A number of you have asked why not compare to the Sony Zeiss 55/1.8. Fair question! Really, the 40/2 is closer to 35 in field of view, but the 55/1.8 is excellent - and less expensive than the other 50’s I mentioned. On the other hand, it’s even further away from the 40/2’s wider FOV. But if you really prefer 50, you can argue the 55/1.8 is the most jewel-like and best value of the 50-55 for E-Mount AF lenses out there.
A number of you have pointed out that the Batis 40mm f/2 does NOT shoot wide open at minimum focusing distance. I reached out to Zeiss, and today got this official statement on their firmware update for the lens. Thanks to those of you who brought this to my attention, as I did not pick this up while shooting with it. from Zeiss: "The ZEISS Batis 2/40 CF is our allrounder, it’s the perfect tool for ambitious photographers in a variety of situations. The versatility of the lens is also due to its close focus (CF): the ZEISS Batis 2/40 CF allows photographers to get incredibly close to the object they want to capture - the CF, i.e. the minimum distance between the object and camera sensor, measures just 24 centimeters. To ensure exceptional image quality at close range, the lens automatically stops down when it’s a short distance from the object. This ensures the ZEISS lens delivers the high contrast and resolution across the entire focus range that users have come to expect. In the image, automatic closing of the aperture may become visible in highlights within a blurred background (bokeh). At times, these will not appear perfectly round when focusing at close range. We are currently developing a software update that will allow us to work within a larger focus range with a wide-open aperture. The update will be available to download for free from the ZEISS website in early 2019. We will notify all registered customers via email. What are the benefits of the software update? Once you’ve installed the update, the ZEISS Batis 2/40 CF will only automatically stop down at preset aperture values between f/2 and f/2.5 at close range; in extreme cases (close focusing distance) to max. f/2.8. With a preset aperture value of f/2.8 and up, the aperture will remain unchanged across the entire focus range. Will I be able to achieve circular highlights in my photos after the software update? Automatic stopping down is required at short focus distances and with a wide-open aperture in order to meet the high ZEISS image quality standards while ensuring a compact and lightweight lens. The software update will mean highlights appear in an extended focus range round-shaped, fully up to close focusing distance is not possible. Does the lens only automatically stop down at full aperture, or at other aperture values too? How many f-stop intervals does this concern? Once you’ve installed the update, the ZEISS Batis 2/40 CF will only automatically stop down at preset aperture values between f/2 and f/2.5 at close range; in extreme cases (close focusing distance) to max. f/2.8. With a preset aperture value of f/2.8 and up, the aperture will remain unchanged across the entire focus range. At what object distance will the ZEISS Batis 2/40 CF automatically stop down? We are still developing the configuration of the software update. For this reason, we cannot provide any further details at the present time. What does automatic stopping down mean for the exposure measurement and the EXIF data of my camera? Will I get incorrect results? The camera performs exposure measurements correctly because the exposure time is calculated in line with the actual aperture. The exposure time is then saved to the photo’s EXIF data. The camera saves the aperture value as per the manual setting to the EXIF data, e.g. with a setting of f/2 on the camera, the EXIF data will also show an aperture value of f/2 regardless of the focus distance. When taking photographs at close range, will I be able to identify how open the aperture actually is? We are still developing the configuration of the software update. For this reason, we cannot give you any further details at the present time. I manually set the exposure (aperture, shutter speed, ISO). How can I achieve correct exposure in my photos at close range with the ZEISS Batis 2/40 CF? If you manually adjust the exposure settings, please take test shots to check whether the exposure is right for you. In some cases, when focusing at close range it may be necessary to set the exposure time up to one exposure step (+ 1EV) higher than usual. I use the ZEISS Batis 2/40 CF for filming. Will the aperture also close automatically in movie mode? The ZEISS Batis 2/40 CF behaves in the same way in movie and photo mode."
40mm is-or-was popular in cinematography. It is a fantastic length for portraits that place the subject in their environment as it is long enough to not be unflattering, but wide enough for a hint of cinematographic ‘bigness’. Of course it’s about the operator, but there is a certain magic about the 40mm look in the right situation.
Another comparison: ILCE-6500 w/ Sony-Zeiss 1.8/24mm Sonar. This gets to 1:3 magnification, has fantastic optics, nearly identical operating controls as the latest a7 products, and is significantly lighter to carry. FOV is that of 35mm in FF. Before I bought my ILCE-7M3 & used Loxia 2/35, the 6500 w/ 1.8/24 was my carry camera.
Batis lenses have a custom settings menu, just go into MF and turn focus ring beyond range- ccw gives you options to use the display in AF and cw gives the option to use metric/inch systems. Very interesting lens, but I own both 35mm- 1.4 and 2.8 so... It is very hard to justify.
the MFT options are Voigtländer: 17.5 or 25mm f/0.95 (so 35mm or 50mm f1.9 FF equiv) or mitakon 25mm f0.95 and there is one more I cannot remember right now (so 4 options as far as I know) but not the exact FOV like you said.... and manual.
A reasonable competitor to this lens (in the Sony lineup) is the Sony-Zeiss 35mm f2.8. It's not as fast or as tele, but as a walk-around lens, it tips in at a teensy 120g; that's M43 weight on a FF body!
Incorrect at 1:26, the OLED display can be switched on for both autofocus and manual focus from the lens menu. You need to rotate the ring anti-clockwise to get to the menu. ;)
I’ve got a 40mm F1.2 Voigtlander (M-mount) with TechArt Pro adapter for my Sony A7r3. I thing it’s a better choice for a one lens traveling light and beautiful images with wonderful bokeh. I have Sony 35/1.4, 50/1.4, 85/1.4 and 24-70/2.8 lens. But I better choose this combo for my traveling. The pictures I’ve got from this setup are wonderful.
Even though this is a year old, I’m leaving a comment about the Batis LED. You can have it on full time if you set it to manual the rotate the lens beyond 360degrees. The opposite direction changes from ft to meters.
I just ordered this lense for my Sony A7iii. I’m planning to use it for street and travel photography. Your review felt like it was done to reaffirm my decision which did not come easily. Thx for all of your work and for sharing your knowledge. I found you through AOP. Your and Ted’s site have provided some fabulous “artistic” insights missing on many other channels.
I picked the sigma art 50mm becauseit is overall much better. It is sharper, has better chromattic abberation control, better minimal focusing distance, better manual focus ring and faster aperature. It does only weight more and has a bit worse autofocus.
sony a6300/6500 and 30/1.4 sigma is a killer combination.. light and close focus too (30cm but at a 45mm fov) and the combination costs less than the 40mm batis :) just an option :)
Greg Thurtle GREAT point. We have an a6300 and a Sigma 30/1.4, but the Sigma is for our GH5. Only half the maximum magnification, though, for those who are interested.
This is a focal length I love having used a Rollei 35s fitted with a Zeiss 40mm f2.8 Sonnar all through the 80s; its why I bought a Voightlander 28mm f2 for my Leica TL2 giving a 40mm view. Alas it doesnt have the bite of my Leica 23mm Summicron-TL but, its still good. So to the Batis, I really have no interest in shallow DoF, what I care about is how the lens renders and on this you give no indication. I suspect its quite good as it has 9 elements which puts it inside my limit of 10 elements; above that the rendering goes soft. I need to have images so real that I feel I can walk around in them, I need hyper realism front to back. This is something that no lens reviwers give any information on. They are so full of bokeh and bokeh balls that you never get any indication of what the image actually looks like. Any fast lens will deliver shallow DoF, its about as special a lens property as the colour of the focus ring. Very few will render an image with conviction. Here you are talking about Leica, Zeiss, Voightlander, Panasonic, Olympus and older Nikkors (I use a D700 with a 35mm f2D). This video by the Japan street photographer using a D3 (same sensor and processor as my D700) and a Voightlander 40mm f2. will give you some idea of what I am talking about; this is hyper realism - winks ruclips.net/video/JQIdhKkf-E4/видео.html
It is interesting but I can and, i think, so can you, if you stand back and look. I can see the difference even in the thumbnails in my folders between the images from my Leica X113 23mm f1.7 Summilux and recent Nikon G glass; which is why I no longer have any Nikon made after 2010. I have seen this quality in the Zeiss 35mm f2.8 in RUclips videos but, I have never seen it in any of the images from the D850 with G glass even though I have downloaded raw files. The fact is people test these lenses wide open which essentially snuffs out the resolving power of any lens; you cant get 3D pop from an image 2inches deep. But, these high glass lenses are designed to be used wide open, stop them down and they are dead. Really the best lenses dont have much glass but that is expensive to make because they have to be crafted with some care; the Leica 50mm f0.95 Noctilux is the bench mark of a high quality fast lens with 7 elements but gosh it costs $12Grand. You wont see this effect on a 20 element Olympus Pro lens which produces a very dead flat image but the Premium f1.8 low glass lenses are dripping in microtones. Fast lenses that resolve are not cheap, the prosumer models are lifeless. So yes you can see it in low resolution images as its not a resolution or sharpness thing, its the atmosphere and presence that the lens produces in an image. The images just look alive ;-)
Why, in the context of "things functionally similar to this", pair the X-T3 to the 16-55 f/2.8 instead of one of the two 23mm? the f/1.4 even gives you a similar max DOF, and the f/2 maximizes portability with impeccable IQ (I have it and I love it)
Ariel Kanterewicz I actually have the 23 and 35, but the 16-55 is tastier, is all of $999, gives more options, and has better, newer AF. But I take your point. Thanks for weighing in.
