SHG/HG VS Zeiss ?

Started Mar 8, 2013 | Questions thread
philosomatographer Contributing Member • Posts: 539
Re: SHG/HG VS Zeiss ?

Hi Chris,

You misunderstand me - I was addressing one or two very specific concerns, not the Zeiss lens line in general - which certainly have some very superb designs. Just to clarify:

Chris Mak wrote:

I have the Zeiss 85/1.4 and could not possibly deduct from that lenses' outstanding build quality and superb manual focus ring, how it should qualify as "dismal". Sure, its AF is rather none existent and it is not weather sealed, but I assume you weren't expecting that.

Oh, I was referring specifically to the autofocus on the Zeiss for SOny 85 1.4, which is dysmal by any measurement The optical qualities are superb, and the rendering is beautiful - the Sony 85/1.4 is a better optical design for technical image quality than the Nikon/Canon-mount, manual-focus 85/1.4, which is a more purposefully "soft" portrait lens. So - I am not talking the lens down in general, just the AF abilities of the Sony-mount one, in the context of the OP's comparison of Sony Zeiss AF lenses compared to SHG.

Goodness, B-grade, nothing special optically... Have you tried the Zeiss 50/2 makro planar, or the Zeiss 100/2 makro planar?

​I have, yes! Both are good, but not the best available. The Olympus OM lenses in these focal lenghts (50/2.0 Macro, 90/2.0 Macro - both of which I have a lot of experience with) are better to my tastes - but such things matter little when you're dealing with some of the best lenses ever.

However, I was here specifically referring to the Distagon 35mm f/1.4, which is very disappointing considering the enormous size and cost. Both "cheap brand" Sigma and Samyang 35mm f/1.4 lenses are demonstrably superior in almost every optical parameter. One would have expected the Zeiss to be a world-beater, but it's only "OK".

Those who purchased on, though, will feel compelled to defend it as the best 35mm f/1.4 ever, but it's simply not true. I used this lens as an example that one should not attach too much virtue to the brand of a lens - even Zeiss makes average lenses now and then.

What is different, is that Zeiss has some average lenses in the "premium" or "professional" line - something which Olympus does not have at all. All of Olympus' professional lenses are spectacular beyond reproach.

Unfortunately... Olympus has a very average sensor in the professional camera, as if to make up for it...

 philosomatographer's gear list:philosomatographer's gear list
Nikon Df Nikon AF-S Nikkor 14-24mm f/2.8G ED Nikon AF-S Nikkor 200mm f/2G ED-IF VR Olympus Zuiko Digital ED 14-35mm 1:2.0 SWD Carl Zeiss Makro-Planar T* 2/100 +3 more
Post (hide subjects) Posted by
Keyboard shortcuts:
FForum PPrevious NNext WNext unread UUpvote SSubscribe RReply QQuote BBookmark MMy threads
Color scheme? Blue / Yellow