Archived posting to the Leica Users Group, 2014/01/21

[Author Prev] [Author Next] [Thread Prev] [Thread Next] [Author Index] [Topic Index] [Home] [Search]

Subject: [Leica] Zeiss Otus
From: richard at richardmanphoto.com (Richard Man)
Date: Wed, 22 Jan 2014 10:27:17 +0800
References: <CAJ3Pgh5FrVbioLNRN=0Z3mozv0E+-Rbg7XN-ERZgHO97hNiUhA@mail.gmail.com> <CF04786D.16CAE%mark@rabinergroup.com>

Touit and Otus?!

What happened to Gauss, Tessar, Distagon, Biogon and the legendary Hologon?
:-)


On Wed, Jan 22, 2014 at 8:18 AM, Mark Rabiner <mark at rabinergroup.com> 
wrote:

> I'm going to have to just come out and say it:
> Any personal lens test which indicates the glass from Zeiss ultra premium
> lens lines (what Zeiss had always been about) as being less than
> Supercalifragilistic in every way points to the lens tester not the lens.
> Those soft boxes are way too big and the angle is too steep reflecting
> glare
> off the paper and off white wall right back into the lens. Plus they have
> no
> baffling on the edges that are flush with the front surface so we are
> getting glare right into the camera from the soft boxes themselves. (the
> lens hood it not huge)
> The test results  I've seen so far from 55mm f/1.4 Otus Apo Distagon T*
> resets the bar on modern lens design period. Outdoes Leica glass. Though if
> Leica M glass had a two pound  weight parameter  I'm sure it could give the
> Zeiss for SLR  more than a run for its money.   ( f/0.95 Noctilux-M 1.54
> lbs)
>
> The 55mm f/1.4 Otus Apo Distagon T* is not an exceedingly great lens.
> Its an over the top impossibly great lens which spares nothing and takes no
> prisoners.
> Glass which Zeiss outsources for the consumer market is never intended to
> be
> in the same category of Otus leaving no regrets.
>
>
> On 1/21/14 11:17 AM, "Paul Roark" <roark.paul at gmail.com> wrote:
>
> > I'm not sure the Otus is worth the weight disadvantage in light of how
> good
> > the Zeiss that is made for the Sony is.  See
> >
> http://3d-kraft.com/index.php?option=com_content&view=article&id=151&catid=40&;
> > Itemid=2&limitstart=1
> >
> > Also, my metabones M to E adapter was terrible (Novoflex fine).  It has
> > made me reluctant to buy the metabones Canon to E adapter, though many
> seem
> > to use it.
> >
> > Paul
> > www.PaulRoark.com
> >
> >
> > On Tue, Jan 21, 2014 at 7:58 AM, Steve Barbour <steve.barbour at 
> > gmail.com
> >wrote:
> >
> >>
> >>
> >> Sent from my iPhone
> >> Steve Barbour
> >>
> >> On Jan 20, 2014, at 11:10 PM, "Frank Filippone" <red735i at verizon.net>
> >> wrote:
> >>
> >> Popflash has an Otus in stock...  I think it fits the Sony, but not
> sure..
> >>
> >> for Canon
> >>
> >>
> >>
> >>
> >>
> >> Frank Filippone
> >>
> >> Red735i at verizon.net
> >>
> >>
> >>
> >>
> >> _______________________________________________
> >> Leica Users Group.
> >> See http://leica-users.org/mailman/listinfo/lug for more information
> >>
> >> _______________________________________________
> >> Leica Users Group.
> >> See http://leica-users.org/mailman/listinfo/lug for more information
> >>
> >
> > _______________________________________________
> > Leica Users Group.
> > See http://leica-users.org/mailman/listinfo/lug for more information
>
>
>
>
> --
> Mark William Rabiner
> Photographer
> http://gallery.leica-users.org/v/lugalrabs/
>
>
>
> _______________________________________________
> Leica Users Group.
> See http://leica-users.org/mailman/listinfo/lug for more information
>



-- 
// richard <http://www.richardmanphoto.com>
// http://facebook.com/richardmanphoto


Replies: Reply from sonc.hegr at gmail.com (Sonny Carter) ([Leica] Zeiss Otus)
In reply to: Message from roark.paul at gmail.com (Paul Roark) ([Leica] Zeiss Otus)
Message from mark at rabinergroup.com (Mark Rabiner) ([Leica] Zeiss Otus)