Is there anyone out there actually using Batis 135?

Luis Gabriel Photography · Jul 12, 2017

biza43 said:
Luis Gabriel Photography said:

Not all of us value size over other aspects and when it comes to IQ the Sigma is a stunning lens, not to mention the amazing blur from the 1.8 aperture and razor sharp performance wide open across the frame. So "mirrorless friendly" is not really an accurate term as it just depends on our own preferences and requirements.

Click to expand...

Ok, how about if Zeiss chose to make the Batis f1.8 or f2, at about 1,200 kg and EUR 2,600? Mirrorless friendly means a compromise between size, weight, and balance on a smaller camera. For those wanting a Zeiss 135 f2, there is the Milvus. Indeed, my preference is for a lighter lens that I can carry around all day without a spinal injury The difference between f2.8 and f2 is irrelevant to me. But I accept it is important to others, of course.

If I wanted to carry a heavy lens, I would go for the GM 70-200.

--
www.paulobizarro.com
http://blog.paulobizarro.com/

Again "mirrorless friendly" has no meaning because is a term determined by your personal needs. So your needs are a lens that has a balance between size, weight and your camera. Great but that does not mean this is a "thing". For me, mirrorless friendly would be a lens that performs as it should when mounted on a mirrorless camera, ie wide lenses with sharp edges, etc. Size does not factor in nor weight for MY personal preferences, only IQ.
So not sure why this is even a discussion, you have your preferences, I have mine and others may have different ones...all about choices.
Regards

Dan_168 · Jul 12, 2017

Luis Gabriel Photography said:
biza43 said:

Luis Gabriel Photography said:

Not all of us value size over other aspects and when it comes to IQ the Sigma is a stunning lens, not to mention the amazing blur from the 1.8 aperture and razor sharp performance wide open across the frame. So "mirrorless friendly" is not really an accurate term as it just depends on our own preferences and requirements.

Click to expand...

Ok, how about if Zeiss chose to make the Batis f1.8 or f2, at about 1,200 kg and EUR 2,600? Mirrorless friendly means a compromise between size, weight, and balance on a smaller camera. For those wanting a Zeiss 135 f2, there is the Milvus. Indeed, my preference is for a lighter lens that I can carry around all day without a spinal injury The difference between f2.8 and f2 is irrelevant to me. But I accept it is important to others, of course.

If I wanted to carry a heavy lens, I would go for the GM 70-200.

Click to expand...

biza43 · Jul 13, 2017

Luis Gabriel Photography said:
biza43 said:

Luis Gabriel Photography said:

Not all of us value size over other aspects and when it comes to IQ the Sigma is a stunning lens, not to mention the amazing blur from the 1.8 aperture and razor sharp performance wide open across the frame. So "mirrorless friendly" is not really an accurate term as it just depends on our own preferences and requirements.

Click to expand...

Ok, how about if Zeiss chose to make the Batis f1.8 or f2, at about 1,200 kg and EUR 2,600? Mirrorless friendly means a compromise between size, weight, and balance on a smaller camera. For those wanting a Zeiss 135 f2, there is the Milvus. Indeed, my preference is for a lighter lens that I can carry around all day without a spinal injury The difference between f2.8 and f2 is irrelevant to me. But I accept it is important to others, of course.

If I wanted to carry a heavy lens, I would go for the GM 70-200.

Click to expand...

kelly15 · Jul 13, 2017

biza43 said:
Luis Gabriel Photography said:

biza43 said:

Luis Gabriel Photography said:

Not all of us value size over other aspects and when it comes to IQ the Sigma is a stunning lens, not to mention the amazing blur from the 1.8 aperture and razor sharp performance wide open across the frame. So "mirrorless friendly" is not really an accurate term as it just depends on our own preferences and requirements.

Click to expand...

Ok, how about if Zeiss chose to make the Batis f1.8 or f2, at about 1,200 kg and EUR 2,600? Mirrorless friendly means a compromise between size, weight, and balance on a smaller camera. For those wanting a Zeiss 135 f2, there is the Milvus. Indeed, my preference is for a lighter lens that I can carry around all day without a spinal injury The difference between f2.8 and f2 is irrelevant to me. But I accept it is important to others, of course.

If I wanted to carry a heavy lens, I would go for the GM 70-200.

Click to expand...

Click to expand...

biza43 · Jul 13, 2017

kelly15 said:
Many bought Sony because of compactness but most (I believe) because of the file quality.

Indeed. That was my case, I could migrate from Canon EOS + Zeiss 21 Distagon to Sony A7 + Loxia 21 (or Tokina 20 these days).

kelly15 said:
If the logic of Zeiss is true if Sony enlarge their bodies, like they are doing a bit with A9, then they change completely the Batis range.

No they don't. There will always be small and large cameras; I have used my EOS 1 with f2.8 zoom, or with 50mm small lens. It is much more unbalanced to use a small camera with big lens, than large camera with small lens.

kelly15 said:
In no way I see Batis prices proportioned to their value. For sure they are grat lenses but just open to 1.8 or 2.8 consequently too expensive ( for sure in my opinion).

