NikonGear'23
Gear Talk => Lens Talk => Topic started by: Michael Erlewine on June 19, 2015, 18:29:24
-
Nothing too scientific about this, but as I am trying to use the new Zeiss Otus series for close-up work, and wonder which is better for that, the Otus 55mm or the Otus 85mm. The reviews all say it is the Otus 85mm that is the lens to vet others against, but then they probably are not doing just close-up work with these particular lenses.
So here is a shot of each of these two lenses at f/16, and I threw the legendary Voitlander 125mm f/1.5 APO-Lanthar (also at f.16) into the mix for good measure.
I guess, in summary, my estimate is that the 85mm is perhaps better for longer distance shots, while if we are in close, the 55mm is just as good or better. The APO-Lanthar comes out a definite third.
As someone who has done many hundreds of thousands of stacked photos, these new lenses have really thrown a monkey-wrench into that scene. I am doing more and more single photos at f/16 or very short stacks or less than three shots.
And I provide a shot of the whole frame for the Zeiss Otus 85mm, so you see how far away I am. Camera is NikonD810 at ISO 64, and the subject is a Goatsbeard bud.
Your (kind of course) thought please.
-
Bokeh in the first shot is very rough and coarse less so in the second shot and the APO Lanthar its Bokeh heaven.
Othervise, yes they are fantastic tools the new Otus series...
What camera?
-
Erik, As you know we don't go to Boker Heaven at f/16. I love the CV-125, but I love more what the Otii (sp?) can do.
-
Erik, As you know we don't go to Boker Heaven at f/16. I love the CV-125, but I love more what the Otii (sp?) can do.
It all comes down to different tools for different jobs.
I get demand for many different types of images, some sharp soft close far dreamy sweet classic environmental safe spiritual calm precise corrected straight or crocked...
Apparently these new Zeiss Otus goes into the sharp and clinical category, as the new series 1.4 AFS lenses do at f/5.6 to f/16
Thanks Michael
-
Not really. The Zeiss Otus lenses are, as mentioned, not bokeh-oriented at f/16. However, at f/1.4, they are excellent.
-
we need to see them wide open..
my examples of the Otus 55/1.4.. unfortunately i do not own the 85.
Nikon D800E ,Carl Zeiss Otus 1.4/55
1/125s f/1.4 at 55.0mm iso560
(https://nikongear.net/revival/proxy.php?request=http%3A%2F%2Fwww.pbase.com%2Fbobfriedman%2Fimage%2F156951122%2Foriginal.jpg&hash=b9b85ab2450a0c1ed4d2e405bc02d579a712630a)
Nikon D800E ,Carl Zeiss Otus 1.4/55
1/1250s f/1.4 at 55.0mm iso100
(https://nikongear.net/revival/proxy.php?request=http%3A%2F%2Fwww.pbase.com%2Fbobfriedman%2Fimage%2F157023346%2Foriginal.jpg&hash=d81b9b614cb8956ee4c8a0c155d3291025bbf981)
-
Of course the Zeiss Otus lenses work great wide open. My interest with f/16 is as a substitute for certain kinds of focus stacking projects, and they do amazing well at f/16 compared to any other lenses I have.
-
i am not sure i could ever go back to f/16 after focus stacking.... seems a shame to take all the good out of the lens.
but i definitely use my Otus between f/1.4 and f/8
-
Obviously, I feel there is some good in that lens are higher apertures. The same goes for the Otus 85mm and the 135mm APO.
-
To my humble eyes, the CV-125 wins and in second place comes the 55mm. The CV-125 delivers the most pleasing image, very creamy.
-
It needed my return to good internet connection to find this interesting APO Lanthar 125 comparison under an unassuming title.
Curious, none of the other repliers stated the obvious: The Otii (or should it be the Otuses) render more crisp detail. To me, there is a surprise in this.
I would have thought that all reasonable lenses are diffraction limited at f/16. So how come? The only aberrations that survive in the small aperture limit are longitudinal and lateral CA, and also distortion and curvature of field. The latter two would not matter in this test, so can it be that some lenses are more APO than others ? In principle it can. I tend to believe its the case here, but would it show in this way ?? The coastal optics lens might then also be very crisp for this test.
Doing a bit of image forensics, I guess the 85mm is at about its near focus limit.
I find that you had the object reproduced a bit larger with the 55mm and again larger with the 125mm. Keeping nominal f/16 would then reduce pixel-peeper DoF (about +-20mm for the 85) going to the 55 and 125. I believe I see the DoF reduction for the APO Lanthar. But then the diffraction limited peak sharpness should be a bit higher there. That its not, reinforces the conclusions of the first paragraph.
-
...
I would have thought that all reasonable lenses are diffraction limited at f/16. So how come?...
Different lenses behave differently as you stop them down, and I think that the Otus is sharper at f/5.6 than f/16...
These f/16 are for sure sharp!
-
I leave it to the Techspurts to explain why the Otus lenses at f/16 are mostly usable for my work. I would like to know why, but to my eyes they just are.
-
... so can it be that some lenses are more APO than others ? ...
Seems like I have heard this before... Michael... :)
The shot answer is of course yes! Some APO are more APO than others... UV-Nikkor 105 is also on that top list :) now also the Otus lenses are close! Well done Zeiss!!! a must to add is the new Leica M 50mm APO Summicron!
The current 1.4 AFS series of Nikkors are not even close to APO but that doesn't keep them from producing stunning images though :)
-
I leave it to the Techspurts to explain why the Otus lenses at f/16 are mostly usable for my work. I would like to know why, but to my eyes they just are.
Someone has probably already tested them for diffraction, yes who cares as long as they perform for the intended purpose, but it would be nice to know if it really is the case that they get sharper as you stop down below f/5.6 or what is going on.... :)
-
I'm a clinical guy... sorry for that :P
For me both Zeiss just blow away the CV...
-
I agree, but I am not a tester, just a user. I depend on you folks to explain why. I can the difference, but not know what exactly it is due to.
-
The CV 125 is not performing at its best at f/16, a fact that has been known for a long time.
The 55 Otus photo shows signs of chromatic aberrations. The 85 Otus is so grainy and noisy that any CA would be swamped.
Why can't you shoot all of them at the same magnification of detail? The setup is flawed.
And start at f/2.5 (common lowest denominator) and go upwards.
-
Sadly, not really a tester, and not much interested in learn. I agree, it was not a good test. The bottom line for me are what the Otus lenses produce as product. They are remarkable, and I would not use the CV-125 at narrow apertures... agreed.
-
Michael, I like your images a lot regardless of the APO lens used.
Looking forward to seeing some more ;)
-
I am not an expert in the field at all so my opinion is of little interest, but aestetically, I find your stacked images much more pleasing than the ones you have been showing at small apertures, recently.
What do you think you gain by closing the lens? Obviously it is less work since you don't need to stack, but now the background is so present that it becomes intrusive. And from the little I know of you, the amount of work is not the decisive factor. I'd be interested in understanding your motivation.
Thank you !
Olivier
-
The motivation is always the same, to push the envelope, experiment, and see what is possible with these (or any lenses) that I can work with. Also, I find it interesting to see what can be done with a single-frame shot, etc. Often here in Michigan, which is flat, the wind is ever present, so if there is something that can be done in a single shot, that can be good. I shoot single-frame at high aperture or at other apertures. I stack wide-open or at other apertures. I never have arrived at the end, but always am in-process, learning.