Love my Loxia 21mm f2.8 ….. bought for my ‘Back to my Roots’ landscape photography project - One Camera, One Lens’, this is how I started 37 years ago: (OM3+21mm+CirPol+Tripod+Fuji Velvia)! Back in 1987 this combination cost me ‘an arm and a leg’! Today it’ll be A7rII+Loxia 21mm+ND64 & 1000+Tripod+SD Cards!
As a hobbyist, I have 50 and 25 loxias, with a7r3, one of the most pleasant combination to use when you have time and mood for vintage-like modern gear.
$6000 is not expensive at all for this set of lens, all metal including the hoods and the amount of engineering design it takes to have of controls line up with out changing anything is another achievement and is a must for cinema use, these work with fluid like movement, not your usual manual focus lens, you must use them before you know truly how good they are, these are like any fine hand built watch, so they are not expensive, fantastic review
I sold six Carl Zeiss Classic lenses to buy the entire set of Loxia lenses and I'm never looking back. They are not fast lenses, but they are small, light, colour and feature balanced, and will serve me well 20 years from now. Their colour and sharpness destroy the Classic lenses! They are also great for both photo and video.
Have them all and it makes for a awesome landscape shooting experience! They are definitely worth it and a joy to travel with if you are OK with manual focus.
had to give this video a like, i call my loxia lenses my photography cheat code, minimal post processing with these bad boys, what's even more amazing is that shooting manual over a certain period of time makes your focusing accuracy much more precise, my 85mm and 35mm in particular give such accurate renditions its ridiculous
I actually think no AF is an advantage... . Because when you focus manually, you get this direct mechanical contact to the lenses. I am right now thinking very much about buying one used. Right now I only have the Kit Lense and although the Tamron 17-28 would make more sense I just like the Loxia more 😅 (Metall feeling, Compact size, completely mechanical and quality)
Scout Dog riiight...I don’t think he asked why doctors are paid so much, he asked why the healthcare costs so much (hint: doctors’ salaries have nothing to do with the cost of healthcare)
@@asherdog9248 1. I'm not American, 2. I asked for the channel to make a video about it, don't really care what you have to say, 3. Doctor salaries aren't the biggest cost, not by a long shot.
You don't know how economy work $! probably you don't work either ! you think you are funny but you don't! I pay 400 Swiss frank every month and wenn go to hospital I have to pay 10% for hospital cost best hospital find on this planet is in Switzerland ! nothing is cheap nothing is free if you don't live in USA why make stupid comment on a photo video?
That's actually VERY SIMPLE. There are two kinds of patients in America -- those with SOMEBODY ELSE to pick up the tab (ie. the insured) who do not care how much it costs, and those who DON'T PAY but which healthcare providers are required to treat then pass on the costs to the former. When there is always a desire and a way to pay for something it'll never be cheap. Imagine going to a restaurant where you either have "food insurance" pay whatever the price of that plate of pasta, or you simply throw up your hands after eating and say that you have no money while telling restaurant to jack up the price on everyone else! Yeah... that plate of pasta is going to cost $500... LOL! -- Fixing the healthcare problem is also very simple if a little counter intuitive. No, it's not single payer. That only passes on the cost without reducing it one penny. The government is and has always been the single payer for defense; is the F-35 affordable, on time or problem free? Or its LockMart laughing all the way to the bank while you have no choice but to pay your taxes? It's simply to require that EVERYONE pay their own way with no subsidies and no insurance until they have spent some relatively large amount of money that year -- say $10,000. I bet you that $49.99, $39,99, $29.99 and $19.99 signs will pop up in front of doctors offices in quick succession, while $19,999 FLAT FEE heart surgery with 0.9% APR financing ads will be all over the air waves. Why? Because they'll need to make it affordable to their customers or go out of business! It's called COMPETITION.
I have the 35. I use it for landscape and light painting. It's a joy to use. I also plan to get the 21 and the 85. This setup will cover most things I shoot and paired with my A7RIII give a very compact setup. I wouldn't pay full price for them but they are very cheap to buy on the used market now.
I have most of them for my A7Sii. Whilst I do miss the 1.4 for low light (slog is 1600 iso), and there is some vignetting at their smallest aperture, I am working around that because they render so well. They give a pleasant roundness to subjects and the colours are rich but natural and I like the punch the contrast has. Can be tricky unmounting them as I have big hands. The lens hoods are lovely and flock lined but don’t drop the hoods onto a hard surface as you will get a ding on them. They are beautifully made and I am very thankful Zeiss made the Loxia’s. 😊
I don't know... they are certainly expensive but these don't seem overpriced. They seem like they give you value for money and the design is both practical and beautiful.
