candleJack: What a dumb design to put out at that price point.
The 135L has been probably the best lens I've had from a purely technical perspective. There was nothing I could want more in a 135 prime except maybe IS.
Again a silly move by CZ.
Have you ever shot videos at f/2, 135mm? I have (tried). Unless you are shooting a statue, it is a disaster.
Somebody will shoot movies at 135mm, f/2 with manual focus???
micahmedia: Why would a company bother making a press release like this without some stunning images shot with the lens to back it up? Their website (lenses.zeiss.com) has none.
Maybe it's more about an idea than function.
Almost all AF lenses have manual focus as well. (Nikon 1 are the only exception I know of.)
Why are people so passionate about such a silly difference? You can take perfectly great pictures using AF and you can do the same with MF. There are challenges to both ways, and I wouldn't necessarily call one easier. Although with this aperture/focal length, AF has some precision advantages.
EDIT: Correction! There is a single shot available at full size from a 5Dmkiii at f3.5. Not bad. Nice bokeh. But not as sharp as the Nikon 135/2. However the Nikon has bad LoCA, and this appears to have none. I can fix LoCA in post, but I can't add resolution info--I'll pass on this one.
That image is awful, like an image taken with some vintage lens from the 1950's that the guy got on ebay for $20.
FTW: That is all ok, but you need CS6 to use it, it will not work on CS5. I have up to the throat to eternally be forced to buy a new version of PS every time I buy a new camera. I use CS5 and see no major improvement, or at least not what brings me an advantage in CS6. I use the RAW 6.7 and have only problems with it, it leaks memory and every 3 or 4 shots I need to exit the program and restart, it is a pain in the best. So, I planed to buy a Sony RX100, I will then not buy it. I had a big discussion once with Capture One service for that issues. Here it is worse, you need to buy the program at every update of new cameras. And since we buy a few per year, this is unaffordable, specially if one considers Pro One pricing policy.
Switch to LR. Cheaper, leaner. I am still with CS2 and the latest LR.
Peter 13: I would love to see a version of LR which does not catalog anything, and I do not need to "import" images which are on my HD already. Like DXO Optics Pro.
Wow, so many people have difficulty reading and know better than me what I understand!
Let me repeat - I do not need, and do not care about the catalog features of LR. That would not be a problem, if those features do not get on my way but they do! Every time I download new images (and I have my reasons NOT to use LR for that), I have to "import" them. It is slow and annoying.
LR costs me much less than CS6, installs much less junk on my PC, and no, I do not want to use RT or whatever.
$90 (educational price), much less junk on my computer (PS is over 1GB), etc. - not meaningless. I did not upgrade since PS CS2.
I would love to see a version of LR which does not catalog anything, and I do not need to "import" images which are on my HD already. Like DXO Optics Pro.
iShootWideOpen: Olympus, Four Thirds, and Pro do not belong in the same sentence.
F/2 zoom on m43 is f/4 on FF - not so sexy anymore.
The motion blur ruins it for me, sorry.
Agree. F 5/6 for shooting sports (indoors) is too slow. Since you are not going to get a faster 800mm lens, just use a shorter and a faster one.
Peter 13: The guy is getting paid to showcase Panasonic. For the right kind of money, he will be shooting the games with an iphone.
"So that is different to any other working photographer?"
Yes, in most cases they are paid to deliver photos, not to use specific gear.
The guy is getting paid to showcase Panasonic. For the right kind of money, he will be shooting the games with an iphone.
Sergey Borachev: This is the EOS-M killer!!
This is exactly what is needed by all those Canon owners who have been waiting for a Canon mirrorless camera and who are now giving up on Canon releasing anything worthwhile any time soon.
This Kipon adapter will allow all Canon EOS lenses to be mounted and therefore also stabilised on the Olympus E-M5, since a builtin IBIS should work with any lens.
Who is still going to buy the Canon EOS-M at $1000 apparently for the camera plus the Canon adapter now? How can such a basic camera sell? It was released apparently to target Canon owners who have Canon lenses, since no new buyers will buy such a camera, but this adapter is going to make it very hard to sell even to Canon owners.
"Who is still going to buy the Canon EOS-M at $1000 apparently for the camera plus the Canon adapter now?"
Anyone who understand the benefit of larger sensors especially when using lenses designed for even larger (FF) ones.
NIKON EXPANDS ACCLAIMED NIKKOR LENS LINEUP ...
Compact, versatile and powerful - introducing the [Canon] EF-S 18-135mm f/3.5-5.6 IS STM and EF 40mm f/2.8 STM
So the Nikon lenses are "acclaimed" while the Canon lenses are just a lenses?
steelski: Dell had a business laptop in 2005 with 1920x1200 on a 15 incher..... and here we are 7 years later, the industry finally passed 2005 levels.
They were 1600x1200 ISP, there were no wide (short) screens then. I still have one of those.
Mssimo: My 2 cents
75mm F1.8 has the same DOF no matter what format camera its mounted on.
DOF of this lens is perfect for portraits.
No need to stop it down.
Lots of special glass reduces the need for post corrections.
You get what you pay for and this lens is worth every penny and it will not drop in price for a long time.
Make it 1 cent. Just use any DOF calculator to prove yourself wrong.
It is equivalent to about 150/3.6 on 35mm, that is all.
Looks like PS work to me.
diforbes: Never thought I would see Canon's pricing higher than Nikon's in the same camera class. This is concerning.
pixelpeeper007: It is important to note that pixel-binning, in and of itself, cannot reduce noise over using a single pixel of the same size as the bin that collects all the light (Stats 101). Therefore the great noise performance comes from the much larger sensor.
Pixel-binning may be somewhat useful for digital zoom (and marketing), but any anti-alias filter will make shrinking images in software just as good and potentially more flexible. I'm wondering if doing it in hardware saves power, CPU cycles, or program storage space instead.
It is not binning, it is resizing. You cannot do binning with "around" 7 pixels. This is not the first time this sites talks about things that they do not understand.