Agreed, Ariel...I have that combo (X-T3 and XF16-55 f/2.8) and love it for it's superb image quality (sharpness and detail rendition), along with very fast AF, build quality (both weather-sealed) and overall ergonomics!
no mention of an aps-c camera with the sigma 30 1.4 in the mix of comparison..... i only throw it in there as i'm still torn whether to jump to full frame or wait and see the next gen of aps-c a7000 (or other) and lens combinations to save weight for travel and street
I have the Tamron, I think if your work is any kind of professional work where you get different types of assigments, like one day event, then fashion, then some wedding then its that base do it all lens. Anything else that you add to that will be specialised about your need. Like the 16-35 f2.8 or 4, new gmaster 24 or 40 f2 or even the 85 1.8
Anh Ty Pham Huynh Hello Norway! They are BOTH GREAT lenses in terms of IQ and weather/dust resistance. The Sony is smaller and less expensive so I think it comes down to budget and personal preference for field of view and max magnification. The differences are otherwise small (check out lens rentals.com MTF testing as well). I don’t know that there is much difference in copy to copy variation, either - though if any of you know differently, please weigh in.
So the image quality is relative the same? :) soo hard to decide. I have a 24mm1.4 and 55mf1.8 Is it true with the «3D» picture and better colour you Get from zeiss?
Thank you so much for your review!! I just switched to Sony from Olympus (actually have both still) and I was looking for a travel / street lens for my Sony A7III ... i recently bought the Batís 85mm... will tell you how it goes!! Cheers, Raul
So my pre-order has been shipped but due to the snow storm at the end of the week I don't have it just yet. I am really interested even though now that it is out some have raised issues about its Eye-AF precision. It will be a wait and see. I do have other lenses that compete in this focal range on the Sony but if it works out like I hope I can let some of those go. I admit I am a Batis fan so far owning the other four AF ones. This family of AF primes meet my original goal of having a FF mirrorless that is smaller and lighter than my DSLR setup. The think is you can have both smaller and lighter lenses and fast and heavy lenses on the same system. For me both are needed so I win with the flexibility it provides. Don't have to be in only one camp can move back and forth between the two.
Mr. B, I have two questions you can’t possibly really answer but I’m going to ask anyway. Is Sony going to release either a 35 mm or 50 mm G master in the next three years? The second being if you had to choose between the only two lenses on earth with one being the one you just reviewed here and the second being the 35mm Sony Zeiss 1.4 you mentioned in the review and I did not care one whit about weight, which would you choose? PS please UPS me some Anthony’s pizza from Malvern to Austin Texas please
@@MaximeDesessard Setting aside the additional control over DOF, I'm simply more familiar with and tend to think in terms of either a 35 or 50mm field of view.
A number of you have asked why I look so red in this video. All I can tell you is that RUclips processing significantly altered the color that I saw on my 2018 5K Retina 27” iMac, which actually looks great. Maybe the X-T3 is new to them.
This monitor is only capable of displaying 78% of the Adobe RGB color space. In addition there is NO sRGB emulation or display mode. It´s the worst Apple you can buy for Photo. Newflash: The Web is sRGB. NOT aRGB, nor DCI-P3 (base calibration of this monitor). Thats why for everyone it´s RED, just for the blind man its fine :) Suggestions: get a X-Rite ColorChecker. Profile your monitor, printer AND cam.
Sedthawit Tangsumpant I’d be delighted to have either one - I think it depends on what you already have ; how you see; and what you shoot. I tend to see in 35 rather than 40mm field of view. I already own a 50. For these two reasons, I’d lean toward the 35/1.8. OTOH, if street is your thing and you could afford only one, to my surprise I’d lean toward the 40 - unless you’d bypass a 50 in any case and budget were very tight, at which point I’d swing back toward the 35. As I recall, it’s smaller too. For years (just to make it more complicated), I’d have bypassed both focal lengths since I’m such a 50 prime kinda guy - and go straight to a fast 24 - like the G-Master 24/1.4. If you shoot video, I’d look closely at physical CA correction, because software correction (especially longitudinal CA) cannot be easily corrected in post, but I don’t recall which one did best for that.
@@3BMEP Thank you for your reply. Currently I have Sigma 35 f1.4 Art and Sony Zeiss 55 f1.8. However, I found that sometimes the 35 Art is too heavy and large to fit in my daily bag. So I was thinking of having the 35 f1.8. However, the Batis 40 is really interesting as it have a better magnification ratio (but the size is larger). I'm leaning toward the 35 more. I would really like your comment on the color reproduction comparison between these two lens. I have heard so much about the Zeiss 3D pop, but cannot really tell the difference myself. Cheers.
Thoughts on the 40mm vs. The 35 distagon? I have the 35 1.4 but dont find i use the 1.4 since I shoot fashion. I have the 25mm batis and use it in super 35 mode for the 35ish focal legnth when I dont need the megapixels. So...what do you think?
Sean O'Neill apples vs... apples. If you have one, no need for the other - both are great. I shoot wide open often, so I might have a very slight preference for the Distagon. But that’s just me.
Hugh- when you mention “greater distortion you get at 40mm”, I’m thinking alot of the distortion you’re getting is due to it being a Distagon lens. Distagon are notorious for pronounced curved field curvature and distortions are very difficult to correct in the Distagon design, requiring complex elements(see link in following post).
Here’s the link to a great article that breaks down Zeiss lens designs (and includes links to H.H. Nasse’s technical articles): ilovehatephoto.com/2014/12/30/a-guide-to-optical-lens-design-and-zeiss-nomenclature/
Also worth noting is the size and weight of this is also due mostly to being a Distagon design. Compare the size to say, the (delightful) Pentax 43/1.9, or the Canon & Pentax 40mm 2.8. Or...any other 40mm (though there aren’t many AF 40’s in existence).
I looked at my EXIF data at my closest focusing shots (wish it would include distance, too, but alas...). Anyway, at closest focusing I could see, aperture was f/2.2.
Just want to take a moment to say how important sound and composition is. I sat here with this video in full-screen mode on a 27" iMac and watched the whole thing from start to finish, totally engaged. Great video. The sound quality, your voice, and the content was fantastic. Really would've appreciated some more sample images, but it's a small point. I'm not sure why but people spend far more time on the video side of this lens than on the photographic side of it. Thank you for your insight!
And if you can bear F:2.8 as maximum aperture then Fuji offers a 27mm compact lens for APSC and Canon offers the EF 40mm STM for full frame for the same field of view.
Hi Edwin. FYI, MAny years back, I dabbled in m4/3, and used the superb Panny 20mm f/1.7 on a G1. It was fantastic! Super-sharp, compact, and fast AF. However, I moved on to the Fujifilm X-System when I found that poster-size enlargments from the m4/3 system just didn't hold onto as much detail as I'd have liked. The Fujifilm APS-C X-System of cameras and lenses seemed to do a bit better in that department. (If I didn't have need for extreme enlargement, I likely would have stayed with m4/3. Have fun!
not sure you all notice that the aperture change roughly to f4 when close focus. this is crazy, not sure whether is zeiss releasing new firmware to resolve this issue and so disappointed as this is zeiss product.
I do mostly video with some ocasional photo shooting. Well, for my company I normally need to bring both: video and photo. My job is about shooting workshops and people learning things, that means, closed up images of their hands working, portraits and landscapes. I am ready to move from my old canon 5DII to Sony, this is a fact... But I am considering to get rid of all my Canon 24-105 F4, Carl Zeiss Contax lenses (35,50,135) with canon adaptors, Leica 50 F2 Summicrom Canada, flashes, filters and all my Hasselblad 503CX and Carl Zeiss Sonnar 85... just for buying a Sony A7SII (or maybe the upcoming one) plus this Zeiss Batis 40mm... i just don't want to carry more stuff and I already experienced for years manual prime lenses are not very agile for documentary video shootings... Considering I am getting rid of years of collected gear... does it make sense this exchange? Will I be able to do my job with just this lenses and a Sony camera? would you guys consider I should keep any of this gear to complete the Batis/Sony set? Thanks!
mariano galan please tell me you’d make a pile of profit on the sale of all that gear! The first question: when was the last time you used each piece of gear you’re contemplating selling? Second: When you did, how important was it to your client’s satisfaction?
@@3BMEP Thank you very much for replying! Well, the reason to change my gear is because I still shoot RAW videos on Magic Lantern with 5D. Converting all this footage takes ages and this brings me to the Sony system. I use my Canon on regular basis combining all the CZ Contax and Leica lenses, but I always miss situations or I ask people to repeat the scene because my lenses were out of focus or I am changing to another one. To be honest, now that I get older I miss autofocus and traveling ligthter. My photo trips are also a nightmare, carrying so much heavy stuff. My Leica Summicrom 50 R is my favourite lenses for video, but for travel photography... I miss many situations again with the manual focus thing. Plus they are not stabilized, so many shots are shaky. My Hasselblad? Love it as an artifact, but I shoot films that I never develop or scan afterwards. Maybe it's time to be honest to myself and recognize I am never going to use it for a professional project. Profit? My plan is trying to sell it for the same price of a Sony Alpha+All rounder Zeiss lenses. I am not sure I will make profit, probably reasonable even to what I paid all over the years. That's why I am asking if the quality and all-round features of Batis are good enough in order to get rid of my stuff. thanks! I am my own client, I produce stories for a website so I don't have a client side pressure, the reason of this change would be for agile shootings keeping the current quality :)
I have the Batis 18mm and 25mm. I love them but honestly want a 1.4 lens and like 35mm lenses. I just ordered a Sony Zeiss Distagon 35mm 1.4 used and am waiting on it to see if it's a good copy. Do you feel that the 40mm would replace the 35mm or do you feel that it does not isolate the subject as well given that it's a F2? What about for portraits? Does the 40mm make that much difference in terms of creating more flattering portraits (less distortion for close ups)?
brandon jourdan I actually prefer the 35/1.4, as a I think I said. ;) DOF is the issue. Neither will be flattering for portrait unless you back away, and the differences in perspective distortion are small.
