I asked this question recently on the Canon EOS R5 review video, which was fantastic. That video is so old I don't think you saw my question over there. Re:Canon EOS R5. Did the Mechanical Shutter vertical blurring bug ever get addressed in subsequent firmware? If you shoot burst mode does it only affect the first exposure in the burst sequence or do all exposures in the burst suffer from vertical blur? Was it only with the 1/100th of a second shutter speed that you saw this bug?
I suspect that the weather sealing gaskets interfere with the smooth manual focus. The Milvus is weather sealed and the focus is much stiffer and less precise. Just use a good case and a lens storage cabinet.
One of my friends has just bought one...I'll see if I can borrow it from him. I haven't had any luck yet in getting in touch with Sony's PR to borrow lenses directly from them
Does it have a chip? Does focus confirmation work on the camera? You say it's hard to use but it would be good to know why. You seem to only have the lenses you review for a short time and I'm not sure you get to the crux of what makes this special. Your understanding of image quality is predominantly passed on through technical parameters, which at this end of the market can be expected to be stellar. And as a pro-level lens, it should also get a thorough review as a studio lens.
Any chance you could explain what makes this (or other Zeiss) lens special? I recently bought a Zeiss on my Sony full frame for which I had a corresponding Sony GM. I took corresponding photos with the Zeiss and the GM - portraits, wildlife, interiors, then double-blind surveyed preferences to pairs of photos for each scene. In every case I and my friends/family picked the GM's rendering, or had no preference. Do folks have a brand loyalty to Zeiss, or are we truly missing something?
@@AdvayMengle A) yes, ofc ppl have brand loyalty to Zeiss, they're one of the most seminal lens mfrs in history. B) Zeiss hasn't released a photography lens in years, and now they recently announced they're done in the space. GM's that were released after the Zeiss lenses, which is the vast majority of them, tend to be optically superior, yes... but it's not so simple, like that any GM will be better than any Zeiss. so yes, your GM, depending on which one it is, is probably superior to w/e Zeiss you have. but w/out knowing which lenses, it's impossible to know. Zeiss made lenses like these, which are essentially perfect, w the price tag to match, and they made far cheaper lenses. The cheaper ones (I mean cheap-ish, now, used... most of them are wildly overpriced new now)for Sony e-mount weren't actually made by Zeiss, either, they were made by Sony and given a Zeiss badge. That's likely what you have, so yes, a GM is gonna be made after it, and use superior tech. C) Zeiss does have a particular look across much of their line - the "3D pop," which is what ppl call microcontrast. they also made the Super Speeds, which are some of the most famous cine lenses of all time.
Hey Chris! Have you ever thought to make the smartphone camera reviews using your very efficient testing process? Maybe some top camera oriented and overall flagship devices like for example iPhone 12 pro, Samsung s21, Huawei p40 etc?
What people call focus breathing is simply the law of optical physics at work. And bokeh balls round in the center and looking like cat eyes towards the edges of the frame are simply the result of the change of angle from the bokeh point to the optical axis. Preventing focus breathing requires a zoom mechanism that compensates the changes of image angle caused by focusing and that mechanism should be precisely coupled to the focusing. I don't understand the hype of cine lenses that have such a function, except it has a price and some people want to pay for it. Will it make for better storytelling images and storytelling movies?
Thanks for the review. I have to say that the longitudinal CA is still visible on the Otus and doesn't actually look much better than the Canon RF85mm 1.2 (especially if that lens was also stopped down to f1.4). Maybe it looks better when you are lookig directly at the image (not through youtube). Cheers
Manual focus not easy to use? How do you think all the beautiful photographs got made before autofocus existed? Race cars, birds in flight, portraits, street photography, etc. If you still have memories of those times, then somebody making such a complaint triggers associations with the term "spoilt little brat".
It was very interesting to see how Otus compares with modern lenses. My point RF 85 mm f/1.2 is better in every aspect. It’s brighter, sharper, got autofocus and what is most important - does not go with ugly notch-window :-)
If I’m going to spend $4K on a prime, I’ll make sure it has a decent AF first, with an option to do manual AF, not the other way around(without AF option). But still, the Otus 1.4/85 bokeh is almost as dreamy as the RF1.2/85 DS and not quite as sharp in the corners. A “sharpest 85 f1.2-1.4” comparison soon, maybe?