I don’t know why it took me so long to realize that this set even exists but I definitely want them. I’ve been looking for similar features lenses at a lower price point but non of them pair well enough as a set (especially in regards to filmmaking). I’d say these are very well worth the premium
...and if you're really lucky, you can pick up the Loxia 35mm & 50mm for a big discount....no matter how old it is, it'll still be producing lovely colours when we are long gone..
Definitely geared more toward video, but I’ve borrowed one from my brother’s friend for a day in the streets and its very enjoyable to use (and also that clickless aperture is godsend for me) That said though, I prefer the Batis over Loxia because of the AF (I’m kinda tired using all manual lens for 3 years)
They are old school type photo lenses, that seem to be good for video as well because of a few neat features like de-clickable aperture, and their physical properties like mentioned in the video.
I would love to see how they compare to my Contax Zeiss set. Never seen a good comparison. Though I’ve had the Loxia’s in my hands, they feel incredibly well-built. The fact that these were ‘recently’ used in the cockpit shots on Top Gun Maverick with the Sony Venice says a lot.
Were they to be made by Leica, double the price for starters. I have been using Zeiss optics for decades, firstly on Hasselblad cameras, and now have a Zeiss Biogon 21mm f4.5 on Leica. Superb. ☆☆☆☆☆
Why did Zeiss only create these in FE mount? Zeiss does have a special relationship with Sony but it probably because it was the only full frame mirrorless mount at the time.
I don't know why it is a problem mounting these lenses just reverse the hood and you have all the grip you need dismounting is a bit more of challenge but no worse than alot of other small primes.
Of course not because they are Sony fanboys... Just think, what mirrorless fullframe system was there in the year 2015? Leica and Sony. Guess for which of these two companies they will sell more... The word "fanboy" just shouldn't be used for such things. By the way, for their APS-C lineup (the Zeiss Touit) they do have two mounts: Fuji and Sony, the only companies (after Samsung stepped out) that do serious APS-C mirrorless camera systems with a good lens lineup.
You can't make a fair assessment on weather or not these lenses are overpriced or not from this video. Neither did you tell us why these lenses are so expensive, like you've been doing in the past 1-2 episodes. You should've compared at least 2 of them with other similar lenses in similar price points, there's no way to evaluate if it's overpriced without knowing how well they perform
@@TackJorrance Don't worry, I have rented and worked with the otus line myself, I know what you're talking about, but it just bugs me that this video asks a fairly simple question in the title but then doesn't even try to answer itself.
Please do an episode on the Zeiss Touit trio lenses for Fujifilm aps-c mirrorless cameras too, bro. That trio costs around $2200 altogether without any promotions or discounts.
I think these are a good investment if you shoot video. With vintage lenses still holding a great value and being highly desirable these lens I imagine will only get better with time.
they are not the same,rf lenses made for leica m are optimized for the leica thin filter stack,any lens under 50 suffers from increased aberrations. They have the same build quality as the voigtlanders vm and zeiss zm lenses(made by cosina ),the equivalent is cheaper because are not rangefinder coupled and rf lenses if not used for some time without a range finder they'll simply decouple
One of my favorite lens to grab is the 35mm 2.8, love the small compact size.. Wish Sony would come out with more lenses this size. Fun lens to throw on and goto dinner or around town. These lenses are great but with such amazing autofocus in the Sony not sure these Loxia make sense.
One of the reasons I got my Sony A7iii was the great eye auto focus. Buying a manual focus lens defeats the whole point of having a camera with a killer AF. That's why I own batis 25mm.
Not sharp? I think you better look again. I’d say the 50/2 is maybe even too sharp. And I’m glad they’re not fast, they are tiny and match a compact mirrorless camera like the A7 perfectly. They’re beautiful lenses.
![Seungmin "그렇게, 천천히, 우리(As we are)" | [Stray Kids : SKZ-PLAYER]](http://i.ytimg.com/vi/kAzmhLHePqU/mqdefault.jpg)
Yet another compelling watch whereby you made good use of every word. Great video.
agreed - he's pretty good at that
Love my Loxia 21mm f2.8 ….. bought for my ‘Back to my Roots’ landscape photography project - One Camera, One Lens’, this is how I started 37 years ago: (OM3+21mm+CirPol+Tripod+Fuji Velvia)! Back in 1987 this combination cost me ‘an arm and a leg’! Today it’ll be A7rII+Loxia 21mm+ND64 & 1000+Tripod+SD Cards!
As a hobbyist, I have 50 and 25 loxias, with a7r3, one of the most pleasant combination to use when you have time and mood for vintage-like modern gear.
@@asherdog9248 I use air bulb with filter on the back thereof every time I change lens at home, so never saw dust points on photos.
As a Hobbyist, I have 50 loxias. As in, I own 50 Loxia lenses. Money grows on trees.