Fine.

kelly15 said:
Unfortunately I do not see any Sony direct competition apart 85 1.8 FE which offers almost the same quality of Batis at half the price and 28 2.0 at one third.

On the 85 I agree, I have used both, and the Sony is really good value. On the 28, well, the Batis is 25, and is really better.

Many here are waiting for a 135 f2 or f1.8, which is fine. Sony no doubt will release that; but it will be even more expensive.

tommiejeep · Jul 16, 2017

https://www.robertwhite.co.uk/zeiss-batis-135mm-f2-8-apo-sonnar-t-lens-sony-e-mount.html?utm_source=robertwhite.co.uk&utm_campaign=5db76862ea-EMAIL_CAMPAIGN_2017_07_14&utm_medium=email&utm_term=0_9c07a9c387-5db76862ea-315895749

I have purchased quite a bit of gear from them. I have not checked B&H price.

oriomenoni · Jul 16, 2017

Thank you Mike. It looks extremely good to me! And I don't see anything wrong in the bokeh (like some say).

now... if only it would cost a bit less... around 1500 would be ok

FF Pro · Jul 16, 2017

kelly15 said:
biza43 said:

kelly15 said:

Mirrorless friendly or not the value os this lens is not 2000 euro IMHO.

Around 800/1000 euro it is acceptable as the only benefit compared to Sigma 135 is the reduction of weight.

Click to expand...

Of course you are entitled to your opinion. But then you really need to check the price of Zeiss lenses from other ranges: ZM, Milvus, Batis, Loxia. We are talking about a lens that is practically optically perfect, from Zeiss, that features (true) APO, T* coating, OSS.

How one expects such a lens to be cheaper than the other Batis lenses is difficult to understand.

Click to expand...

Dan_168 · Jul 16, 2017

FF Pro said:
I don't really feel the 18, 25, and 85 are overpriced persay , but that 18 is worth every penny. The 135 seems out there to me but I have not used it. AF, lightweight, and sharp make a good product. I'm sure other lenses can do it but the Batis 18 and 25 are a joy to use and top shelf imho.

Whether something is "overpriced" is very personal. My take on the Batis line is yes. I just sold my 4 month old Batis 25 to my friend and my Batis 18 is still on local Craigslist. just not a huge fan of this line of Zeiss product. it really doesn't feel like i am using a Zeiss lens. optic is fine but all the plastic housing, the horrible focusing ring and MF operation, it's just none-Zeiss like.

With the 85 1.8, I don't think is overpriced for only $1200, but I went with the 85GM and feel it worth every penny, mainly the Bokeh difference between the GM and the Batis. Now if I compare that Batis to the newer Sony 85 1.8, I feel the Sony 1.8 is a bargain for what you are getting for half of the price of the Batis.

As for the Batis 135 F2.8, I don't know if I will call it overprice or not, but for me, I will never paid $2000 for a 135 F2.8 lens when I can get a one full stop faster Zeiss 135 F2 Milvus for only $2200, and not to mention the Samyang 135 F2 for $500, not that is a steal, and I love both of my Zeiss 135 F2 apo and Samyang. so I guess in my eyes the whole Batis lne id kind of "overpriced", i never consider the Loxia 21 and the whole Milvus line very expensive for what you are getting though.

FF Pro · Jul 16, 2017

Dan_168 said:
FF Pro said:

I don't really feel the 18, 25, and 85 are overpriced persay , but that 18 is worth every penny. The 135 seems out there to me but I have not used it. AF, lightweight, and sharp make a good product. I'm sure other lenses can do it but the Batis 18 and 25 are a joy to use and top shelf imho.

Click to expand...

Whether something is "overpriced" is very personal. My take on the Batis line is yes. I just sold y 4 month old Batis 25 and the 18 is still on local Craigslist. just can't get my head around this line, it really doesn't feel like i am using a Zeiss lens.

With the 85 1.8, I don't think is overpriced but I went with the 85GM and feel it worth every penny, mainly the Bokeh difference between the GM and the Batis. Now if I compare that Batis to the newer Sony 85 1.8, I feel the Sony 1.8 is a bargain for what you are getting.

As for the Batis 135 F2.8, I don't know if I will call it overprice or not, but for me, I will never paid $2000 for a 135 F2.8 lens when I can get a one full stop faster Zeiss 135 F2 Milvus for only $2200, and not to mention the Samyang 135 F2 for $500, not that is a steal, and I love both of my Zeiss 135 F2 apo and Samyang. so I guess in my eyes the whole Batis lne id kind of "overpriced", i never consider the Loxia 21 and the whole Milvus line very expensive for what you are getting though.

I certainly can understand your point-of-view. I used the Loxia 21 today on a shoot and it is just lovely. I really love the Batis line but in my heart, Loxia is special.

--

http://14fps.tv - My YouTube channel with a focus on Sony cameras.
http://14fps.com - My photography website.

MrT-Man · Jul 16, 2017

To each their own. I value image quality and I value portability, much more than whether the lens body is plastic or metal. The Batis 18 and 25 have impeccable image quality, as does the 135.