It's an awesome lens, but the problem is there are shitton of amazing alternatives already and it's price is completely absurd. Considering that jawdropping RF 85/1.2 is around 1/3 cheaper says everything.
Tricky question. Not so few that she thinks you didn't get good value out of it...and not so many that you become really good with the kit lens and she questions your need for a better one ;-)
I like your content, I've been watching for years now, but really that "what his the most perfect, no defect, most sharpest lens ever" kind of bother me, your are not the only reviewer how does this, but at least try to realize that this ever competing lens/camera contest just makes no sens. Photography isn't about what is the most optically perfect lenses, or "which brands brags the most about their product", if everyone follows that trend you're will all just be market sellers and not photographers. You don't need a lens which has more lines per milimeters resolution that Hubble telescope, those are made by optics scientists who just care about performance, but photography isn't about performance, it's about art, expression, feelings. Has a photographer, and young cinematographer, this whole state of mind just triggers me. I like lenses with character, with suddle (or sometimes strong) look, not like the Otus which is just a souless optical bloc made by technicians who measures sharpness instead of blur transition/falloff. PS : For portraits a softer lens with beatifull bokeh are actually more suted than optical perfection. (like some old Zeiss Biotar for example) Otherwize your model better have a good skin condition or a nicer makeup.
There are plenty of photographic uses for high performance lenses for which "art, expression, feelings" are less important, or even wholly unimportant.
Who is claiming the sharper the lens, the better the lens is for everyone? Chris is simply doing technical tests to see how different lenses compare OPTICALLY. You then get to choose which lens is best-suited for your needs, which may well be a soft lens. I find it weird that you get upset with these kind of tests. It's as dumb as hating car reviewers measuring 0-100km/h acceleration times. Noone is claiming the fastest accelerating car is the best car, but most people are interested to see if car A out-accelerates car B. Especially comparing Ferrari with Lamborghini, for example. I get the impression you have the lens being tested and you're embarrassed you paid so much and some cheaper lenses are now sharper.
@@cooloox The problem I'm talking isn't just the fact of comparing, but the trend that optical makers and reviewers have nowadays. The lens is the window to your artistic vision, and just wanting something by pure performance is just ridiculous for artistic needs, this isn't motorsports, it's a tool made for creativity, except that today no one seems to care. As a young cinematographer I know full well how much the choice of a lens is important, and we have a very broad selection of lenses to choose from for our needs. And their's a real care about the philosophy of each optic maker, and they make modern cine lenses to have a certain look, and not just everything perfect with no defect just because they can do it. Of course, some series of optics are like that, like the Zeiss Master Prime, but to me making a perfect optical lens, is like making something with no soul. If you use filters at least that makes sense, but shooting just with that and no filters that's awful, it just look too seamless and impersonal, I want character and personality, otherwise if they continue to do that everyone would have the same look.
For my taste, the "weather sealing" is too much an overrated subject ! I am an amateur photographer since 1965, and I had never ever any problems with this matter!
i have seens this lens the resolution and contast is little better in the sigma version, as chris has seen this correctly however the zeiss has a big strengt over the sigma it has almost no chromatic at all the price for the sigma is a lot less sigma 1000 € zeiss 3000 €
There are better lenses than this one for the same price. sigma 85mm F1.4 sony FE F1.4 Tamron SP 85mm F1.8 D VC do we really need a F1.4 NO and how many pro photographers shoot at f1.4 the depth of field is so shallow to be practical, unless it's for a still object..
Haven't heard a Gooooooood Evening for a while! Good to hear it again! haha
Goooooooood eeevening...
its electronic Aperture on the EF version. the Nikon version is manual which makes it a common lens to adapt to a cinema camera
Yes! The creepy intro is back
Howdy Chris, thanks for the review.
I asked this question recently on the Canon EOS R5 review video, which was fantastic. That video is so old I don't think you saw my question over there. Re:Canon EOS R5. Did the Mechanical Shutter vertical blurring bug ever get addressed in subsequent firmware? If you shoot burst mode does it only affect the first exposure in the burst sequence or do all exposures in the burst suffer from vertical blur? Was it only with the 1/100th of a second shutter speed that you saw this bug?