Thanks for the reply! This is what I thought. I've looked at lots of sample photos with the Batis and while nice, I still went ahead with ordering the 35mm 1.4 Sony Zeiss.
I have the tiny Voigtlander 40mm F1.4 on my X-T2 all the time, I have the B&W single coated version. After a while muscle memory takes over and freaking out about auto focus speed fades away. Yes I miss a few shots but I think the overall results are stellar. Jonas Rask has a great blog on this lens. It also works a treat on my film Leica CL.
I loved the Voigtlander Noktons a couple of years ago on a GH4, and a number of folks have mentioned them again right here. So I guess I need to get a couple in house and play with them, this time on another camera I have in hand at the moment. Hold that thought. At least for another week or two. ;)
Thank-you. Exactly the summary I was looking for. Do you you think that the low-light performance of the A7III/Batis F2 will match or exceed my older A6000/Sony 35 F1.8 OSS Combo? Which I mainly use for portraits of winemakers in their cellars where the 50mm equivalent is occaisionally restrictive/too long. Thanks again...
Is the manual focus pulling good (steady-speed) enough for shooting video? Put it this way, is it as good as the latest generation G or GM lens's manual focus performance (which i think that's good enough)? Thank you.
since when are fly by wire lenses like the GM good for pulling focus? get yourself a cinema lens if you're a filmmaker. The Batis looks like an incredible value.
meh i'm pretty happy with my ef-m 22mmf2 stm pancake lens on my Canon M50, now that's a light, sharp and very cheap deal! There an ef-m 32mm f1.4 that just came out also which I might get if I don't get an upcoming speedbooster from Viltrox to use with my 50mm 1.8 stm and 85mm 1.8. The speedbooster will make these cheap lens faster (1.4) and almost full frame field of view without break the bank or my back.
I know this is a stale thread. Just my thoughts. I'm going to rent one of these. I know I don't need the lens to get great shots on my A7ii, and I have a G9 with the PL 12-60. A good photog could capture amazing images / make stunning pictures with this lens or any lens etc etc. It's the industrial design, the dedication to manufacturing to high tolerances, the look and feel that attracts me. Good Lenses won't get any cheaper, and the hobby (I'm amateur) depends so much on glass. Buy cheap, buy again. Buy something like this product, and just have it for life. I'll rent it, see how it feels, how it looks, and try to take a photo or two that are worthy of the lens, and then try to find a decent used one. Maybe. I've been thinking about this a lot lately, Lens before Body I mean. If you happen to read this and have time for a quick response..If you were to start from scratch in photography, and money were no object, what lens would you buy? One lens only, although a good ecosystem is important, as an amateur I feel too many focal lengths get confusing and prevent growth in composition. The 12-60 PL on my G9, most of the time, is taped at 35 or 40mm EFL. I'm trying to get a sense for how to frame a subject(s) properly with a normal focal length. It's not that I don't use wide lens or tele, for sports I have to, but for everyday shots, planned events etc, I want no distractions from zoom. In a pinch the electrical tape can come off of course, but I'm making every effort to stay at 35 or 40. I actually ordered a plastic chinese 35mm lens for my A7ii, and when it arrives it will be glued to the body while I learn that focal length and determine if I want to shoot at it for the next 20 years. If I make that decision, I may buy the Batis 40. May. Hence the question, if starting from scratch at 35 or 40mm, what lens would you buy? What mount? So far I am leaning toward A7riii and Batis 40.
Brandon Mount a7R IV and Batis 40 of money were no object, although new Sony 35/1.8 is great. Nikon Z7 with Nikkor Z 50/1.8 is also great. Panasonic S1R with Leica Summicron SL 35 or 50....
Thank you for the excellent review. After many years as a Canon shooter it's time to upgrade. I held out to see the Canon mirrorless offering but I'm just not convinced. My main interest is low light street and I'm torn between the Sony A7iii with the Batis and the Fuji xt3 with the 16-55mm which might deliver similar performance for a much lower financial outlay - any thoughts gratefully received.
Mark Adams Thanks. If you don’t need IBIS, the Fuji combo will get you close, though the full frame Sony will still outperform the X-T3 at the margin. If you shoot at 12800 or lower, you should be fine - though again IBIS will help even for stills. But the price differential is a compelling argument in the Fuji’s favor.
Hugh - many thanks for the reply. Compelling arguments to ponder both financially and in terms of IBIS. Sometimes you might just have to pay for your art, and maybe an X-H1!
Hi Mark. I have the X-T3 with XF16-55 (and vertical grip), and can certainly vouch for Hugh's comments. That combo is stellar for my type of work (landscape, product, and some street/travel). I really don't miss IBIS, because I don't shoot video, plus, 98% of my work is tripod-mounted, hence IBIS is irrelevant. In terms of sheer image quality (sharpness, detail rendition, dynamic range, etc.), this combination is stellar, and IMHO, equal to FF for all but extreme low light conditions. The other Fujinon XF lenses are mostly all superb as well. If you want to really go light for street, the X-T3 sans grip, plus the XF23 f/2 is a superb combination!! Super light, Super-sharp (from f/4 onward), super fast AF! If interested, contact me at ss.mba@verizon.net, and I can direct you to some sample jpegs taken with that gear. In short, the X-T3 is the best, most robust camera I've used in 40 years of photography! Good luck!
Was wondering if you were going to touch on the photowalk. So sorry that I missed it. Was really looking forward to it, but something came up last minute. Hopefully you'll do another. -- There was a Leica B&H photowalk that I missed the next day too. **sighs**
Given that most of the A7(s/r) shooters have the Sony Zeiss 55 1.8 which is cheaper and lighter and just as capable - is it worth getting the 40/2? I understand that the min. focusing distance is great but its 1300 bucks and very very close focally.... I guess what Im saying is - give me an excuse not to buy this lens
Hah! I'd say (what I'd do if I were in your shoes, so this is just me and what and how I shoot): get the new 24/1.4 G-Master instead. Good enough excuse? ;)
Hugh, I love your approach to gear reviews...much more "Philosophical" than others that I've seen...As a photography and gear fanatic, I read/view many reviews, though admittedly, I'm currently a Fujifilm X-System user. I do respect Zeiss of course, which is the only reason I enjoy reviews of their gear (excuse me, but not so for Sony, except their sensors). I find that the X-T3/X-Pro2, combined with the stellar Fujinon XF lenses, gives me results that rival FF and even approach medium format in image sharpness and detail rendition (especially when utilizing good technque, optimum apertures, a solid tripod, and focus stacking!). Regarding your comment about being unable to achieve quite the same shallow DOF when using APS-C, I respectfully offer a different opinion...Any one of my XF f/2 lenses, when used at appropriate lens-to-subject distances, can achieve quite shallow DOF indeed. That said, as a landscape and product photographer, I rarely shoot wide open, as I usually desire maximum sharpness and detail throughout my images (foreground to background). Anyway, thanks again for your excellent "take" on the wonderful Zeiss Batis 40.
Steve TQP Steve, welcome. You make great points. We have been a crop sensor shop now for three or four years. f/2 on an APS-C camera is just about f/3, and that’s more than enough for most situations. With this said, there have been a few times when I’ve wished for a 1.2 or even 1.0 - but agreed, that’s been far or few between. :)
Thank you sir! Yes, as a landscape and product photographer, and admitted "sharpness fanatic", I'm quite pleased with the results I achieve with Fuji X-System...largely because of their stellar Fujinon lenses! (Back in the '70's I shot 35mm and large format, using Nikkor, Rodenstock, Schneider and Fujinon optics, which is how I came to know that Fuji makes awesome glass.) If you'd like to see some of my work, please email me at ss.mba@verizon.net, and I'd be happy to share sample images. Regards, Steve
I recently bought a 25mm batis trusting that it would not have distortion due to the quality of the zeiss glass, tremendous lie because I felt cheated, in reality there is distortion, I would have preferred a 40mm batis a thousand times, because it is just the combination of the best between 35mm and 50mm, however the intention with my batis was to capture more the environment with models and interiors, it turns out that it is also not useful for portraiture due to its constant deformation and that is too disappointing to me. how much I regret not having bought the 40mm batis :(
What is it about the image quality of the Black Magic Pocket Cinema Camera 4k? Is it the raw recording? Is it the color science? Its so beautiful. Woops wrong subject matter for a comment on this excellent review. Still for video work is there an argument for ultimate video image quality ultimately mattering above all other considerations? I watched The Sacrifice the other day and still haven't recovered from the astonishing cinematography of Sven Nyqvist. Video image quality seems such a different animal from its stills counterpart. Do I want to a really good functional workhorse of a true hybrid camera or a somewhat compromised video gem. Sorry...can't help it as its camera purchase decision time, and I am so stuck!
starky497 I feel your pain. As for us, we simply aren’t aiming that high for the work we do, so 8 bit 4:2:0 and the price, ease of use and form factor of hybrids rule the day.
