EF lenses. Fancy a mint EF 16-35 f/2.8 iii L ? Can be yours for £700
(Although I have an R6 I don’t have any RF lenses. Did have a RF 50/1.8 but it wasn’t for me).

 

[David - Sydney]

And even more amazing on the used price: a mint one in the UK about £370

Didn't get a nibble to sell mine for the equivalent of £350 in Australia. It doesn't owe me anything but is still in perfect working order despite how much I have used it.
You can cobble together a pretty great system these days with EF "L" lenses with a R8 (second hand).
The only EF lens to still keep reasonable value seems to be the EF100-400.

 

[Sporgon]

Didn't get a nibble to sell mine for the equivalent of £350 in Australia. It doesn't owe me anything but is still in perfect working order despite how much I have used it.
You can cobble together a pretty great system these days with EF "L" lenses with a R8 (second hand).
The only EF lens to still keep reasonable value seems to be the EF100-400.

Here in the UK the EF 24-70 f/2.8 ii L seems to be holding its value - at least mint examples.

 

[Del Paso]

Zeiss just confirmed the RF mount, and, even better, that the new Japan made Otuses are APO!!!!
Also far less expensive than expected.
Edit. I wonder how it'll compare to the RFs 50mm f/1,2 and f/1,4.

 

[GMAX]

Here we go:

ZEISS Otus ML 1.4/50 | Full Frame Lens with Manual Focus for Sony E-Mount, Canon RF-Mount or Nikon Z-Mount

www.zeiss.com