I think it's the one with the octagonal bokeh. Zeiss seems to be very hit or miss with lens variance. For what these German lenses cost they should really address that.
-
Ever wanted an RSS feed of all your favorite gaming news sites? Go check out our new Gaming Headlines feed! Read more about it here.
-
We have made minor adjustments to how the search bar works on ResetEra. You can read about the changes here.
I'm really interested in it and have been checking the site of this guy who did a 30-day review of it, with a blog post covering different impressions/details for it each day.
https://30daysofbatis.com/
It's just hard to justify at $1,300 when I already have two 35mm lenses, a 50mm macro lens, and a 55mm lens.
That is like the price of a used 35mm Distagaon, which I want, but that price with what is essentially a lens lottery is off putting. I'd have to go to a store and try one out.
So...Rokinon 35 1.4 vs Sony 85 1.8. If you had to buy one which would it be? I'm leaning Sony because I'm trying to be as native as possible on Sony. This will have to wait till next week...might be a nevermind post.
But, seriously, two very different lenses with completely different use cases. 35mm is wide-ish but not nearly wide enough for my main wide use case, architecture, so I'd go with the 85.
I think I'm eventually going to get both, it just turns into a matter of which do I get first. I actually use 35mm a lot for street fashion shoots.
But, seriously, two very different lenses with completely different use cases. 35mm is wide-ish but not nearly wide enough for my main wide use case, architecture, so I'd go with the 85.
Yeah, I imagined you'd get a lot of use from it for street stuff. It's a pretty great walkaround prime FL for street, so, if I were in your shoes and I did a lot of (or any, really) street, that would be first in line.
Yeah I do a good amount of street stuff. I think the Rokinon needs to be bought in a store just due to lens variance incase I needed to exchange it for another copy or test it out in store. The 85 and I think the 28-75 are safer online purchases.
Sony not having an affordable quality 35 is quite a pain in the ass. Even Fuji has two good versions of a 35.
I'll be honest, I think I'd use the Tamron 28-75 for my 35mm needs. That's what I did on Canon, never had a dedicated 35mm. Kinda depends on how much bokeh you need, though.
Lots of folks still adapt the Canon 1.4 but I think I'd just go Rokinon at that point. I assume the Rokinon has fairly bad AF and a noisy motor though.
I think I should probably prioritize the 28-75 and the 85 as my first two lenses and just get a dedicated 35 later. 50 isn't that far from 35 for the most part.
I should probably get this lens then. I have heard a lot of mixed things from every E-mount 35 available.
Tons of Batis vs G videos out there that make the Batis 85 look only marginally better at best. It's strange.
I'm still trying to figure out what Zeiss does to guarantee over a grand a lens. Don't get me wrong they have great build quality, but optically it sounds like the cheaper lenses are competing with them.
So pretty much you're paying for a name, which yes I get, but that's too much for a name.
https://youtu.be/wPjPCtK0diE
Maybe more than just the name depending on the situation. The 24/1.4 is being lauded as one of Sony's best lenses yet, and it can't keep up with the Batis 25 for video AF, and the Batis color rendition is better to my eye as well on the side by sides, like by a lot.
Chris found the 85s to be basically a push. https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=EGjykmqkKgo
Last edited:
I don't see myself ever buying a 24 prime though, but I'll look at this. Which are the good consistent Zeiss lenses? I wouldn't mind getting one of the 135 lenses if they have AF. The Batis is stomping the GM in video AF.
Their 135 is only 2.8 so MEHHHHHHHH, especially for $1500.
God damn it!! Still looking at the vid for the 25mm and even that has the onioning in their bokeh. Why are Zeiss lenses like this?
5 month old, 10/10 condition Sony 85 for $450 on FM today. https://www.fredmiranda.com/forum/topic/1572477/0?keyword=sony,85#14676133
This kind of shit usually crops up in glass that is overcorrected. Lens optics is a bunch of trade-offs. You want sharper corners? There you go, aspheric elements. Oops, they made your OoF areas super busy. I see you have some longitudinal spherochromatism going on, let me solve this with an apo doublet. There you go, now you have a coma issue.
All glass has a bunch of aberrations, good lens designers try to optimize to have more of the less objectionable aberrations and less of the really bad ones.
Pretty choice quote from Panny regarding the L mount and Olympus...
"This alliance is like marriage. The previous arrangement [with Olympus] was more like we were just living together. So the obligation [now] is a little more high-level."
I swear, Oly is fucking dead without a mount partnership. They'll be relegated to microscope optics in short order if they don't wise up.