I am about to fall into patreon... maybe next video, is kind of irrestible though ... "there are already videos waiting " OMG Greetings from Chile !!!
I'm having a blast making the exclusive videos to be honest :-)
I suspect that the weather sealing gaskets interfere with the smooth manual focus. The Milvus is weather sealed and the focus is much stiffer and less precise. Just use a good case and a lens storage cabinet.
I wanted you to review Nikon 180mm f/2.8 ed. I have used that lens once and image output was stunning. Since then I'm searching for a detained review.
Feel guilty asking, but are you planning to review that Sony 200-600mm lens any time soon? I only ask because I'm tempted to get one!
One of my friends has just bought one...I'll see if I can borrow it from him. I haven't had any luck yet in getting in touch with Sony's PR to borrow lenses directly from them
@@christopherfrost Thank you! It'll be ace to see how it compares to what Sigma offers, especially in regards to the price. :)
Ooooo Chris hit us with a treat today! 😃
Could the flaring test(s) be done indoors with an artificial light source, while all other lights are cut out? In a basement maybe even?
voigtländer 65mm f2 macro apo-lanthar test Please
Question: why are you using a Canon mount adaptor on a Canon mount Zeiss Otus? 🤔
Thank you Christopher! I just ordered the Samyang 85mm 1.2 based on build and picture quality. God bless!!!
i always wanted you to review the zeiss loxia 50mm f2 planar T it’s a manual focus lens and the reviews are kinda mixed online
Same, that's a lens I'm really interested in checking out
Isn't the Zeiss 55 Otus reputed to be the sharpest of the bunch?
It is
How close would you say the Samyang xp 85mm f1.2 measures to the Zeiss?
I recently did a review of the Samyang lens on a 45mp camera - check my channel
Does it have a chip? Does focus confirmation work on the camera? You say it's hard to use but it would be good to know why. You seem to only have the lenses you review for a short time and I'm not sure you get to the crux of what makes this special. Your understanding of image quality is predominantly passed on through technical parameters, which at this end of the market can be expected to be stellar. And as a pro-level lens, it should also get a thorough review as a studio lens.
Any chance you could explain what makes this (or other Zeiss) lens special? I recently bought a Zeiss on my Sony full frame for which I had a corresponding Sony GM. I took corresponding photos with the Zeiss and the GM - portraits, wildlife, interiors, then double-blind surveyed preferences to pairs of photos for each scene. In every case I and my friends/family picked the GM's rendering, or had no preference. Do folks have a brand loyalty to Zeiss, or are we truly missing something?
@@AdvayMengle A) yes, ofc ppl have brand loyalty to Zeiss, they're one of the most seminal lens mfrs in history.
B) Zeiss hasn't released a photography lens in years, and now they recently announced they're done in the space. GM's that were released after the Zeiss lenses, which is the vast majority of them, tend to be optically superior, yes... but it's not so simple, like that any GM will be better than any Zeiss.
so yes, your GM, depending on which one it is, is probably superior to w/e Zeiss you have. but w/out knowing which lenses, it's impossible to know. Zeiss made lenses like these, which are essentially perfect, w the price tag to match, and they made far cheaper lenses. The cheaper ones (I mean cheap-ish, now, used... most of them are wildly overpriced new now)for Sony e-mount weren't actually made by Zeiss, either, they were made by Sony and given a Zeiss badge. That's likely what you have, so yes, a GM is gonna be made after it, and use superior tech.
C) Zeiss does have a particular look across much of their line - the "3D pop," which is what ppl call microcontrast. they also made the Super Speeds, which are some of the most famous cine lenses of all time.
Next vidio review tokina 85mm f1.8 sony E maunt please🙏
Whens the new sony 50mm f1.2 coming? Want to see it compared to the canon 50mm f1.2
Bold claim about the universe considering your profession. Great intro
Amazing lens!!
Tha Gooood Evening was creepy! I thoutgh you would start reading a scary crepy pasta hahaha Love it.
You wanna scare me with that Gooooood eeeeveniiiingg
How does this compare to the Samyang 85mm f/1.2 manual focus lens?
Hey Chris! Have you ever thought to make the smartphone camera reviews using your very efficient testing process? Maybe some top camera oriented and overall flagship devices like for example iPhone 12 pro, Samsung s21, Huawei p40 etc?