This thing is such a performer, the minimum focus distance and weight really are surprising, particularly when compared to the Sigma 50 1.4 A as you mentioned - that thing is a heavy, hefty giant. Also wow, there's a red shift and softness in this video compared to the older ones, did you go back the Canon way? :') (fwiw I really enjoyed the more orange light, curious what's caused the change in look)
Fuji X-T3 with 16-55/2.8 AWB. :) Testing it out. As for softness - are you seeing this in 4K? It is crispy! Also, YT is doing something during processing which is definitely turning it redder than on my 5K Retina 27" screen. Sigh. Just noticed it.
@@3BMEP Usually watching on 1080, mostly noticing your individual hairs being less pronounced than usual (must admit, that's kind of became a trademark of yours to me). Perhaps knock the AWB a step or two into the orange direction for video and see if that matches your usual colour profile better? To be clear, the image looks brilliant, just doesn't have quite that air that I've gotten used to. Audio might be just a tad noisier also? But I'm not using headphones right now, so I wouldn't take a bet on that. And yeah, RUclips reprocessing rarely does anyone any favours.. nasty but, sadly required, step in the workflow.
The video is sharp and crisp in 4k, youtube is doing some youtube thing in 1080p though. Next to the different skintones (other than the outro), i notice something like a chirping every other second while you're talking. Slightly louder than your mics noise floor.
@@JennyDarukat vis a vis audio: I DEFINITELy rushed to get this out, so you got me. :) Don't get me started on my hair. Or Sophie's (our golden retriever).
This is by far one of the best video reviews I've ever seen. I watched the whole video. Fully engaged. The way you explain is great. Simple and straight to the point. I really like it because it seems like you just share your thoughts as they come out of your head. This shows experience. Congrats. And I'll check the patreon soon. ✌️
Nice Im a little poorer and using an older manual zeiss 35 1.4 adapted from contax I see many if the same strengths in this new lens! Also Light weight! If it only was 699 lol For a manual guy im staying with my current distagon but If i was shooting any tyoe of event or prefered af This lens looks uber wonderful!!
You seems to have no idea that 40mm is closer to 'normal' human eyes FOV than 35mm or 50mm. That's the reason why I always please when manufacture starts filling this gap.
Hi there, and thanks for another wonderful video. I own the batis 85 for my A7M1 and loving it, hence I was pretty excited bout that 40mm. Now I'm a bit torn though between this lense and a combo of the sony zeiss 55mm and the newly to be released 35mm 1.8. Any thoughts? PS: I'm a sucker for odd vocal lengths. :D
That 35 with one of the sharpest and best standards around is compelling - but the 40 could substitute for both for less money, and might therefore be better for you given your... predilections. 😊 I’m a bit more traditional, so I might go for the two lens setup if the budget were available. If you shoot video, however: be forewarned: the 55 focus breathes like a bull in heat. 😎
@@3BMEP thanks so much for your quick reply. Getting both the 55 and the 35 comes out pretty close to the Batis, given the current cashback for the 55. Only thing is, do I want to carry two except one lense I guess. But if from your experience the sharpness of the 35mm wins (I owned the 55 before and remember it being pretty spot on) that might just be my answer right there. I'm more into stills but start a little video here and there, private only so the bull breath should be fine. Thanks again, I really do appreciate you taking the time a lot.
The close focus just isn’t that impressive in my opinion. Both my 70-300 and 24-105 focus as close so it doesn’t really add to my kit. If it perhaps focused 1:2 it might have been more interesting. I’d rather the rokinon 35 f1.4 FE and save a lot of money.
Josh You’re right - both lenses get to about the same magnification. And they give you options the 40/2 doesn’t. But it doesn’t weigh as much, either. Different tools for different use cases...
@@3BMEP It might be the American pronunciation then, here is a video from Zeiss ruclips.net/video/l4x_xz6mRIg/видео.html the announcer sounds American but pronounces Batis correctly, same as the German Dr.. Cheers.
This is the video to which my bud directed me, specifying the 23 second mark as the correct pronunciation ruclips.net/video/pgL0-cz-KqA/видео.html. But with this written, I note that the person on camera uses a different pronunciation later in the video, and in any event my Zeiss bud said they're fine with multiple pronunciations.
@@3BMEP No worries. Apart from that, I enjoyed the video as it answered several questions I had. The bottom line, I got the lens yesterday and is excellent. I believe my Loxia 50mm will stay at home for a while lol
Some wrong information here!, the lens is f2 but at close focus distance, the aperture lens closes smaller (looks like f4 to me). I really think that Zeiss doesn’t make any magic, they just lied to us, it’s such a bad business practice, from my test, you definitely lose light for close focusing. It’s never a good idea to watch a review and buy a lens. I hope you take a deeper look at this lens and inform your audience
TT Smasher Others have mentioned the Philip Bloom post, and while I no longer have the eval unit, I did check my EXIF data for close focused shots and saw f/2.2. I’ll check in with Zeiss.
Hold that thought while you consider the 40mm f2 Voightlander at 260g. Exceptionally small and well made with amazing optics (albeit for those who don't mind focusing). I shoot interiors and architecture and use it all the time (www.vicwahbyphotography.com) on my Nikon FF cameras. It's also half the price of the Batis "No-Brainer." What do you think?
Oh yes. I promise you it's a winner. Among my favorite, and I own 10 lenses. Especially low distortion too, which is always a primary consideration in interior / architectural photography.
![Blox Fruits Dragon Rework Update [Full Stream]](http://i.ytimg.com/vi/EqDAp8udhm0/mqdefault.jpg)
I just realized that I say “Leica CL” beginning around the 5 or 6 minute mark when clearly I meant Leica Q. Sigh.
A number of you have asked why not compare to the Sony Zeiss 55/1.8. Fair question! Really, the 40/2 is closer to 35 in field of view, but the 55/1.8 is excellent - and less expensive than the other 50’s I mentioned. On the other hand, it’s even further away from the 40/2’s wider FOV. But if you really prefer 50, you can argue the 55/1.8 is the most jewel-like and best value of the 50-55 for E-Mount AF lenses out there.
A number of you have pointed out that the Batis 40mm f/2 does NOT shoot wide open at minimum focusing distance. I reached out to Zeiss, and today got this official statement on their firmware update for the lens. Thanks to those of you who brought this to my attention, as I did not pick this up while shooting with it.
from Zeiss:
"The ZEISS Batis 2/40 CF is our allrounder, it’s the perfect tool for ambitious photographers in a variety of situations. The versatility of the lens is also due to its close focus (CF): the ZEISS Batis 2/40 CF allows photographers to get incredibly close to the object they want to capture - the CF, i.e. the minimum distance between the object and camera sensor, measures just 24 centimeters.
To ensure exceptional image quality at close range, the lens automatically stops down when it’s a short distance from the object. This ensures the ZEISS lens delivers the high contrast and resolution across the entire focus range that users have come to expect.
In the image, automatic closing of the aperture may become visible in highlights within a blurred background (bokeh). At times, these will not appear perfectly round when focusing at close range.
We are currently developing a software update that will allow us to work within a larger focus range with a wide-open aperture. The update will be available to download for free from the ZEISS website in early 2019. We will notify all registered customers via email.
What are the benefits of the software update?
Once you’ve installed the update, the ZEISS Batis 2/40 CF will only automatically stop down at preset aperture values between f/2 and f/2.5 at close range; in extreme cases (close focusing distance) to max. f/2.8. With a preset aperture value of f/2.8 and up, the aperture will remain unchanged across the entire focus range.
Will I be able to achieve circular highlights in my photos after the software update?
Automatic stopping down is required at short focus distances and with a wide-open aperture in order to meet the high ZEISS image quality standards while ensuring a compact and lightweight lens. The software update will mean highlights appear in an extended focus range round-shaped, fully up to close focusing distance is not possible.
Does the lens only automatically stop down at full aperture, or at other aperture values too? How many f-stop intervals does this concern?
Once you’ve installed the update, the ZEISS Batis 2/40 CF will only automatically stop down at preset aperture values between f/2 and f/2.5 at close range; in extreme cases (close focusing distance) to max. f/2.8. With a preset aperture value of f/2.8 and up, the aperture will remain unchanged across the entire focus range.
At what object distance will the ZEISS Batis 2/40 CF automatically stop down?
We are still developing the configuration of the software update. For this reason, we cannot provide any further details at the present time.
What does automatic stopping down mean for the exposure measurement and the EXIF data of my camera? Will I get incorrect results?
The camera performs exposure measurements correctly because the exposure time is calculated in line with the actual aperture. The exposure time is then saved to the photo’s EXIF data.
The camera saves the aperture value as per the manual setting to the EXIF data, e.g. with a setting of f/2 on the camera, the EXIF data will also show an aperture value of f/2 regardless of the focus distance.
When taking photographs at close range, will I be able to identify how open the aperture actually is?
We are still developing the configuration of the software update. For this reason, we cannot give you any further details at the present time.
I manually set the exposure (aperture, shutter speed, ISO). How can I achieve correct exposure in my photos at close range with the ZEISS Batis 2/40 CF?
If you manually adjust the exposure settings, please take test shots to check whether the exposure is right for you. In some cases, when focusing at close range it may be necessary to set the exposure time up to one exposure step (+ 1EV) higher than usual.
I use the ZEISS Batis 2/40 CF for filming. Will the aperture also close automatically in movie mode?
The ZEISS Batis 2/40 CF behaves in the same way in movie and photo mode."
40mm is-or-was popular in cinematography. It is a fantastic length for portraits that place the subject in their environment as it is long enough to not be unflattering, but wide enough for a hint of cinematographic ‘bigness’. Of course it’s about the operator, but there is a certain magic about the 40mm look in the right situation.
Joel Webster Great input!
