Rumor: Zeiss will announce a new Otus lens this week

[Dr Klaus Schmitt]

The MILVUS line is the cheap (err..., economic) counterpart of the OTUS lesnes, about 1/3 the price, so don't expect too much, also no APO correction.

[John Geerts]

The bottomline, apart from the renaming and housing, optically nothing refreshing new?

[Ilkka Nissilä]

The bottomline, apart from the renaming and housing, optically nothing refreshing new?

Well no, the 50/1.4 and 85/1.4 are entirely new designs. The design objectives are different than with the Otus lenses but weight is  unfortunately close. The cost is much less though. AFAIK the Milvus 85/1.4 is designed for optimum bokeh: "features a fast maximum aperture along with a unique spherical design to produce especially smooth bokeh for selective focus applications. " Also, floating elements, seven anomalous partial dispersion glass elements etc. Should be an interesting lens, if ridiculously heavy.

[Jan Anne]

What do you guys think about the new look of these lenses?

They look very similar to the very good looking Loxia line for the Sony a7 series but somehow I don't like that look for the ZF lenses, maybe that changes when I handle them.

Of course form follows function which is improved over the old lenses mainly for bad weather use but I won't deny that an awesome looking lens is part of the fun

[Airy]

A 50mm with distagon design... that's pretty unusual. 50mm are usually (modified) planars or tessars, aren't they ? If it could replicate the virtues of the 35/2, I'd really be interested. Night behaviour, in particular...

The weight and size are totally unappealing, and the absence of close focus ability is a pity. Let us however see the pictures first.

The revised macro planar could be more interesting, if it corrects some of the shortcomings of the current one (flare above all things, and vignetting...)

[Akira]

The 50mm might be of heavily modified planar design rather than distagon: it very roughly looks like the optical system of the very first version of Nikkor 50/2.0 that uses the concave front element to lengthen the back focus.

[Frank Fremerey]

All of the lenses are MF, or do the Zoniess feature AF?

[Airy]

The 50mm might be of heavily modified planar design rather than distagon: it very roughly looks like the optical system of the very first version of Nikkor 50/2.0 that uses the concave front element to lengthen the back focus.

Maybe, but the leaflet says "distagon", which to me means retrofocus (unlike planar)

[Akira]

Maybe, but the leaflet says "distagon", which to me means retrofocus (unlike planar)

Oh, I didn't see the leaflet, only the cross-section chart.  Thanks for the correction.

[Airy]

No correction meant. I was not aware of the diverging first element (probably not : group) in the 50/2. I guess there may be other such cases.

[Jan Anne]

All of the lenses are MF, or do the Zoniess feature AF?

Only the Zeiss Batis lenses have autofocus, the Loxia lenses are manual focus but do report the exact focus distance back to the Sony cameras for flash and EXIF purposes.

As all these Zeiss lenses come from the Cosina factory they should have all the ingredients under one roof to produce autofocus Zeiss lenses for the Canon and Nikon mounts.

[Akira]

Only the Zeiss Batis lenses have autofocus, the Loxia lenses are manual focus but do report the exact focus distance back to the Sony cameras for flash and EXIF purposes.

And Touit lenses are AF, too, but they are for APS-C mirrorless (Sony E and Fuji-X).  The Zeiss lineups are increasingly confusing!

[Jan Anne]

And Touit lenses are AF, too, but they are for APS-C mirrorless (Sony E and Fuji-X).

If it ain't full frame it ain't on my radar  

[Danulon]

Only the Zeiss Batis lenses have autofocus, the Loxia lenses are manual focus but do report the exact focus distance back to the Sony cameras for flash and EXIF purposes.

As all these Zeiss lenses come from the Cosina factory they should have all the ingredients under one roof to produce autofocus Zeiss lenses for the Canon and Nikon mounts.

(EDITED - including quotes for easier reference)

Ming Thein wrote a nice summary of his visit to Zeiss where the Milvus line was presented.
As interesting as the blog entry were his answers in the comment section to this article:

Unfortunately AF on N/C is out due to patent issues.

Comment: "N/C" being Nikon and Canon.


... and another long comment regarding "shortcomings" of Zeiss' surmised by a reader of that blog:

Notice how many of the old lenses do not have Milvus equivalents yet.     It does not take that long to just design a new housing…Focusing screens are camera specific. Which cameras do they pick? Who would bear liability for installation? You can bet N and C service won’t touch it, and it’s easy to scratch something permanently in the finder. This assumes the mirror is perfectly aligned from the factory, which it never is. I was pushing hard for dedicated focusing screens too, but I can see more potential downsides for the majority of users. High quality AF lenses equal to Zeiss? Theoretically yes, in practice no. Sample variation renders a theoretically great design not so great – and in the case of very sensitive designs like superwides, potentially disastrous. The Nikon 300/4 is beset by VR problems and has variation from horizontal to vertical because of the floating stabilization elements (like many stabilized lenses I’ve seen). In my experience, what sets Zeiss aside is quality control and consistency. It isn’t that some Otuses are brilliant – it’s that *all* of them perform at that level. It’s the same with their other MF lenses, too. The same cannot be said of all N/C etc AF lenses – I know because I will try at least half a dozen samples of *any* lens before making a purchase to ensure I’m not getting a dud. There is a real concern about new electronic lenses not necessarily having longevity: focus motors or CPU chips dying and rendering them inoperable is already happening while they are in current production – I’ve experienced it several times with Nikon. 10 years from now, there may no longer be parts. And your $2,000 lens is now a paperweight. I give them full credit for marketing, but in this case it actually corresponds with practical use, too.

[Jan Anne]

Another interesting hands on writeup:
http://www.verybiglobo.com/zeiss-milvus-lenses-hands-on/