p.15 #1 · ZEISS Otus ML line officially announced!
Jman13 wrote:
I know APO doesn’t always mean completely free of CA, but this has quite a lot. More than the 50/1.2 GM. More than the 50/1.4 GM (of which it is more closely a direct competitor), and more than the RF 50/1.2L. I haven’t used the Z 50/1.2 enough to make a call.
It would be one thing in an $800 lens, but this has more CA than my $600 Nikon Z 50/1.8S, even when it’s stopped down to f/1.8.
If you’re paying $2,500 for a large manual focus prime, it really needs to be aberration free or darn close to it to be worth the extra cost. When the competition’s AF 50mm are better and cheaper, it becomes an issue.
Outside of the CA and some wonky mechanical vignetting it’ll renders quite beautifully, but I sort of expected something along the lines of the Nikon Plena bokeh (worh low mech vignetting) with Voigtländer APO-Lanthar levels of CA correction and sharpness. Maybe that was too high of expectations, but a $2,500 manual focus 50/1.4 raises those expectations.
I have noticed some GM lenses can and do perform quite well in this regard and don't include APO in their tech specs. Since we are on this topic, I'll do some testing with the GM 50 1.2 with a bit of well-lit chrome objects to check this out again--since its been a while since I tested this lens.
Steve Spencer Offline • • • • • • • Upload & Sell: On
p.15 #2 · ZEISS Otus ML line officially announced!
Jman13 wrote:
I know APO doesn’t always mean completely free of CA, but this has quite a lot. More than the 50/1.2 GM. More than the 50/1.4 GM (of which it is more closely a direct competitor), and more than the RF 50/1.2L. I haven’t used the Z 50/1.2 enough to make a call.
It would be one thing in an $800 lens, but this has more CA than my $600 Nikon Z 50/1.8S, even when it’s stopped down to f/1.8.
If you’re paying $2,500 for a large manual focus prime, it really needs to be aberration free or darn close to it to be worth the extra cost. When the competition’s AF 50mm are better and cheaper, it becomes an issue.
Outside of the CA and some wonky mechanical vignetting it’ll renders quite beautifully, but I sort of expected something along the lines of the Nikon Plena bokeh (worh low mech vignetting) with Voigtländer APO-Lanthar levels of CA correction and sharpness. Maybe that was too high of expectations, but a $2,500 manual focus 50/1.4 raises those expectations.
I just think it is way premature from a couple of samples you have seen without any side by side comparisons and without ever using the lens to say it has more CA than the lenses you just mentioned. I have used almost all of them and I would never make those claims you are making. In fact, in a bunch of the situations in the samples it seems to suppress CA very well and in one or two it shows quite notable CA. Sorting out a lens and when it provokes CA and does not takes time and comparison and in my view should not be made as a snap judgment. Sorry, but I think that is what you are doing. Do know I generally appreciate your perspective, however. Just not this time. I do think time will tell about this lens, but we will need to have a lot more testing and it will need to be in a lot more people's hands before we can really make such judgements.
p.15 #3 · ZEISS Otus ML line officially announced!
It's interesting as there's some well wrangled things and some surprising things. For those who looked at the DPR test images, the ratchet set shots at various apertures shows some good performance, but equally there's something else going on that's a bit odd as we go in and out of the plane of focus with fringing and it's a loud saturated color and may actually manifest slightly different on other cameras/sensors.
This will be "fun" comparing them to the top primes, the previous Otus, and the newest manual focus APOs. Just to see where things land more or less. They did go out of their way to shoot some pretty high contrast stuff and I suspect were told to. Nice contrast withheld actually in a few of those situations.
It's not discussed much, but the bokeh however is very nice with no color cross talk I can detect. And there are some colors happening that remind me of the previous Otus in clipped areas, which could be the glass and coatings plus general design.
I still own my Otus primes and 100% will be testing them against Otus ML. Too hard to guess from early samples where exactly these land on the tier of top performers out there. I'd also like to test them against the Nanos as I feel that might be a thing.
p.15 #4 · ZEISS Otus ML line officially announced!
The 50 seems like a hard sell to me. It's larger than the 50GM f1.4 and how much better can it be than the autofocus stellar Sony 50 f1.2 GM? Maybe nice manual focus fee but is that it?
p.15 #8 · ZEISS Otus ML line officially announced!