Another comparison: ILCE-6500 w/ Sony-Zeiss 1.8/24mm Sonar. This gets to 1:3 magnification, has fantastic optics, nearly identical operating controls as the latest a7 products, and is significantly lighter to carry. FOV is that of 35mm in FF. Before I bought my ILCE-7M3 & used Loxia 2/35, the 6500 w/ 1.8/24 was my carry camera.
I love the richness of ideas here! Thank you!
wow same exact thought! A7R3 + B40 is my dream travel setup
So elegant, both the lens and the video!
Batis lenses have a custom settings menu, just go into MF and turn focus ring beyond range- ccw gives you options to use the display in AF and cw gives the option to use metric/inch systems.
Very interesting lens, but I own both 35mm- 1.4 and 2.8 so... It is very hard to justify.
Rafał I great input - thanks!
the MFT options are Voigtländer: 17.5 or 25mm f/0.95 (so 35mm or 50mm f1.9 FF equiv) or mitakon 25mm f0.95 and there is one more I cannot remember right now (so 4 options as far as I know) but not the exact FOV like you said.... and manual.
Guy Rabinovich Just so. I love the Noktons.
A reasonable competitor to this lens (in the Sony lineup) is the Sony-Zeiss 35mm f2.8. It's not as fast or as tele, but as a walk-around lens, it tips in at a teensy 120g; that's M43 weight on a FF body!
MegaNardman Wow - sure is!
I overlooked that one. That little guy looks like a steal.
I comparison between those two would be great
@Foto4Max Have you used this combo? How do you like it?
Incorrect at 1:26, the OLED display can be switched on for both autofocus and manual focus from the lens menu. You need to rotate the ring anti-clockwise to get to the menu. ;)
Lone Explorer Thanks - you’re the second person to let me know. I love this community!
I’ve got a 40mm F1.2 Voigtlander (M-mount) with TechArt Pro adapter for my Sony A7r3.
I thing it’s a better choice for a one lens traveling light and beautiful images with wonderful bokeh.
I have Sony 35/1.4, 50/1.4, 85/1.4 and 24-70/2.8 lens. But I better choose this combo for my traveling.
The pictures I’ve got from this setup are wonderful.
Even though this is a year old, I’m leaving a comment about the Batis LED. You can have it on full time if you set it to manual the rotate the lens beyond 360degrees. The opposite direction changes from ft to meters.
Thanks!
I have the Zeiss Batis 40mm. How do I get my street images to look like that, I mean the colors? Even though Zeiss color is amazing.
You sound like a radio personality.
I just ordered this lense for my Sony A7iii. I’m planning to use it for street and travel photography. Your review felt like it was done to reaffirm my decision which did not come easily. Thx for all of your work and for sharing your knowledge. I found you through AOP. Your and Ted’s site have provided some fabulous “artistic” insights missing on many other channels.
Pam & Mike Williams Ted is great! Glad to be of service - and welcome!
Gustavo Ibarra I only had a loaner!
After I buy the 24mm 1.4, this will be next one on my list.
Sigma 35mm 1.4 is a better option for value and optics..
Thanks for ur views on this lens..
Maybe samyang, too
I don’t think the Sigma lens will autofocus as reliably as a fully native lens.
@@harveylouis445 you win some, you lose some..
Sigma is 400$ cheaper with amazing IQ,
although its heavier and AF is slow by 10%..
@@KevinZJR Sigma art series is reliable to me.. Not sure of Samyang
I can listen to you talk all day. You’ve just earned a sub.
Javed White Welcome!
A9 + 55mm f1.8 is my no-brainer combo
Danny Hsu it is an excellent combo!
I picked the sigma art 50mm becauseit is overall much better.
It is sharper, has better chromattic abberation control, better minimal focusing distance, better manual focus ring and faster aperature.
It does only weight more and has a bit worse autofocus.
daniel salahi It’s not sharper. They basically have the same sharpness.
I really like the focal length and the light weight. Expensive though. My other choice would be the Voigtlander 40mm f1.2.
Pavlos Papageorgiou you have company!
Just got the Voigtlander 40mm f1.2 a wk back using with a7iii
George Elsasser let me know how you guys like your glass!
@@yeshedorje175 I have the 40/1.2 right now. Stay tuned!
Sony cameras are good at auto focus. Should better use auto lenses.
sony a6300/6500 and 30/1.4 sigma is a killer combination.. light and close focus too (30cm but at a 45mm fov) and the combination costs less than the 40mm batis :)
just an option :)
Greg Thurtle GREAT point. We have an a6300 and a Sigma 30/1.4, but the Sigma is for our GH5. Only half the maximum magnification, though, for those who are interested.
P2
Nice call on the statement the user is most important part vs which lens
Totally agree!!
Unbelievably sharp
Did you compare size/weight/price against F/1.4 lenses? Dude, this is an F/2 lens!
This is a focal length I love having used a Rollei 35s fitted with a Zeiss 40mm f2.8 Sonnar all through the 80s; its why I bought a Voightlander 28mm f2 for my Leica TL2 giving a 40mm view. Alas it doesnt have the bite of my Leica 23mm Summicron-TL but, its still good. So to the Batis, I really have no interest in shallow DoF, what I care about is how the lens renders and on this you give no indication. I suspect its quite good as it has 9 elements which puts it inside my limit of 10 elements; above that the rendering goes soft. I need to have images so real that I feel I can walk around in them, I need hyper realism front to back. This is something that no lens reviwers give any information on. They are so full of bokeh and bokeh balls that you never get any indication of what the image actually looks like. Any fast lens will deliver shallow DoF, its about as special a lens property as the colour of the focus ring. Very few will render an image with conviction. Here you are talking about Leica, Zeiss, Voightlander, Panasonic, Olympus and older Nikkors (I use a D700 with a 35mm f2D). This video by the Japan street photographer using a D3 (same sensor and processor as my D700) and a Voightlander 40mm f2. will give you some idea of what I am talking about; this is hyper realism - winks ruclips.net/video/JQIdhKkf-E4/видео.html
Thanks for the link. Some really beautiful work!
Nice link, thank you! Tough for me to tell from HD footage to which you link how it compares to the Batis, but the Batis renders beautifully, Vici.
It is interesting but I can and, i think, so can you, if you stand back and look. I can see the difference even in the thumbnails in my folders between the images from my Leica X113 23mm f1.7 Summilux and recent Nikon G glass; which is why I no longer have any Nikon made after 2010. I have seen this quality in the Zeiss 35mm f2.8 in RUclips videos but, I have never seen it in any of the images from the D850 with G glass even though I have downloaded raw files. The fact is people test these lenses wide open which essentially snuffs out the resolving power of any lens; you cant get 3D pop from an image 2inches deep. But, these high glass lenses are designed to be used wide open, stop them down and they are dead. Really the best lenses dont have much glass but that is expensive to make because they have to be crafted with some care; the Leica 50mm f0.95 Noctilux is the bench mark of a high quality fast lens with 7 elements but gosh it costs $12Grand. You wont see this effect on a 20 element Olympus Pro lens which produces a very dead flat image but the Premium f1.8 low glass lenses are dripping in microtones. Fast lenses that resolve are not cheap, the prosumer models are lifeless. So yes you can see it in low resolution images as its not a resolution or sharpness thing, its the atmosphere and presence that the lens produces in an image. The images just look alive ;-)
This hairstyle gives you that artist look. Awesome.
Update for the Batis 40mm is there since yesterday
www.zeiss.de/camera-lenses/service/download-center/firmware/firmware-update-batis-2-40-cf.html
Why, in the context of "things functionally similar to this", pair the X-T3 to the 16-55 f/2.8 instead of one of the two 23mm? the f/1.4 even gives you a similar max DOF, and the f/2 maximizes portability with impeccable IQ (I have it and I love it)
Ariel Kanterewicz I actually have the 23 and 35, but the 16-55 is tastier, is all of $999, gives more options, and has better, newer AF. But I take your point. Thanks for weighing in.
Agreed, Ariel...I have that combo (X-T3 and XF16-55 f/2.8) and love it for it's superb image quality (sharpness and detail rendition), along with very fast AF, build quality (both weather-sealed) and overall ergonomics!
no mention of an aps-c camera with the sigma 30 1.4 in the mix of comparison..... i only throw it in there as i'm still torn whether to jump to full frame or wait and see the next gen of aps-c a7000 (or other) and lens combinations to save weight for travel and street
Matt Mitchell Good point!
The tamron 28-75 also has similar magnification, also is a versatile lens, also is a no-brainer according to some. Can you compare the two?
I have the Tamron, I think if your work is any kind of professional work where you get different types of assigments, like one day event, then fashion, then some wedding then its that base do it all lens. Anything else that you add to that will be specialised about your need. Like the 16-35 f2.8 or 4, new gmaster 24 or 40 f2 or even the 85 1.8
I love the clarity of this video
miguel Pason So glad!
I don’t think it will be too long before Zeiss offers the Batis line in Z and R mount.
I wonder if Nikon and Canon will encourage that. Hmm...
This one or FE 35mm 1.8 Sony? :D any ideas? love from norway
Anh Ty Pham Huynh Hello Norway! They are BOTH GREAT lenses in terms of IQ and weather/dust resistance. The Sony is smaller and less expensive so I think it comes down to budget and personal preference for field of view and max magnification. The differences are otherwise small (check out lens rentals.com MTF testing as well). I don’t know that there is much difference in copy to copy variation, either - though if any of you know differently, please weigh in.
So the image quality is relative the same? :) soo hard to decide. I have a 24mm1.4 and 55mf1.8
Is it true with the «3D» picture and better colour you Get from zeiss?
