|
Forums >
Photography Talk >
Zeiss 85 f1.4
I'm always seeing people talk of Zeiss glass, and assumed it always came at an exotic price. This lens is placed right between the two 85 f1.4 offerings from Nikon, at $1283. I understand its a manual focus lens, but optically is it superior to the competition? I guess I expected a much higher price. I was talking to a photographer at a wedding last Fall and he was shooting video on a 5D. He said the Zeiss 85 f1.4 on it cost $3000....is there another lens he may have been referring to that I'm not thinking of?  Feb 26 13 08:43 am Link It was probably a Compact Prime cinema lens (great lenses, by the way). It's aperture is measured in T stops, not F stops. http://www.bhphotovideo.com/c/product/6 … _T2_1.html http://lenses.zeiss.com/camera-lenses/e … 6wodaBcA2A Feb 26 13 08:48 am Link Marty McBride wrote: far superior! I almost bought one but for the price and manual focus Feb 26 13 08:51 am Link Feb 26 13 08:52 am Link Paramour Productions wrote: No it was actually an 85 f1.4 I mounted it on my D300s and took a few indoor low light shots, that were blurry due to subject movement....It was a Nikon mount he was using on his Canon 5D Feb 26 13 08:55 am Link John Horwitz wrote: The review you read, wasn't referring to the same lens as above though. Feb 26 13 08:58 am Link Part of the reason I shoot SONY is AF Zeiss glass I get to use on that mount. Although for redundancy via my D800 I recently got Nikon's equivalent of the SONY ZEISS 24-70/2.8, I have to say at the end of the day the practical difference is not THAT great, except in extreme conditions one tends to avoid. Then again it could also be said at the end of the day the practical difference between a VW Bug and an Aston Martin is not THAT great either, except in extreme conditions one tends to avoid. Feb 26 13 09:13 am Link Marty McBride wrote: I wanted an 85 - and in other tests the Rokinon outshone Nikon & Zeiss, why spend the money??? Feb 26 13 09:16 am Link It would have been very helpful and appreciated if the Nikon's 85mm 1.4 D or G were included in this test. Feb 26 13 11:16 am Link I have to wonder why the wedding photographer was shooting video on a 5D with this lens, what possible benefit could it give him, given the limitations of 1080p? Feb 26 13 12:28 pm Link I personally believe in the signature look of Zeiss T star lenses, the 85 1.4 included. As mentioned however, I don't think its price is justified when the Rokinon 85 1.4 can be had for so much less (unless you are looking at the Sony Zeiss which at least has AF and far superior build). The Zeiss 135 1.8 however, is unmatched IMO. Unbelievable 3D look and micro-contrast.. Feb 26 13 01:33 pm Link In my opinion, the Zeiss 50mm f1.4 and 85mm f1.4 can't compete with the Nikkor 50mm f1.4G and 85mm f1.4G. The Nikkor is better lens optically and functionally. Instead of the 1.4G, I would recommend the 50mm f1.8G and the 85mm f1.8G unless you absolutely need the f1.4. http://www.photozone.de/nikon_ff/591-ze … ff?start=1 http://www.photozone.de/nikon_ff/606-ni … ff?start=1 http://www.cameralabs.com/reviews/Nikon … D800.shtml http://www.cameralabs.com/reviews/Nikon … dict.shtml Zeiss 100mm f2 Makro is a different story. Feb 26 13 01:40 pm Link Compared to the Nikon versions, but Zeiss users report slightly better sharpness, and slightly busier bokeh. However, the fact that it is a manual focus lens means that it usually has less breathing and a more accurate and responsive focus dial, making it much better for pulling or following focus manually. This makes it better for video. The cine lenses have even less breathing, and even more accurate (and longer) focus scales. They're also often written sideways on the lens barrel, which makes them much easier to operate when the camera is on a tripod or other large rig. Feb 26 13 05:58 pm Link John Horwitz wrote: This.^. This lens kicks ass. It's been beating the giving the competition a run for their money, beating them in clarity. Feb 26 13 06:39 pm Link |