I only hope that this new Zeiss lenses will not block new Voigtlander APO lenses for Nikon, Canon and Sony. Both are made by Cosina and I can imagine that something like that could happen. The new Voigtlander 28 and 90 APO’s I certainly would love to see on my Nikon.
p.15 #9 · ZEISS Otus ML line officially announced!
It also depends on which other lenses will follow.
photos_of_chu wrote:
In what world would anyone take the new ML Otus 85 1.4 over the stellar 85mm 1.2 S from Nikon? I fail to see any appeal in this release from Zeiss.
I have the 25/35/50/85 Loxia set, all of which I purchased used after the Loxia series had fallen out of popularity. The total cost of my entire set was less than the price of this 50mm f/1.4 alone.
I also previously owned the Voigtländer 50mm f/1.2, but I found it extremely frustrating to shoot wide open due to frequent misfocused shots.
With the Loxia lenses, I get significantly more accurately focused shots, so I’m sticking with my Loxia set for manual focus and relying on my G/GM lenses for fast autofocus primes.
I understand that not everyone notices the Zeiss difference and microcontrast. While I find the Zeiss look unique, the lack of autofocus is a dealbreaker for me.
Feb 25, 2025 at 12:58 PM
Steve Spencer Offline • • • • • • • Upload & Sell: On
p.15 #12 · ZEISS Otus ML line officially announced!
Ripolini wrote:
What should these lenses be used for ?
Large & heavy, no AF, no IS/VR.
Studio work?
I would use it for portraiture. It isn't that large and heavy and on my Sony A7r V, it would have 5-axis IBIS (assuming it is the same as the Voigtlander E mount lenses). And it is physically very similar in size to the Sony 50 f/1.4 GM and in weight is very similar to the Sony 50 f/1.2 GM. So for someone like me, who actually prefer MF to AF, it might be a compelling option. I have to like the images at least as well as the Sony lenses, however, and the price I think is still too high. I suspect if I give it a couple of years the price on the used market will be very similar to the Sony 50 f/1.2 GM. I know I will prefer the MF of this lens, but if I prefer the images of the Sony f/1.2 GM, then I might well choose that instead.
It will be a similar process for me in comparing the Otus 85 ML to the Sony 85 f/1.4 GM OG. I like the images from that lens a lot (and more than the images from the 50 f/1.2 GM) and the price differential is a lot bigger too.
So, I am trying to keep an open mind about both these lenses, and I may be in the market, but I may go with the Sony lenses instead. I need to see a lot more images and likely borrow or rent the Otus lenses (I have used the Sony lenses and currently have the 85 GM OG) before making a decision.
p.15 #14 · ZEISS Otus ML line officially announced!
Steve Spencer wrote:
I just think it is way premature from a couple of samples you have seen without any side by side comparisons and without ever using the lens to say it has more CA than the lenses you just mentioned. I have used almost all of them and I would never make those claims you are making. In fact, in a bunch of the situations in the samples it seems to suppress CA very well and in one or two it shows quite notable CA. Sorting out a lens and when it provokes CA and does not takes time and comparison and in my view should not be made as a snap judgment. Sorry, but I think that is what you are doing. Do know I generally appreciate your perspective, however. Just not this time. I do think time will tell about this lens, but we will need to have a lot more testing and it will need to be in a lot more people's hands before we can really make such judgements....Show more →
Of course it's premature...this is commentary on an announcement. I'm not doing a full review based on samples - I'm remarking about what I'm seeing in what's been presented thus far. What I can say is that I have seen CA in several samples from multiple sources that are higher than what I have experienced in a few years shooting with the 50/1.2 GM and the RF 50/1.2L. I am not saying it's a definitive thing, but this is my thoughts based on what has been presented thus far. Could these be odd circumstances where it just happens to bring out the worst in this characteristic? Yeah, I suppose so (though I find it unlikely).
Overall, I think the lens renders very nicely. I don't, however, see anything thus far that shows how these lenses show any significant improvement vs the first party manufacturers. And when the price tag is this steep, that's a bit of an issue.
p.15 #15 · ZEISS Otus ML line officially announced!
Overall I am excited to see more about these lenses. Zeiss sample photos look solid. You can definitely see some of Zeiss look in the images.