$6000 is not expensive at all for this set of lens, all metal including the hoods and the amount of engineering design it takes to have of controls line up with out changing anything is another achievement and is a must for cinema use, these work with fluid like movement, not your usual manual focus lens, you must use them before you know truly how good they are, these are like any fine hand built watch, so they are not expensive, fantastic review
I sold six Carl Zeiss Classic lenses to buy the entire set of Loxia lenses and I'm never looking back. They are not fast lenses, but they are small, light, colour and feature balanced, and will serve me well 20 years from now. Their colour and sharpness destroy the Classic lenses! They are also great for both photo and video.
Have them all and it makes for a awesome landscape shooting experience! They are definitely worth it and a joy to travel with if you are OK with manual focus.
had to give this video a like, i call my loxia lenses my photography cheat code, minimal post processing with these bad boys, what's even more amazing is that shooting manual over a certain period of time makes your focusing accuracy much more precise, my 85mm and 35mm in particular give such accurate renditions its ridiculous
I own the Zeiss Loxia 21mm f/.2.8... My best lens. No AF, I don’t care it’s the best!
Love em!
I actually think no AF is an advantage... .
Because when you focus manually, you get this direct mechanical contact to the lenses.
I am right now thinking very much about buying one used. Right now I only have the Kit Lense and although the Tamron 17-28 would make more sense I just like the Loxia more 😅 (Metall feeling, Compact size, completely mechanical and quality)
Not Overpriced at all Love them
Do a "why it's expensive" on American Health Care
Scout Dog riiight...I don’t think he asked why doctors are paid so much, he asked why the healthcare costs so much (hint: doctors’ salaries have nothing to do with the cost of healthcare)
@@asherdog9248 1. I'm not American, 2. I asked for the channel to make a video about it, don't really care what you have to say, 3. Doctor salaries aren't the biggest cost, not by a long shot.
You don't know how economy work $!
probably you don't work either !
you think you are funny but you don't!
I pay 400 Swiss frank every month and wenn go to hospital I have to pay 10% for hospital cost
best hospital find on this planet is in Switzerland !
nothing is cheap nothing is free
if you don't live in USA why make stupid comment on a photo video?
That's actually VERY SIMPLE. There are two kinds of patients in America -- those with SOMEBODY ELSE to pick up the tab (ie. the insured) who do not care how much it costs, and those who DON'T PAY but which healthcare providers are required to treat then pass on the costs to the former. When there is always a desire and a way to pay for something it'll never be cheap. Imagine going to a restaurant where you either have "food insurance" pay whatever the price of that plate of pasta, or you simply throw up your hands after eating and say that you have no money while telling restaurant to jack up the price on everyone else! Yeah... that plate of pasta is going to cost $500... LOL!
--
Fixing the healthcare problem is also very simple if a little counter intuitive. No, it's not single payer. That only passes on the cost without reducing it one penny. The government is and has always been the single payer for defense; is the F-35 affordable, on time or problem free? Or its LockMart laughing all the way to the bank while you have no choice but to pay your taxes? It's simply to require that EVERYONE pay their own way with no subsidies and no insurance until they have spent some relatively large amount of money that year -- say $10,000. I bet you that $49.99, $39,99, $29.99 and $19.99 signs will pop up in front of doctors offices in quick succession, while $19,999 FLAT FEE heart surgery with 0.9% APR financing ads will be all over the air waves. Why? Because they'll need to make it affordable to their customers or go out of business! It's called COMPETITION.
Hahaha this comment hits even harder a year later.
I have the 35. I use it for landscape and light painting. It's a joy to use. I also plan to get the 21 and the 85. This setup will cover most things I shoot and paired with my A7RIII give a very compact setup. I wouldn't pay full price for them but they are very cheap to buy on the used market now.
I have most of them for my A7Sii. Whilst I do miss the 1.4 for low light (slog is 1600 iso), and there is some vignetting at their smallest aperture, I am working around that because they render so well. They give a pleasant roundness to subjects and the colours are rich but natural and I like the punch the contrast has. Can be tricky unmounting them as I have big hands. The lens hoods are lovely and flock lined but don’t drop the hoods onto a hard surface as you will get a ding on them. They are beautifully made and I am very thankful Zeiss made the Loxia’s. 😊
In Japan Loxia 2/50m is affordable. I own it and one one favorite lens 😊
I bought the 21 and 35 primarily for photo. In fact I bought my FF camera for the 35 lense.
Same. I bought an A7iv just to use the Loxia lenses. That’s how you’re supposed to buy a system… you date the body, you marry the lenses.
Great review!Whase base a
Plate do you have on your camera please?
I don't know... they are certainly expensive but these don't seem overpriced. They seem like they give you value for money and the design is both practical and beautiful.
