ZEISS Otus 100mm F/1.4 Review: Simply Phenomenal 

Ringtone sounds maybe in a future download haha

The force is strong with these lenses. I can only do so much to hold people back 😂

@@TECH360TV We are being dragged to the dark side ! 😉

One of the best for sure

Thanks for watching

Thanks!

It is

Thank you for the kind words. Yes you can, but it’s a manual focus lens so just take that into consideration

I would recommend trying it, but understand about completing the set. I found it to be the most difficult to use vs the other Otus lenses mainly because of focus throw, and such a small area of focus at 1.4. It does work well with the Z6/Z7 or the EOS for the Canon version.

Hahaha

Thanks for watching

Not quite caught up but much better than the EF lenses. Otus lenses are some of the most impressive lenses I’ve had the pleasure of using, however RF lenses are very impressive.

The camera or the video?

TECH360.TV ,,,,images from the Otus, sort of an old Hollywood portrait look .

Yes. The fall off is beautiful and the look of the images inspired me to edit a certain way.

Understand but these are some of the best lenses. Still less expensive than Leica 😊

Looking back on this comment, and now I own the Zeiss 135mm f/2 APO Sonnar. Yes the Fujifilm 90mm f/2 is a great lens but it pales into comparison with the Zeiss. The big thing with the Zeiss modern Otus and Milvus lenses, having owned the Milvus 85, 50, 21mm is the weight. Zeiss Otus and Milvus lenses are built like tanks, and they are incredibly heavy, which can be off putting, when going out to use the lenses. The last thing I want to do is carry around a heavy lens all day. A prime example of Zeiss adding weight is the 135mm f/2 APS Sonnar which weighs around 930g, but the new 135mm Milvus f/2 with the same optical formula weighs 1059g. I am about to go to France and I would love to take my Panasonic s1r, and Zeiss lenses, but I would be insane to, because Zeiss make optically great lenses which are completely impractical to carry around. With the Otus they made the best optical lens they could possibly make, but at some point they forgot to make the most enjoyable lens they could make. Now, I still love my Zeiss lenses, Ultimate image quality is addictive, and at the moment I am considering buying the Milvus 35mm f/1.4, but the reality is, I would be an idiot to buy that lens, though knowing me I probably will. It is a pity Zeiss seems to have exited the photography lens market in any real meaning. As I would love to see some lighter manual prime lenses, designed for modern mirrorless camera, which were designed to be optically great but lighter.

It will blow your mind on the SL.

Its better than this?

Zeiss has the better image quality but its manual focus. Sigma and Nikon are autofocus so easier to use daily. I have tried the Sigma but from what I hear it’s impressive.

Yes you can but then why make a lens to use in live view. Why not make it for mirrorless

@@TECH360TV good point

@@TECH360TVBecause there are more DSLR users. Also as long as AF works, no need for any magnification and if needed is not so uncomfortable to use it in live view

Hear ya. Cute puppy

100%

Perhaps in the future. But why not the GFX100 then? 😊

@@TECH360TV Sure, how about both! 😃 Between you and me, I own an S1R so I'm my interest is slightly biased.

Will work on that in the near future

Hahaha depends on your camera stores customer service 🤣

i'm going to need a bottle of wine to numb the pain of losing so much money

Thanks for watching :)

We used a Canon M50 for this review :)

j cortes I am saving up for my Sigma 105 mm F1.4. I hear it works great on the Nikon Z6. The images look so amazing when it’s opened wide open.

Not yet. Been wanting to though. Heard it’s also a stunning lens

TECH360.TV I have it, my opinion is that is breathtaking. May be the Carl Zeiss optically is better, but being a manual focusing lens the rate of useful sharp pictures is much less than the autofocus lenses. If eventually you are able to copare the of them it will be nice to know your findings. 😎

Looking forward to trying it one day.

Thanks for watching and will check out the link 👍👍

4K Bobby is always here 😂

Sigma makes great lenses as well.

@@TECH360TV I agree! Plus they have auto focus. What they don't have is the image that my Zeiss 85 T* can make. No amount of PP can change that. I want more Zeiss glass, but, the cost of Milvus, Otus make it untenable. I might still find a way to afford Milvus, but, now that I'm shooting kids, I just cant make MF work for me. Oh well.....

To make it sound more exotic hahahahaha

I do just fine with my Zeiss 85 1.4 T* on the 810/750. There truly is something magical about the lens. Not as Sharp as the otus or their new "consumer grade" ones

Different character to the bokeh than Zeiss but I find them equally good depending on what I’m photographing.

Thanks for watching and commenting. You have many valid points and agree to some extent. Not sure why they felt 100 1.4 MF Lens was necessary on an SLR Mount, however if we look at the market place, mirrorless isn’t dominating the camera market yet. DSLR is still king thus potentially more buyers. For the mirrorless market you can adapt theses lenses with no issue at all as I did. How you feel is to some extent my thoughts on the Leica 75 Noctilux. Beautiful lens, amazing IQ but at 1.25 at 75mm it’s damn difficult to focus on an optical view finder and get tact sharp images. To me this lens was an Engineers way of saying we can make this with optimal image quality and for those that want it it’s there. From what I understand they aren’t making that many of them so they prob understand how niche the market is.

@@TECH360TV , to some extent? :) Yes, of course you can adapt it to mirrorless body, but you're losing all the benefits of mirrorless lens design - overly smaller and lighter, no need of rear-focus group of elements, bigger rear element (weight balance shifted to the back of the lens too) etc, etc. AND most annoying is still the weight and size. Normally great SLR lenses are THIS big due to the presence of AF motors and not so great quality glass. This lens is still same size, but without AF. It must be MUCH smaller than this. If they were using decent glass for the elements, this lens shouldn't be bigger than sensor width + 2-3mm for the body. Take for example Leica APO Summicron 50. This is how it has to be as diameter and not weighting a ton. But it is far cheaper for them to use 9-10 cm diameter for the elements and use only 35mm from them. They don't care much that the poor photographer will be lugging this thing around for a whole day... :))) If the size is going to be this big, I'd much prefer the Canon RF glass - it is even better optically, taking into account what the RF85/1.2 can do and it has AF. For manual focusing - the winner is perfectly clear - Leica - small, light and such a joy to use. Cheers and keep up the good work, mate.

@@alexanderivanoff no, it’s that big because they want it to be sharp in the corners and not have cat’s eye bokeh. And probably helps them eliminate the color fringing.

@@hautehussey This simply isn't true. It is this big because they are cutting costs and aiming at maximum profitability. No other reasons behind believe it or not. What you say has nothing to do with how big a lens is. It simply is much easier and cheaper to put a 120mm glass element and use only it's central area (36mm), instead of aiming at perfection in the whole surface. If in doubt, check Leica M 50mm f/2 APO - it is only 38mm edge to edge and perfectly covers the 36mm sensor area. It is also one of the most optically perfect lenses on this planet (razor sharp edge to edge, tons of micro-contrast, etc, etc). Ok, it is f/2, not 1.4, but Zeiss really has no excuse for making it this big and heavy, and it doesn't even have AF as an excuse that it has to also employ the AF motor(s). Cheers.

@@alexanderivanoff a 50mm is very different than a 100mm!