Hard to focus lens - Zeiss Otus 28mm f/1.4

[atpaula]

I thought telephotos were easier to focus.
I've never missed so many images with a lens.
But I'm loving the ones I nail focus.

1



2



3



4

[atpaula]

I meant "telephotos were HARDER to focus".

[Bjørn Rørslett]

This lens is very fast and getting properly focused images should therefore be very easy. At least that is my experience with fast wide angles on my Nikons.

Thus, I'm curious as to what camera was used and any reasons you feel could cause this behaviour. Have you tried focusing on pin light sources - they ought to be easy to get spot on.

I assume you have set the eye piece ocular correct according to your eyesight.

[richardHaw]

tele can be easier because you actually see things go in and out of focus. 50mm and below and be trickier in my experience
now, following something is more difficult with tele than a normal say 50mm

[atpaula]

This lens is very fast and getting properly focused images should therefore be very easy. At least that is my experience with fast wide angles on my Nikons.

Thus, I'm curious as to what camera was used and any reasons you feel could cause this behaviour. Have you tried focusing on pin light sources - they ought to be easy to get spot on.

I assume you have set the eye piece ocular correct according to your eyesight.

The problem is that you think you have proper focus during the shooting, but them the computer tells you were wrong.
Nikon's DK-17M eyepiece didn't help much. Maybe for static subjects, and the camera on a tripod it could help.
It is very tricky.
Richard's experience corroborate that.

[Bjørn Rørslett]

You should have your camera checked for misalignment.

My 20/1.8, 24/1.8, 24/1.4 & 35/1.4 are all very easy to focus manually.

[atpaula]

You should have your camera checked for misalignment.

My 20/1.8, 24/1.8, 24/1.4 & 35/1.4 are all very easy to focus manually.

The problem is the photographer, not the camera or lens. Mostly at f/1.4.
Closer than infinity it is very tricky to distinguish in/out of focus through the OVF.
If I stop down the lens the problem (characteristic?) is mitigated.

[armando_m]

Aguinaldo , I really enjoy the colors you get

Regarding focus with a fast wide angle, I have run into similar situations with my 20mm f1.8 AFS, I tried  focus-recompose and then discover the image is not in focus ... It was surprising for me to find out the 20mm lens wouldn't have enough DOF to cover any movement I may have done when recomposing, since missing a few images due to bad focus, I'm now more careful

[atpaula]

Aguinaldo , I really enjoy the colors you get

Regarding focus with a fast wide angle, I have run into similar situations with my 20mm f1.8 AFS, I tried  focus-recompose and then discover the image is not in focus ... It was surprising for me to find out the 20mm lens wouldn't have enough DOF to cover any movement I may have done when recomposing, since missing a few images due to bad focus, I'm now more careful

Thank you Armando.
With the 20mm @ f/1.8 the problem may be even worse.

[Bjørn Rørslett]

Try finding some street lights and use them as training targets for manual focusing.

[Tristin]

Stock focus screen?  I'm sure you are aware that shooting any lens at aperatures faster than f/2.8 with the stock screen is a gamble.  The faster you get the larger the margin for error.

[pluton]

Using both the D3 and the D800, I found my copy of the Zeiss 25/2 to be slightly more difficult to eye focus than most lenses. My experience with the Zeiss 100/2 was similar. 
Part of it could be the "f/2.8 optical restriction" of the modern finders, but then why do other, similarly spec'd lenses prove easier to focus?
My untested hypothesis is that with most lenses, a constellation of aberrations make the slightly out of focus image appear "more out of focus" in the finder than with lenses like the ZF 25/2 or ZF 100/2 that have a higher degree of correction. 
From all reports, the Otus 28 would fit into the category of lenses that are unusually highly corrected wide open.

[atpaula]

Stock focus screen?  I'm sure you are aware that shooting any lens at aperatures faster than f/2.8 with the stock screen is a gamble.  The faster you get the larger the margin for error.

Is it possible to change the focusing screen of the D4s? I didn't know that.

[atpaula]

Using both the D3 and the D800, I found my copy of the Zeiss 25/2 to be slightly more difficult to eye focus than most lenses. My experience with the Zeiss 100/2 was similar. 
Part of it could be the "f/2.8 optical restriction" of the modern finders, but then why do other, similarly spec'd lenses prove easier to focus?
My untested hypothesis is that with most lenses, a constellation of aberrations make the slightly out of focus image appear "more out of focus" in the finder than with lenses like the ZF 25/2 or ZF 100/2 that have a higher degree of correction. 
From all reports, the Otus 28 would fit into the category of lenses that are unusually highly corrected wide open.

I think the focusing confirmation green light should work precisely, regardless of lens aperture.

[Bjørn Rørslett]

I think the focusing confirmation green light should work precisely, regardless of lens aperture.

It usually does, but there is plenty of room for user error. Much depends on what is in front of, or behind, the point of focus, and how large that point is.

Contrary to what humans believe, cameras have no idea about what constitutes 'sharpness' in an image. The camera can only maximise a given function, which may or may not be relevant.