Also JadedWriter you might find this thread interesting. https://www.fredmiranda.com/forum/topic/1572460
Basically, Sony lenses should largely be bought from a store where you can easily return them.
"This alliance is like marriage. The previous arrangement [with Olympus] was more like we were just living together. So the obligation [now] is a little more high-level."
I swear, Oly is fucking dead without a mount partnership. They'll be relegated to microscope optics in short order if they don't wise up.
Also JadedWriter you might find this thread interesting. https://www.fredmiranda.com/forum/topic/1572460
Basically, Sony lenses should largely be bought from a store where you can easily return them.
I'm trying and don't know how to buy from here. Even set up an account. Do I have to PM the person? Also looks like I have to pay to even be allowed to buy or something.
So pretty much Zeiss over corrected their lenses and made their bokeh ugly? Sounds like a bad trade off.
So pretty much Don't even buy Sony Zeiss stuff from Ebay and just store purchase them? I can't even buy the 70-200 2.8 off of Ebay?
But the sharpness, bro. You could cut the very Earth with those images.
Some of the lenses with the best, creamiest bokeh I've ever used had soft corners and vignetting. It's just the nature of the beast.
I don't even think I care about soft corners as long as the person I'm focusing on is sharp. It's also very easy to fix vignetting with lens corrections. So...it sounds like I'm not supposed to get a Zeiss lens then.
It's just a forum. Make an account like any other.
You only have to pay to post listings in Buy/Sell/Trade. You have to PM the seller and it's a paypal transaction like any other forum sale.
This makes sense. I'm trying to hold off till after I pay rent and get paid again. I have the money regardless, I just don't like my bank account going below a certain amount.
Older lens designs tended to be a bit better about this, with simpler lens formulas, I feel. There's been this sharpness arms race that kinda had a negative impact on the actual rendering. Also, another thing that had a huge impact was a race to get smaller and lighter lenses. That requires glass that is much stronger at bending light, and then require much more correction to get rid of all the weirdness it introduces.
Optics are complicated, man.
Yeah glass formulas are fucking weird. I'd rather prefer a realistic level of sharpness with snappy AF over super sharp, unpleasing bokeh and inconsistent AF
I'd go for the 85mm f/1.8 just because there will likely never be a good reason to replace it, whereas I'm skeptical of Rokinon. It appears to be a good lens, so maybe my skepticism is unfair, though.
The Rokinon seems like a good lens for the price yes. For video work it seems to be better than the Sigma, seems to have better or at least cleaner bokeh than the Zeiss, but I'm not sure about the durability though.
Rokinon shit is at least as durable as most lenses now.
Everything is plastic with metal interiors now anyway.
The 85 1.8 would've been my next lens had I stayed with Sony tho
Everything is plastic with metal interiors now anyway.
The 85 1.8 would've been my next lens had I stayed with Sony tho
I've had good experience buying used stuff on FredMiranda, but obviously your mileage may vary. I'm also not taking pictures of brick walls and shit to "test" my lenses, so maybe I just haven't noticed what some would consider a lemon.
True. Dude said the Rokinon was built as well as the Zeiss and I don't even know if that's a compliment for the Rokinon or an insult to the Zeiss given the price difference.
The only thing I think I tend to notice is garbage AF.
I had no idea Pentax had that problem. Explains why I have never seen an event photographer packing a Pentax.
Yeah. I'm a casual photographer and love my Pentax, but their AF solution is distinctly inferior to Nikon and Canon. Good image processing, ergonomics and legacy glass, though.
Hello.
(They're traditionally much more popular in Japan than the US.)
I see them occasionally in NYC. It's usually one of the white body crop sensor cameras.
Your Flickr gallery has me wanting to go wandering. I really haven't been doing much photography the last year or two. Kinda miss it.
Take the camera and one lens and just walk around. Leave the camera bag at home, it's quite liberating. And thanks, nice to at least see my gallery can entertain and inspire people.
I mean, living in NYC certainly helps. I'm out in the charmless suburbs.
That's probably why I have no real urge to move back to Long Island or go live in Jersey, there's like nothing really there.
I generally like living in the burbs - cities are too hectic and overwhelming for me - but the photography out here certainly takes a more...optimistic eye.
I grew up in the burbs, it's...I don't think it's exactly for me. I miss the quiet yes, but there's nothing about it that I'm really looking forward to returning to. I still enjoy finding new places of the city to photograph, I don't get that with the suburbs.