Thank you so much for your review!! I just switched to Sony from Olympus (actually have both still) and I was looking for a travel / street lens for my Sony A7III ... i recently bought the Batís 85mm... will tell you how it goes!! Cheers, Raul
Please do!
So my pre-order has been shipped but due to the snow storm at the end of the week I don't have it just yet. I am really interested even though now that it is out some have raised issues about its Eye-AF precision. It will be a wait and see. I do have other lenses that compete in this focal range on the Sony but if it works out like I hope I can let some of those go. I admit I am a Batis fan so far owning the other four AF ones. This family of AF primes meet my original goal of having a FF mirrorless that is smaller and lighter than my DSLR setup. The think is you can have both smaller and lighter lenses and fast and heavy lenses on the same system. For me both are needed so I win with the flexibility it provides. Don't have to be in only one camp can move back and forth between the two.
Let me know!
So how is eye-af?
Love your insights
😊🙏🏻🖖🏻
Mr. B,
I have two questions you can’t possibly really answer but I’m going to ask anyway.
Is Sony going to release either a 35 mm or 50 mm G master in the next three years?
The second being if you had to choose between the only two lenses on earth with one being the one you just reviewed here and the second being the 35mm Sony Zeiss 1.4 you mentioned in the review and I did not care one whit about weight, which would you choose?
PS please UPS me some Anthony’s pizza from Malvern to Austin Texas please
David Fowler in reverse order: 35/1.4; and I dunno - but that 50/1.4 is close to a G-Master in all but name
Interesting ! f1.4 aside, why would you choose the 35 1.4 ? Image quality ?
Thank you so much!
@@MaximeDesessard Setting aside the additional control over DOF, I'm simply more familiar with and tend to think in terms of either a 35 or 50mm field of view.
A number of you have asked why I look so red in this video. All I can tell you is that RUclips processing significantly altered the color that I saw on my 2018 5K Retina 27” iMac, which actually looks great. Maybe the X-T3 is new to them.
This monitor is only capable of displaying 78% of the Adobe RGB color space. In addition there is NO sRGB emulation or display mode. It´s the worst Apple you can buy for Photo. Newflash: The Web is sRGB. NOT aRGB, nor DCI-P3 (base calibration of this monitor). Thats why for everyone it´s RED, just for the blind man its fine :) Suggestions: get a X-Rite ColorChecker. Profile your monitor, printer AND cam.
Trust your scopes! Then let the internets do what they do with the color.
OK, I definitely need to try out the Voigtländers!
Yep. I've got the 40 f/1.2 -- don't have the AF, as you know, so the shooting experience is much different and not as valuable for street shooting.
Just a detail, I guess CL = Q?
Hold that thought :-D
I think you're right with Q and CL
Definitely the Q!
I started filming with a 50 f/0.95 lens... not sure I would buy this...
I did not liked the Batis 25 tho and since I sold it I miss a wider angle
is it me or is this lens soft at f2.0 and all your photos don't really have sharp eyes ? it's like it's off focus imo. I am returning this lens :/
I'm interested to know your thoughts on the voigtlander 40mm f1.2.
Jude Anthony lovely. See my M10-D review.
Could you compare the Batis 40mm to the newer Sony 35 F1.8 FE?
Sedthawit Tangsumpant I’d be delighted to have either one - I think it depends on what you already have ; how you see; and what you shoot. I tend to see in 35 rather than 40mm field of view. I already own a 50. For these two reasons, I’d lean toward the 35/1.8. OTOH, if street is your thing and you could afford only one, to my surprise I’d lean toward the 40 - unless you’d bypass a 50 in any case and budget were very tight, at which point I’d swing back toward the 35. As I recall, it’s smaller too. For years (just to make it more complicated), I’d have bypassed both focal lengths since I’m such a 50 prime kinda guy - and go straight to a fast 24 - like the G-Master 24/1.4. If you shoot video, I’d look closely at physical CA correction, because software correction (especially longitudinal CA) cannot be easily corrected in post, but I don’t recall which one did best for that.
@@3BMEP Thank you for your reply. Currently I have Sigma 35 f1.4 Art and Sony Zeiss 55 f1.8. However, I found that sometimes the 35 Art is too heavy and large to fit in my daily bag. So I was thinking of having the 35 f1.8. However, the Batis 40 is really interesting as it have a better magnification ratio (but the size is larger). I'm leaning toward the 35 more. I would really like your comment on the color reproduction comparison between these two lens. I have heard so much about the Zeiss 3D pop, but cannot really tell the difference myself. Cheers.
Thoughts on the 40mm vs. The 35 distagon? I have the 35 1.4 but dont find i use the 1.4 since I shoot fashion. I have the 25mm batis and use it in super 35 mode for the 35ish focal legnth when I dont need the megapixels. So...what do you think?
Sean O'Neill apples vs... apples. If you have one, no need for the other - both are great. I shoot wide open often, so I might have a very slight preference for the Distagon. But that’s just me.
I just bought a Sony A7III. As my first lens should I go for the Zeiss 55mm 1.8 or the Zeiss 40mm f2?
Simon Ravnsbæk both are great, so it depends on what you shoot. For street, 40/2.
@@3BMEP is the autofocus good for video?
Currently have 55 1.8. Not sure if i want Batis 40 2 to replace it or not. Awesome voice btw. You should work in radio.
Thanks. :) 55/1.8 is great. I'd go to the 24/1.4 before the 40/2 given that you have the 55.
It's my new favorite lens.
Greg Watermann have fun with it!
Hugh- when you mention “greater distortion you get at 40mm”, I’m thinking alot of the distortion you’re getting is due to it being a Distagon lens.
Distagon are notorious for pronounced curved field curvature and distortions are very difficult to correct in the Distagon design, requiring complex elements(see link in following post).
Here’s the link to a great article that breaks down Zeiss lens designs (and includes links to H.H. Nasse’s technical articles):
ilovehatephoto.com/2014/12/30/a-guide-to-optical-lens-design-and-zeiss-nomenclature/
Also worth noting is the size and weight of this is also due mostly to being a Distagon design. Compare the size to say, the (delightful) Pentax 43/1.9, or the Canon & Pentax 40mm 2.8. Or...any other 40mm (though there aren’t many AF 40’s in existence).
GhostTech1 what a great reference! Thank you!
So what does this mean in reality? How noticeable is the distortion with the Batis 40/2 ?
I think you will find he is referring to perspective “distortion” here in the video.
Did the F Stop stay at 2 during "Close Focus"?
I looked at my EXIF data at my closest focusing shots (wish it would include distance, too, but alas...). Anyway, at closest focusing I could see, aperture was f/2.2.
Just want to take a moment to say how important sound and composition is. I sat here with this video in full-screen mode on a 27" iMac and watched the whole thing from start to finish, totally engaged. Great video. The sound quality, your voice, and the content was fantastic. Really would've appreciated some more sample images, but it's a small point. I'm not sure why but people spend far more time on the video side of this lens than on the photographic side of it. Thank you for your insight!
Alexander Hendrickson Thank YOU! 😊
...or for Micro Four Thirds how about the Panasonic 20mm F:1.7?
And if you can bear F:2.8 as maximum aperture then Fuji offers a 27mm compact lens for APSC and Canon offers the EF 40mm STM for full frame for the same field of view.
Hi Edwin. FYI, MAny years back, I dabbled in m4/3, and used the superb Panny 20mm f/1.7 on a G1. It was fantastic! Super-sharp, compact, and fast AF. However, I moved on to the Fujifilm X-System when I found that poster-size enlargments from the m4/3 system just didn't hold onto as much detail as I'd have liked. The Fujifilm APS-C X-System of cameras and lenses seemed to do a bit better in that department. (If I didn't have need for extreme enlargement, I likely would have stayed with m4/3. Have fun!
not sure you all notice that the aperture change roughly to f4 when close focus. this is crazy, not sure whether is zeiss releasing new firmware to resolve this issue and so disappointed as this is zeiss product.
Can i use this lens for astrophotography?
Harsha Vardhan Yes, though you might want to go wider.
I do mostly video with some ocasional photo shooting. Well, for my company I normally need to bring both: video and photo. My job is about shooting workshops and people learning things, that means, closed up images of their hands working, portraits and landscapes. I am ready to move from my old canon 5DII to Sony, this is a fact... But I am considering to get rid of all my Canon 24-105 F4, Carl Zeiss Contax lenses (35,50,135) with canon adaptors, Leica 50 F2 Summicrom Canada, flashes, filters and all my Hasselblad 503CX and Carl Zeiss Sonnar 85... just for buying a Sony A7SII (or maybe the upcoming one) plus this Zeiss Batis 40mm... i just don't want to carry more stuff and I already experienced for years manual prime lenses are not very agile for documentary video shootings... Considering I am getting rid of years of collected gear... does it make sense this exchange? Will I be able to do my job with just this lenses and a Sony camera? would you guys consider I should keep any of this gear to complete the Batis/Sony set? Thanks!
mariano galan please tell me you’d make a pile of profit on the sale of all that gear! The first question: when was the last time you used each piece of gear you’re contemplating selling? Second: When you did, how important was it to your client’s satisfaction?