I am a bit disappointed at the 2,500 price point. I think 2,000 or, even better, 1,800 would have made the 50mm a lot more approachable compared to other options on the market.
As the lens gets more reviewers, maybe the 2,500 price point will make more sense 🤞
p.15 #16 · ZEISS Otus ML line officially announced!
Ripolini wrote:
What should these lenses be used for ?
Large & heavy, no AF, no IS/VR.
Studio work?
I enjoy comments like these to a degree I can't explain, but I am also understanding of how we got here as there are so many people working in the ways that work best for them and their work.
But I assure there are many people who use manual focus and don't necessarily need IS/VR even in a lens, particularly if they enjoy what the camera itself may provide. These being "large and heavy" is also a bit insane to me.
Motion and still, I'd say I'm about 90% manual focus across disciplines. Manual focus, and heck larger lenses, being rather normal in the motion picture world.
I think modern Autofocus is tremendous and useful, but equally so, we have more tools at our disposal today to utilize manual focus even for difficult and fast moving subjects.
Size I can understand the desire for more portable tools, but for image quality first sort of folks, you'll find they don't mind lugging the gear needed to make their image. Perhaps I shouldn't say don't mind.
p.15 #17 · ZEISS Otus ML line officially announced!
DWOfPaul wrote:
Overall I am excited to see more about these lenses. Zeiss sample photos look solid. You can definitely see some of Zeiss look in the images.
I am a bit disappointed at the 2,500 price point. I think 2,000 or, even better, 1,800 would have made the 50mm a lot more approachable compared to other options on the market.
As the lens gets more reviewers, maybe the 2,500 price point will make more sense 🤞
I'm curious about the pricing as well. And the 85mm is going to be more expensive. Which to me also means "whatever wider" we get, and I do hope for a couple focal lengths at a minimum, will likely be closer to the 85mm in price.
I have yet to speak to Zeiss about the long term plans or if they would share them. But if these do well, expect 5-6 focal lengths.
p.15 #18 · ZEISS Otus ML line officially announced!
I find these to be valuable additions but a very significant departure from the original Otus philosophy.
The original Otus, as described by Zeiss, were lenses that prioritized image quality over anything else. That’s why they were very heavily criticized for their size and weight.
These ML versions are compromised since size was obviously a key criteria. They may still be very good compromises, but using Otus is IMHO misleading.
The real ML Otus is the Nikon 58mm f0.95 Noct. Way too heavy and expensive for most people, heavily limited in its applications due to manual focus,… but out of this world good. Exactly what the Otus was about.
Not to mention the fact that any mirrorless lens designed for Sony is not tapping into the potential of the wider and shallower Z mount.
p.15 #19 · ZEISS Otus ML line officially announced!
Can't make this stuff up. Zeiss waits for a company like Viltrox to drop stunning lenses at budget prices and then decides to jump back into the market. Seriously who is running that company?
p.15 #20 · ZEISS Otus ML line officially announced!
PhilH wrote:
I'm curious about the pricing as well. And the 85mm is going to be more expensive. Which to me also means "whatever wider" we get, and I do hope for a couple focal lengths at a minimum, will likely be closer to the 85mm in price.
I have yet to speak to Zeiss about the long term plans or if they would share them. But if these do well, expect 5-6 focal lengths.
I am thinking the same as you that the 50mm will be the lowest price in the series like the DSLR Otus setup, which might exasbarate the pricing debate with wider lenses. I hope we get wider lenses too. Something in the 20-35mm range would be ideal for me, such as an updated 28mm.
bernardl wrote:
I find these to be valuable additions but a very significant departure from the original Otus philosophy.
The original Otus, as described by Zeiss, were lenses that prioritized image quality over anything else. That’s why they were very heavily criticized for their size and weight.
These ML versions are compromised since size was obviously a key criteria. They may still be very good compromises, but using Otus is IMHO misleading.
The real ML Otus is the Nikon 58mm f0.95 Noct.
Cheers,
Bernard
I mentioned prior to release that I was surprised Zeiss was using the Otus name, after release, I am even more confused. They probably should have been it's own unique lens lineup. Granted maybe once we see some Otus 55mm vs Otus 50mm comparisons our opinions will change a bit. It's wild to think how much the bar for IQ has improved in 10 years. Lens IQ which was cutting edge is now becoming commonplace.