Can you do the Classic Zeiss Planar T* 85 mm f/1.4? 😁
GOOOOD EBENING
What people call focus breathing is simply the law of optical physics at work. And bokeh balls round in the center and looking like cat eyes towards the edges of the frame are simply the result of the change of angle from the bokeh point to the optical axis.
Preventing focus breathing requires a zoom mechanism that compensates the changes of image angle caused by focusing and that mechanism should be precisely coupled to the focusing.
I don't understand the hype of cine lenses that have such a function, except it has a price and some people want to pay for it. Will it make for better storytelling images and storytelling movies?
That was an interesting "guuuuUUuuud evening" from you :D but now im confused... its after lunch here... aaaaaaa :D
Thanks for the review, Chris
I can see the 3d pop from the images produced by this lens. Maybe it's not the sharpest lens bit it definitely is the best 85mm
Still waiting for 24mm 1.4 GM :(
Nice lens. It creates beautiful photos and a gorgeous-looking model.
❤❤❤
I would much rather have the Zeiss 85mm 1.4 Planar. It is built like a tank and has so much character, is much smaller too
Video Classic Thanks
for that price you might as well get the Canon cinema CN-E 85mm T1.3 L lens, no focus breathing and cheaper
Chris
I have the Samyang 85mm1.4 at a affordable price. All my 20 camera lenses cost me less money than this lens alone.
I always though these lenses look a bit like the horn part of a soprano saxophone.
Thanks for the review. I have to say that the longitudinal CA is still visible on the Otus and doesn't actually look much better than the Canon RF85mm 1.2 (especially if that lens was also stopped down to f1.4). Maybe it looks better when you are lookig directly at the image (not through youtube). Cheers
Whooo the Patreon music is CGP Grey music...it’s making me want to...👆
Couldn't you use a really bright torch against the lens for flare testing?
With my lack of skills, I can make a $3500 lens look no better than a $100 kit lens :)
Zeiss could make a grand come-back with a revamped Otus! The "Otus II" with Auto focus, stabilized, weather sealed and if possible a shade lighter.
Zeiss need to upgrade their OTUS line, perhaps with better resolution for modern camera and autofocus?
32 views wow I'm early. Do you have plans to test the Zeiss Touit 12mm f/2.8?
Manual focus not easy to use? How do you think all the beautiful photographs got made before autofocus existed? Race cars, birds in flight, portraits, street photography, etc. If you still have memories of those times, then somebody making such a complaint triggers associations with the term "spoilt little brat".
Must be Milo's brother from another mother...
TOUCH THE LENS ELEMENT
What? 2014 was 7 years ago????? That's the most shocking info in this video
It was very interesting to see how Otus compares with modern lenses. My point RF 85 mm f/1.2 is better in every aspect. It’s brighter, sharper, got autofocus and what is most important - does not go with ugly notch-window :-)
The Otus has significantly less chromatic aberration.
To me, the Otus has way more pleasing Bokeh and contrast/colors.
@@heathwirt8919, you are probably right I can’t compare them head to head. I have RF 85L and I can tell CA are very low.
@@BlackSeries_, well I see that some color transitions are probably softer and more pleasing, but Canon is so razor sharp and comfortable to use
@@BlackSeries_ i have the both now. You can’t tell the difference
If I’m going to spend $4K on a prime, I’ll make sure it has a decent AF first, with an option to do manual AF, not the other way around(without AF option). But still, the Otus 1.4/85 bokeh is almost as dreamy as the RF1.2/85 DS and not quite as sharp in the corners. A “sharpest 85 f1.2-1.4” comparison soon, maybe?
That very video is coming :-)
MF only is a no go with todays AF system, especially on a R5/R6.
What happened to HOWDY AGAIN EVERYONE? :D
First! Now with patreon.
6:40 I can definitely see the top out of focus part is green-ish in color and the bottom is purple-ish in color.
What was that intro ???? hahahahhahahaha
Imagine paying 0.75 million rupees for a manual prime @f 1.8
It's an awesome lens, but the problem is there are shitton of amazing alternatives already and it's price is completely absurd. Considering that jawdropping RF 85/1.2 is around 1/3 cheaper says everything.
@jp jast 85 1.2 is better. No contest.