@@3BMEP Thank you very much for replying! Well, the reason to change my gear is because I still shoot RAW videos on Magic Lantern with 5D. Converting all this footage takes ages and this brings me to the Sony system. I use my Canon on regular basis combining all the CZ Contax and Leica lenses, but I always miss situations or I ask people to repeat the scene because my lenses were out of focus or I am changing to another one. To be honest, now that I get older I miss autofocus and traveling ligthter. My photo trips are also a nightmare, carrying so much heavy stuff. My Leica Summicrom 50 R is my favourite lenses for video, but for travel photography... I miss many situations again with the manual focus thing. Plus they are not stabilized, so many shots are shaky. My Hasselblad? Love it as an artifact, but I shoot films that I never develop or scan afterwards. Maybe it's time to be honest to myself and recognize I am never going to use it for a professional project. Profit? My plan is trying to sell it for the same price of a Sony Alpha+All rounder Zeiss lenses. I am not sure I will make profit, probably reasonable even to what I paid all over the years. That's why I am asking if the quality and all-round features of Batis are good enough in order to get rid of my stuff. thanks! I am my own client, I produce stories for a website so I don't have a client side pressure, the reason of this change would be for agile shootings keeping the current quality :)
I have the Batis 18mm and 25mm. I love them but honestly want a 1.4 lens and like 35mm lenses. I just ordered a Sony Zeiss Distagon 35mm 1.4 used and am waiting on it to see if it's a good copy. Do you feel that the 40mm would replace the 35mm or do you feel that it does not isolate the subject as well given that it's a F2? What about for portraits? Does the 40mm make that much difference in terms of creating more flattering portraits (less distortion for close ups)?
brandon jourdan I actually prefer the 35/1.4, as a I think I said. ;) DOF is the issue. Neither will be flattering for portrait unless you back away, and the differences in perspective distortion are small.
Thanks for the reply! This is what I thought. I've looked at lots of sample photos with the Batis and while nice, I still went ahead with ordering the 35mm 1.4 Sony Zeiss.
brandon jourdan Enjoy!
Why not compare to the Sony 55 1.8?
I have the tiny Voigtlander 40mm F1.4 on my X-T2 all the time, I have the B&W single coated version. After a while muscle memory takes over and freaking out about auto focus speed fades away. Yes I miss a few shots but I think the overall results are stellar. Jonas Rask has a great blog on this lens. It also works a treat on my film Leica CL.
I loved the Voigtlander Noktons a couple of years ago on a GH4, and a number of folks have mentioned them again right here. So I guess I need to get a couple in house and play with them, this time on another camera I have in hand at the moment. Hold that thought. At least for another week or two. ;)
Thank-you. Exactly the summary I was looking for. Do you you think that the low-light performance of the A7III/Batis F2 will match or exceed my older A6000/Sony 35 F1.8 OSS Combo? Which I mainly use for portraits of winemakers in their cellars where the 50mm equivalent is occaisionally restrictive/too long. Thanks again...
bill nanson yes!
Three Blind Men and An Elephant Productions - succinct :)
bill nanson 😎
Sky Hermit Good input! We still use an a6300 with 28/2, 50/1.8 - and 24-105/4.
Is the manual focus pulling good (steady-speed) enough for shooting video? Put it this way, is it as good as the latest generation G or GM lens's manual focus performance (which i think that's good enough)?
Thank you.
since when are fly by wire lenses like the GM good for pulling focus? get yourself a cinema lens if you're a filmmaker. The Batis looks like an incredible value.
See the loxia series if you want to pull focus
December of 2019 on sale for $1043. About to pull the shutter... I mean trigger.
Hows the autofocus
meh i'm pretty happy with my ef-m 22mmf2 stm pancake lens on my Canon M50, now that's a light, sharp and very cheap deal!
There an ef-m 32mm f1.4 that just came out also which I might get if I don't get an upcoming speedbooster from Viltrox to use with my 50mm 1.8 stm and 85mm 1.8. The speedbooster will make these cheap lens faster (1.4) and almost full frame field of view without break the bank or my back.
Anyone have any news on when this is actually shipping?
I'm very skeptical of a 40mm lens when my brain thinks in 35mm or 50mm. A 35mm f2 Batis would have been wonderful.
Steve Sanacore I understand completely.
I know this is a stale thread. Just my thoughts. I'm going to rent one of these. I know I don't need the lens to get great shots on my A7ii, and I have a G9 with the PL 12-60. A good photog could capture amazing images / make stunning pictures with this lens or any lens etc etc. It's the industrial design, the dedication to manufacturing to high tolerances, the look and feel that attracts me. Good Lenses won't get any cheaper, and the hobby (I'm amateur) depends so much on glass. Buy cheap, buy again. Buy something like this product, and just have it for life. I'll rent it, see how it feels, how it looks, and try to take a photo or two that are worthy of the lens, and then try to find a decent used one. Maybe.
I've been thinking about this a lot lately, Lens before Body I mean. If you happen to read this and have time for a quick response..If you were to start from scratch in photography, and money were no object, what lens would you buy? One lens only, although a good ecosystem is important, as an amateur I feel too many focal lengths get confusing and prevent growth in composition. The 12-60 PL on my G9, most of the time, is taped at 35 or 40mm EFL. I'm trying to get a sense for how to frame a subject(s) properly with a normal focal length. It's not that I don't use wide lens or tele, for sports I have to, but for everyday shots, planned events etc, I want no distractions from zoom. In a pinch the electrical tape can come off of course, but I'm making every effort to stay at 35 or 40. I actually ordered a plastic chinese 35mm lens for my A7ii, and when it arrives it will be glued to the body while I learn that focal length and determine if I want to shoot at it for the next 20 years. If I make that decision, I may buy the Batis 40. May. Hence the question, if starting from scratch at 35 or 40mm, what lens would you buy? What mount? So far I am leaning toward A7riii and Batis 40.
Brandon Mount a7R IV and Batis 40 of money were no object, although new Sony 35/1.8 is great. Nikon Z7 with Nikkor Z 50/1.8 is also great. Panasonic S1R with Leica Summicron SL 35 or 50....
Thank you for the excellent review. After many years as a Canon shooter it's time to upgrade. I held out to see the Canon mirrorless offering but I'm just not convinced. My main interest is low light street and I'm torn between the Sony A7iii with the Batis and the Fuji xt3 with the 16-55mm which might deliver similar performance for a much lower financial outlay - any thoughts gratefully received.
Mark Adams Thanks. If you don’t need IBIS, the Fuji combo will get you close, though the full frame Sony will still outperform the X-T3 at the margin. If you shoot at 12800 or lower, you should be fine - though again IBIS will help even for stills. But the price differential is a compelling argument in the Fuji’s favor.
Hugh - many thanks for the reply. Compelling arguments to ponder both financially and in terms of IBIS. Sometimes you might just have to pay for your art, and maybe an X-H1!
Mark Adams great camera!
Hi Mark. I have the X-T3 with XF16-55 (and vertical grip), and can certainly vouch for Hugh's comments. That combo is stellar for my type of work (landscape, product, and some street/travel). I really don't miss IBIS, because I don't shoot video, plus, 98% of my work is tripod-mounted, hence IBIS is irrelevant. In terms of sheer image quality (sharpness, detail rendition, dynamic range, etc.), this combination is stellar, and IMHO, equal to FF for all but extreme low light conditions. The other Fujinon XF lenses are mostly all superb as well. If you want to really go light for street, the X-T3 sans grip, plus the XF23 f/2 is a superb combination!! Super light, Super-sharp (from f/4 onward), super fast AF! If interested, contact me at ss.mba@verizon.net, and I can direct you to some sample jpegs taken with that gear. In short, the X-T3 is the best, most robust camera I've used in 40 years of photography! Good luck!
Steve - that’s really helpful thanks for your input
Small note..Are you sure you cannot engage OLED in AF
Because I can with the 85mm
I’ll double check when I’m back home.
Aaargh. Forgot about this and already packed up the glass. I'll ask Zeiss.
I can with my Batis 18mm as well
You can program the lens to function and out of focus mode as well. They come out of the box only working in manual mode. But they can be programmed
Evoke Studio Photography 🙏🏻
Was wondering if you were going to touch on the photowalk. So sorry that I missed it. Was really looking forward to it, but something came up last minute. Hopefully you'll do another. -- There was a Leica B&H photowalk that I missed the next day too. **sighs**
More on the Photowalk coming - stay tuned!
what camera did you use for this video?
Daniel Martin We always list our gear in the show notes below our videos. In this case, Fuji X-T3 with 16-55/2.8
Very hard lens to leave at home
Given that most of the A7(s/r) shooters have the Sony Zeiss 55 1.8 which is cheaper and lighter and just as capable - is it worth getting the 40/2? I understand that the min. focusing distance is great but its 1300 bucks and very very close focally.... I guess what Im saying is - give me an excuse not to buy this lens
Hah! I'd say (what I'd do if I were in your shoes, so this is just me and what and how I shoot): get the new 24/1.4 G-Master instead. Good enough excuse? ;)
@@3BMEP That's not the worst idea
I enjoyed this analysis video and conclusion
pat dinco 🙏🏻
Hugh, I love your approach to gear reviews...much more "Philosophical" than others that I've seen...As a photography and gear fanatic, I read/view many reviews, though admittedly, I'm currently a Fujifilm X-System user. I do respect Zeiss of course, which is the only reason I enjoy reviews of their gear (excuse me, but not so for Sony, except their sensors). I find that the X-T3/X-Pro2, combined with the stellar Fujinon XF lenses, gives me results that rival FF and even approach medium format in image sharpness and detail rendition (especially when utilizing good technque, optimum apertures, a solid tripod, and focus stacking!). Regarding your comment about being unable to achieve quite the same shallow DOF when using APS-C, I respectfully offer a different opinion...Any one of my XF f/2 lenses, when used at appropriate lens-to-subject distances, can achieve quite shallow DOF indeed. That said, as a landscape and product photographer, I rarely shoot wide open, as I usually desire maximum sharpness and detail throughout my images (foreground to background). Anyway, thanks again for your excellent "take" on the wonderful Zeiss Batis 40.