I've been on the fence with the 135, but think I might go ahead and buy it. Sure, a Sigma 135 with MC-11 is cheaper and a stop faster, but the Batis is half the weight... Surely that counts for something. At least for me it does.

Finally, following a very bad service experience with Sony/Precision and an excellent service experience with Zeiss, I also value the fact that a Zeiss lens is probably going to have better quality control and less sample variation than a Sony lens -- and that even if it's a bad copy, Zeiss will make sure to fix it.

Dan_168 · Jul 16, 2017

MrT-Man said:
Finally, following a very bad service experience with Sony/Precision and an excellent service experience with Zeiss, I also value the fact that a Zeiss lens is probably going to have better quality control and less sample variation than a Sony lens -- and that even if it's a bad copy, Zeiss will make sure to fix it.

This I can totally agree, I had to deal with Precision camera two times for my less than 1 year old A7R II, my experience with them is nothing but horrible, almost made me stop buying Sony product just because of this and the only authorized Sony repair center here.

tommiejeep · Jul 16, 2017

Agree. I cannot even find out where a Sony Service Centre is here

. My Leica M, VM, ZM lenses will go to UK on warranty. Zeiss will sort my ZM and Loxia lenses out here but probably not under warranty. All of my Batis lenses go back to my Zeiss dealer and he will get Zeiss to sort them under 3 year warranty. So far so good on not needing any repairs.

More worried about m used a7rii but so far so good

. The a7ii will go back to UK under warrant if needed.

MRK 2010 · Jul 17, 2017

I'm using this lens. It's better than I expected, but it still doesn't quite match the outstanding bokeh quality of the SAL135F18z.

You can find my Batis135 images here: https://www.flickr.com/photos/mattrkeyworth/albums/72157682309226404

biza43 · Jul 17, 2017

Dan_168 said:
FF Pro said:

I don't really feel the 18, 25, and 85 are overpriced persay , but that 18 is worth every penny. The 135 seems out there to me but I have not used it. AF, lightweight, and sharp make a good product. I'm sure other lenses can do it but the Batis 18 and 25 are a joy to use and top shelf imho.

Click to expand...

Whether something is "overpriced" is very personal. My take on the Batis line is yes. I just sold my 4 month old Batis 25 to my friend and my Batis 18 is still on local Craigslist. just not a huge fan of this line of Zeiss product. it really doesn't feel like i am using a Zeiss lens. optic is fine but all the plastic housing, the horrible focusing ring and MF operation, it's just none-Zeiss like.

the body of Batis lenses is metal, not plastic. The focusing ring is rubber. Of course if you want to feel the true MF Zeiss lens experience, getting an AF lens is a wrong move. These are AF lenses, not MF.

Dan_168 said:
With the 85 1.8, I don't think is overpriced for only $1200, but I went with the 85GM and feel it worth every penny, mainly the Bokeh difference between the GM and the Batis. Now if I compare that Batis to the newer Sony 85 1.8, I feel the Sony 1.8 is a bargain for what you are getting for half of the price of the Batis.

The Sony is indeed a great "deal", but it is not as good as the Batis 85 in terms of flare resistance under critical situations.

Dan_168 said:
As for the Batis 135 F2.8, I don't know if I will call it overprice or not, but for me, I will never paid $2000 for a 135 F2.8 lens when I can get a one full stop faster Zeiss 135 F2 Milvus for only $2200, and not to mention the Samyang 135 F2 for $500, not that is a steal, and I love both of my Zeiss 135 F2 apo and Samyang. so I guess in my eyes the whole Batis lne id kind of "overpriced", i never consider the Loxia 21 and the whole Milvus line very expensive for what you are getting though.

Again, the Batis 135 offers image stabilization and AF, some will value that more than MF.

Pjotri · Feb 18, 2018

test it in a store

oriomenoni said:
With it's stellar price tag of 2000$ for an f2.8 lens, I still have to meet someone in my photographic acquaintances that has actually purchased the lens and is using it.
Yet, the lens seems to deliver!
However, with only 500$ or so more needed to get the 70-200 G Master (also f2.8), there doesn't seem to be much reasons left to go for the Batis. Especially now that Sony has announced a new 135 that is likely to be faster.
So... anyone out there using the Zeiss beast and wanting to share some images?

Ordinary · Mar 10, 2018

I love this lens. 135mm is just my cup of tea. No complaints about 2.8 aperture. You really have to focus carefully/exactly, because the depth of field is pretty narrow at 2.8, even at 5.6.

Search

Is there anyone out there actually using Batis 135?

Luis Gabriel Photography

Senior Member

Dan_168

Forum Pro

biza43

Forum Pro

kelly15

Senior Member

biza43

Forum Pro

tommiejeep

Veteran Member

oriomenoni

Leading Member

FF Pro

Senior Member

Dan_168

Forum Pro

FF Pro

Senior Member

MrT-Man

Senior Member

Dan_168

Forum Pro

tommiejeep

Veteran Member

MRK 2010

Well-known member

biza43

Forum Pro

Pjotri

New member

Ordinary

Member

Similar threads

Keyboard shortcuts