How many photos do you need to take with the kit lens before you can (successfully) convince the wife that this lens has a place in your camera bag?
He has an R5 so why wouldn’t he get an 85 f/1.2?
Tricky question. Not so few that she thinks you didn't get good value out of it...and not so many that you become really good with the kit lens and she questions your need for a better one ;-)
I’ll stick to my Sony 85/1.8 and it’s phenomenal sharpness, thank you very much. Good luck photographing faces at 1.4
With manual focus, I agree. With autofocus, 85mm 1.4 or even 1.2 is no big deal these days, even on moving subjects.
@@cooloox It will be impossible to get all parts of the face in focus at 1.4
@@Arcticfox7 only if you're close to the lens though right?
I'll stick with my Samyang 85mm f/1.4. Does what is asked. Paid $550. When I'm rich I'll consider one haha
Crazy ass prices, no AF, no weather sealing. Who's buying, studio heads?
I like your content, I've been watching for years now, but really that "what his the most perfect, no defect, most sharpest lens ever" kind of bother me, your are not the only reviewer how does this, but at least try to realize that this ever competing lens/camera contest just makes no sens.
Photography isn't about what is the most optically perfect lenses, or "which brands brags the most about their product", if everyone follows that trend you're will all just be market sellers and not photographers. You don't need a lens which has more lines per milimeters resolution that Hubble telescope, those are made by optics scientists who just care about performance, but photography isn't about performance, it's about art, expression, feelings.
Has a photographer, and young cinematographer, this whole state of mind just triggers me. I like lenses with character, with suddle (or sometimes strong) look, not like the Otus which is just a souless optical bloc made by technicians who measures sharpness instead of blur transition/falloff.
PS : For portraits a softer lens with beatifull bokeh are actually more suted than optical perfection. (like some old Zeiss Biotar for example) Otherwize your model better have a good skin condition or a nicer makeup.
You're correct but I'm still childishly interested in which really is the sharpest :-)
There are plenty of photographic uses for high performance lenses for which "art, expression, feelings" are less important, or even wholly unimportant.
Who is claiming the sharper the lens, the better the lens is for everyone? Chris is simply doing technical tests to see how different lenses compare OPTICALLY. You then get to choose which lens is best-suited for your needs, which may well be a soft lens.
I find it weird that you get upset with these kind of tests. It's as dumb as hating car reviewers measuring 0-100km/h acceleration times. Noone is claiming the fastest accelerating car is the best car, but most people are interested to see if car A out-accelerates car B. Especially comparing Ferrari with Lamborghini, for example.
I get the impression you have the lens being tested and you're embarrassed you paid so much and some cheaper lenses are now sharper.
@@cooloox The problem I'm talking isn't just the fact of comparing, but the trend that optical makers and reviewers have nowadays. The lens is the window to your artistic vision, and just wanting something by pure performance is just ridiculous for artistic needs, this isn't motorsports, it's a tool made for creativity, except that today no one seems to care.
As a young cinematographer I know full well how much the choice of a lens is important, and we have a very broad selection of lenses to choose from for our needs.
And their's a real care about the philosophy of each optic maker, and they make modern cine lenses to have a certain look, and not just everything perfect with no defect just because they can do it.
Of course, some series of optics are like that, like the Zeiss Master Prime, but to me making a perfect optical lens, is like making something with no soul. If you use filters at least that makes sense, but shooting just with that and no filters that's awful, it just look too seamless and impersonal, I want character and personality, otherwise if they continue to do that everyone would have the same look.
Well then there's the 85mm f1.4 Milvus that is almost as sharp but better bokeh. Very soft foreground.
For my taste, the "weather sealing" is too much an overrated subject ! I am an amateur photographer since 1965, and I had never ever any problems with this matter!
i have seens this lens the resolution and contast is little better in the sigma version, as chris has seen this correctly
however the zeiss has a big strengt over the sigma it has almost no chromatic at all
the price for the sigma is a lot less sigma 1000 € zeiss 3000 €
It still wipes out the competion.
There are better lenses than this one for the same price. sigma 85mm F1.4 sony FE F1.4 Tamron SP 85mm F1.8 D VC do we really need a F1.4 NO and how many pro photographers shoot at f1.4 the depth of field is so shallow to be practical, unless it's for a still object..
first