Steve TQP Steve, welcome. You make great points. We have been a crop sensor shop now for three or four years. f/2 on an APS-C camera is just about f/3, and that’s more than enough for most situations. With this said, there have been a few times when I’ve wished for a 1.2 or even 1.0 - but agreed, that’s been far or few between. :)
Thank you sir! Yes, as a landscape and product photographer, and admitted "sharpness fanatic", I'm quite pleased with the results I achieve with Fuji X-System...largely because of their stellar Fujinon lenses! (Back in the '70's I shot 35mm and large format, using Nikkor, Rodenstock, Schneider and Fujinon optics, which is how I came to know that Fuji makes awesome glass.) If you'd like to see some of my work, please email me at ss.mba@verizon.net, and I'd be happy to share sample images. Regards, Steve
I recently bought a 25mm batis trusting that it would not have distortion due to the quality of the zeiss glass, tremendous lie because I felt cheated, in reality there is distortion, I would have preferred a 40mm batis a thousand times, because it is just the combination of the best between 35mm and 50mm, however the intention with my batis was to capture more the environment with models and interiors, it turns out that it is also not useful for portraiture due to its constant deformation and that is too disappointing to me. how much I regret not having bought the 40mm batis :(
Why do you keep calling the Leica Q the Leica CL? The Q is the best camera on the market today. What a lens!
USandNL brain farts, clearly 😜
Thanks so much Hugh for the review! I have this lens on order and your thoughts [worth holding] have assuaged my fears.
Happy to oblige as always, Craig. ;)
You're a mensch!
What is it about the image quality of the Black Magic Pocket Cinema Camera 4k? Is it the raw recording? Is it the color science? Its so beautiful. Woops wrong subject matter for a comment on this excellent review. Still for video work is there an argument for ultimate video image quality ultimately mattering above all other considerations? I watched The Sacrifice the other day and still haven't recovered from the astonishing cinematography of Sven Nyqvist. Video image quality seems such a different animal from its stills counterpart. Do I want to a really good functional workhorse of a true hybrid camera or a somewhat compromised video gem. Sorry...can't help it as its camera purchase decision time, and I am so stuck!
starky497 I feel your pain. As for us, we simply aren’t aiming that high for the work we do, so 8 bit 4:2:0 and the price, ease of use and form factor of hybrids rule the day.
Thanks Hugh...suppose it was a long winded way of asking, in follow up to your thoughtful BMPCC4K video, will you be reviewing that camera?
This thing is such a performer, the minimum focus distance and weight really are surprising, particularly when compared to the Sigma 50 1.4 A as you mentioned - that thing is a heavy, hefty giant.
Also wow, there's a red shift and softness in this video compared to the older ones, did you go back the Canon way? :')
(fwiw I really enjoyed the more orange light, curious what's caused the change in look)
Fuji X-T3 with 16-55/2.8 AWB. :) Testing it out. As for softness - are you seeing this in 4K? It is crispy! Also, YT is doing something during processing which is definitely turning it redder than on my 5K Retina 27" screen. Sigh. Just noticed it.
@@3BMEP Usually watching on 1080, mostly noticing your individual hairs being less pronounced than usual (must admit, that's kind of became a trademark of yours to me).
Perhaps knock the AWB a step or two into the orange direction for video and see if that matches your usual colour profile better? To be clear, the image looks brilliant, just doesn't have quite that air that I've gotten used to.
Audio might be just a tad noisier also? But I'm not using headphones right now, so I wouldn't take a bet on that.
And yeah, RUclips reprocessing rarely does anyone any favours.. nasty but, sadly required, step in the workflow.
The video is sharp and crisp in 4k, youtube is doing some youtube thing in 1080p though. Next to the different skintones (other than the outro), i notice something like a chirping every other second while you're talking. Slightly louder than your mics noise floor.
@@jul4422 truly odd.
@@JennyDarukat vis a vis audio: I DEFINITELy rushed to get this out, so you got me. :) Don't get me started on my hair. Or Sophie's (our golden retriever).
Wonder what this lens would be like on the XT-3.
This is by far one of the best video reviews I've ever seen. I watched the whole video. Fully engaged. The way you explain is great. Simple and straight to the point. I really like it because it seems like you just share your thoughts as they come out of your head. This shows experience. Congrats. And I'll check the patreon soon. ✌️
Marcelo Moyano second that.
Nice
Im a little poorer and using an older manual zeiss 35 1.4 adapted from contax
I see many if the same strengths in this new lens!
Also
Light weight! If it only was 699 lol
For a manual guy im staying with my current distagon but
If i was shooting any tyoe of event or prefered af
This lens looks uber wonderful!!
Agreed, there are other ways to skin the cat. We don't need to spend beaucoup bucks to get great images!
You seems to have no idea that 40mm is closer to 'normal' human eyes FOV than 35mm or 50mm. That's the reason why I always please when manufacture starts filling this gap.
CL or Q?
Dennis Linden Did I say CL? I meant Q!
The Leica CL is not the same as the Leica Q... Hold that thought...
Senility is a terrible thing...
Great video. Why does your skin look so red in this footage?
Hi there, and thanks for another wonderful video. I own the batis 85 for my A7M1 and loving it, hence I was pretty excited bout that 40mm. Now I'm a bit torn though between this lense and a combo of the sony zeiss 55mm and the newly to be released 35mm 1.8. Any thoughts? PS: I'm a sucker for odd vocal lengths. :D
That 35 with one of the sharpest and best standards around is compelling - but the 40 could substitute for both for less money, and might therefore be better for you given your... predilections. 😊 I’m a bit more traditional, so I might go for the two lens setup if the budget were available. If you shoot video, however: be forewarned: the 55 focus breathes like a bull in heat. 😎
@@3BMEP thanks so much for your quick reply. Getting both the 55 and the 35 comes out pretty close to the Batis, given the current cashback for the 55. Only thing is, do I want to carry two except one lense I guess. But if from your experience the sharpness of the 35mm wins (I owned the 55 before and remember it being pretty spot on) that might just be my answer right there. I'm more into stills but start a little video here and there, private only so the bull breath should be fine. Thanks again, I really do appreciate you taking the time a lot.
The close focus just isn’t that impressive in my opinion. Both my 70-300 and 24-105 focus as close so it doesn’t really add to my kit. If it perhaps focused 1:2 it might have been more interesting. I’d rather the rokinon 35 f1.4 FE and save a lot of money.
Josh You’re right - both lenses get to about the same magnification. And they give you options the 40/2 doesn’t. But it doesn’t weigh as much, either. Different tools for different use cases...
The real bargain on this category is the much smaller and lighter Sony Zeiss 35mm F2.8.
Great review as usual. I'll take two!
It would be good if the reviewer could do some research to learn how to say Batis correctly. Hint: please check B&H video about the Batis 40mm
sjazz I’ve spoken directly with a Zeiss executive on this very point. The pronunciation is correct.
@@3BMEP It might be the American pronunciation then, here is a video from Zeiss ruclips.net/video/l4x_xz6mRIg/видео.html the announcer sounds American but pronounces Batis correctly, same as the German Dr.. Cheers.
This is the video to which my bud directed me, specifying the 23 second mark as the correct pronunciation ruclips.net/video/pgL0-cz-KqA/видео.html. But with this written, I note that the person on camera uses a different pronunciation later in the video, and in any event my Zeiss bud said they're fine with multiple pronunciations.
@@3BMEP No worries. Apart from that, I enjoyed the video as it answered several questions I had. The bottom line, I got the lens yesterday and is excellent. I believe my Loxia 50mm will stay at home for a while lol
OUTSTANDING - enjoy! Just got the Voigtländer Ultron 28/2 for my TL2 to achieve the same field of view. Let's see how it goes...
Love this camera themed ASMR-channel!
Just kidding, great video as usual!
Tobias N Hah!
Some wrong information here!, the lens is f2 but at close focus distance, the aperture lens closes smaller (looks like f4 to me). I really think that Zeiss doesn’t make any magic, they just lied to us, it’s such a bad business practice, from my test, you definitely lose light for close focusing. It’s never a good idea to watch a review and buy a lens. I hope you take a deeper look at this lens and inform your audience
TT Smasher Others have mentioned the Philip Bloom post, and while I no longer have the eval unit, I did check my EXIF data for close focused shots and saw f/2.2. I’ll check in with Zeiss.
$ Batis = $ Tamron 28-75 + $ FE85
Fair point!
that cricket in the background though ))
I can't belive I actualy watched this video:)
Hah!
Zeiss Batis lenses are not good for the price :( It must be compared to other lenses.
I guess it is also a question of taste. I have just the one Batis lens and for me nothing compares. Money? Worth every penny.
I second that, Jackie!
I beg to differ
Hold that thought while you consider the 40mm f2 Voightlander at 260g. Exceptionally small and well made with amazing optics (albeit for those who don't mind focusing). I shoot interiors and architecture and use it all the time (www.vicwahbyphotography.com) on my Nikon FF cameras. It's also half the price of the Batis "No-Brainer." What do you think?
Vic Wahby Photography I think I should try it!
Oh yes. I promise you it's a winner. Among my favorite, and I own 10 lenses. Especially low distortion too, which is always a primary consideration in interior / architectural photography.
No, just give me a Sony 35mm f1.8 for $800.