How to decide between Zeiss Otus and Nikon?

Baldy · October 18, 2013

I NEED a mid-range prime for my D800, doncha know. Zeiss is out with this delicious-looking lens:

Zeiss-Otus-55mm-F1.4.png

But it's expensive and manual focus. I'm not just shooting landscapes, but people and some, like children, move pretty fast.

Or there's the new Nikon 58mm:

Nikon-58mm-f1.4G-Image-Sample-7-650x432.jpg

Nikon-58mm-f1.4G-Image-Sample-7-650x432.jpg

What's to do?

Mitchell · October 18, 2013

The proposed price tag for the Nikon 58mm seems absurd to me. It will likely be over $2400 according to the rumors. As the owner of several 50mm Nikkor lenses (f1.2, f1.4 and f1.8), there had better be some magical pixie dust in the optics of that f1.4 lens to make me consider purchasing such an odd focal length for my FX bodies.

merlinus · October 18, 2013

FWIW, retail for the Nikon 58mm will be ~$1700.

ziggy53 · October 18, 2013

If these MTF charts are accurate:

http://photographylife.com/wp-content/uploads/2013/10/Nikon-58mm-f1.4G-vs-Nikon-50mm-f1.4G-MTF.jpg

... then the Nikkor 58mm f/1.4G AF-S is a significant improvement over the otherwise similar use Nikkor 50mm f/1.4G AF-S. Nikon is also saying that off-axis coma effect is improved over previous similar lenses, leading to better pointillism in focused off-axis specular points of light (stars and specular highlights), as well as more circular off-axis bokeh.

For any sort of non-static situation, I think that the 58mm f/1.4G AF-S would be an obvious selection over the Zeiss Otus 55mm f/1.4 APO-Distagon.

ziggy53 · October 18, 2013

Mitchell wrote: »

... As the owner of several 50mm Nikkor lenses (f1.2, f1.4 and f1.8), there had better be some magical pixie dust in the optics of that f1.4 lens to make me consider purchasing such an odd focal length for my FX bodies.

The practical FOV difference between the Zeiss Otus 55mm f/1.4 APO-Distagon and the Nikkor 58mm f/1.4G AF-S, the subjects of this discussion, is insignificant for most practical purposes.

Nothing really odd about 58mm on 135 format if you're an old fart, as I confess that I am. Anyone remember the Nikon Nikkor-S (Nippon Kōgaku) Auto f/1.4, 5.8cm and Noct-Nikkor 58mm f/1.2 (the lens that Nikon would like you to now remember as similar to the 58mm f/1.4G AF-S)?

Baldy · October 25, 2013

ziggy53 wrote: »

The practical FOV difference between the Zeiss Otus 55mm f/1.4 APO-Distagon and the Nikkor 58mm f/1.4G AF-S, the subjects of this discussion, is insignificant for most practical purposes.

Nothing really odd about 58mm on 135 format if you're an old fart, as I confess that I am. Anyone remember the Nikon Nikkor-S (Nippon Kōgaku) Auto f/1.4, 5.8cm and Noct-Nikkor 58mm f/1.2 (the lens that Nikon would like you to now remember as similar to the 58mm f/1.4G AF-S)?

You know, it's funny, I always heard that Nikon couldn't make 1.2 lenses because the mount width is only 44mm compared to Canon's 54. How did they make a 1.2 before?

Baldy · October 25, 2013

Someone told me on facebook, Here is some more sample photos. Follow them to Flickr and view them full size. Not impressive at all, http://nikonrumors.com/2013/10/17/nikon-af-s-nikkor-58mm-f1-4g-lens-additional-coverage.aspx/#more-65330

I can't tell from those images, so thanks Ziggy for the added info.

ian408 · October 25, 2013

Those samples all seem to have some vignetting-not sure if that's from processing or the lens.

ziggy53 · October 25, 2013

Baldy wrote: »

You know, it's funny, I always heard that Nikon couldn't make 1.2 lenses because the mount width is only 44mm compared to Canon's 54. How did they make a 1.2 before?

Note that the very fastest aperture lenses (with high optical quality) for any manufacturer have been prime lenses at, or near, standard/normal focal length, and manual focus. Trying to build a modern autofocus lens of the same efficiency is probably not practical, from either a durability or a cost perspective.

Baldy · October 29, 2013

ziggy53 wrote: »

Note that the very fastest aperture lenses (with high optical quality) for any manufacturer have been prime lenses at, or near, standard/normal focal length, and manual focus. Trying to build a modern autofocus lens of the same efficiency is probably not practical, from either a durability or a cost perspective.

That's interesting. I didn't know that. Someone told me the Otus is autofocus on the new Sony full-frame mirrorless camera. Does anyone have info on that?

ziggy53 · October 30, 2013

Baldy wrote: »

... Someone told me the Otus is autofocus on the new Sony full-frame mirrorless camera. Does anyone have info on that?

From the official Zeiss site:

http://lenses.zeiss.com/camera-lenses/en_de/camera_lenses/otus/otus1455.html

... the Zeiss Otus 55mm, f1.4 is "only" currently available in Canon and Nikon mounts (ZE and ZF.2, respectively). If another mount will be offered, they are not saying so on their site (that I can find). In the future?; it's very possible.

I suspect too that they may be talking about the Zeiss Planar T* 50mm, f1.4 (ZA), which "is" an autofocus lens (I gather, but I've never seen one). This is an "alpha" mount version. Possibly there is a Sony "FE" mount version in the works?

http://lenses.zeiss.com/camera-lenses/en_de/camera_lenses/sony-alpha-lenses/planart1450za.html

Apparently, Zeiss is having difficulty licensing the autofocus technology from Nikon and Canon:

http://www.flickr.com/groups/carlzeisslenses/discuss/72157627212760846/#comment72157627231091702

(From above link)
"Due to international licences, it is not possible at the moment for companies outside Japan to offer AF lenses with EF- or F - mount. So we will concentrate on high-end manual focus lenses with those mounts within the next future.

Best regards

Carl Zeiss Lenses Team "

How to decide between Zeiss Otus and Nikon?

Comments