I don’t know why it took me so long to realize that this set even exists but I definitely want them. I’ve been looking for similar features lenses at a lower price point but non of them pair well enough as a set (especially in regards to filmmaking). I’d say these are very well worth the premium
...and if you're really lucky, you can pick up the Loxia 35mm & 50mm for a big discount....no matter how old it is, it'll still be producing lovely colours when we are long gone..
Are they more photo or video lenses, what would you say?
(anyone owning them? experiences?)
I think they are more geared toward video
Definitely geared more toward video, but I’ve borrowed one from my brother’s friend for a day in the streets and its very enjoyable to use (and also that clickless aperture is godsend for me)
That said though, I prefer the Batis over Loxia because of the AF (I’m kinda tired using all manual lens for 3 years)
They are old school type photo lenses, that seem to be good for video as well because of a few neat features like de-clickable aperture, and their physical properties like mentioned in the video.
I bought the 21 and 35 primarily for photo. In fact I bought my FF camera for the 35 lense.
They are definitely photo lenses that can be used for video (by declicking them). I don’t understand why anyone would say the opposite.
I would love to see how they compare to my Contax Zeiss set. Never seen a good comparison. Though I’ve had the Loxia’s in my hands, they feel incredibly well-built.
The fact that these were ‘recently’ used in the cockpit shots on Top Gun Maverick with the Sony Venice says a lot.
nice lens bro! i love the carl zeiss milvus lens
Please cover ultra telephoto (both prime and zoom) lenses too.
The best lens maker in the world
Were they to be made by Leica, double the price for starters.
I have been using Zeiss optics for decades, firstly on Hasselblad cameras, and now have a Zeiss Biogon 21mm f4.5 on Leica. Superb. ☆☆☆☆☆
I'd like to see one on Leica lenses. Seems insane to me how one Leica lens can be more that a Sony body and 3 good lenses.
Why did Zeiss only create these in FE mount? Zeiss does have a special relationship with Sony but it probably because it was the only full frame mirrorless mount at the time.
Great video as always ! Thanks for listening to my suggestion of a Sony review, I didn't see a poll drop down where you pointed in video to vote.
Another episode of my favorite series
Could you do the Zeiss Batis line?
Isn't Zeiss a "eyelens" maker to?
“Zeiss” is Cosina of Japan, and yes.
Make a video about the Zeiss line for Fuji! They have a funny name (to me at least funny). Touit is it?
It's when someone watches one's 'Tit' and be like 'ou'...
I don't know why it is a problem mounting these lenses just reverse the hood and you have all the grip you need dismounting is a bit more of challenge but no worse than alot of other small primes.
Can you do a video on the Leica Lens line for Lumix cameras?
Of course not because they are Sony fanboys... Just think, what mirrorless fullframe system was there in the year 2015? Leica and Sony. Guess for which of these two companies they will sell more...
The word "fanboy" just shouldn't be used for such things. By the way, for their APS-C lineup (the Zeiss Touit) they do have two mounts: Fuji and Sony, the only companies (after Samsung stepped out) that do serious APS-C mirrorless camera systems with a good lens lineup.
dang they might be pricey but you can tell youre getting alot of bang for your buck. Those look super well made and very capable
Thanks for answering that question! I really wondered what all the fuzz was about them! Funny that they can be considered affordable cine primes
can you make an episode that isn't about expensive lenses, but other equipment? such as stabilizers, cameras, and extra...
Is it possible to get a new episode talking about Batis line? Thanks.
Yep,
But Most People think BIGGER is better !
but the reality is all that matters is how you use that
You can't make a fair assessment on weather or not these lenses are overpriced or not from this video. Neither did you tell us why these lenses are so expensive, like you've been doing in the past 1-2 episodes. You should've compared at least 2 of them with other similar lenses in similar price points, there's no way to evaluate if it's overpriced without knowing how well they perform
@@TackJorrance Don't worry, I have rented and worked with the otus line myself, I know what you're talking about, but it just bugs me that this video asks a fairly simple question in the title but then doesn't even try to answer itself.
Please do an episode on the Zeiss Touit trio lenses for Fujifilm aps-c mirrorless cameras too, bro. That trio costs around $2200 altogether without any promotions or discounts.
is it compatible with canon? or just sony?
Do a video on zeiss batis lens.
Pls an episode about canon Diffractive optics
love this channel
Par focal? Breathing?
make the a video series on why a particular lens is so popular ( might be premium or not )
Do the canon 85mm f1.2
Can someone tell me what is the model of that tripod in the back?
I think these are a good investment if you shoot video. With vintage lenses still holding a great value and being highly desirable these lens I imagine will only get better with time.
They’re equally good for photography.
Zeiss is spelled like ceiss, in deutsch you change z to c (like hard c, not C from alphabet)
I love those old school focus depth scales
I'd say it's more like a 'tz' or 'ts' than a 'c' right?
I just make sure to buy almost all of my gear used
Ehhh, I don't know if I would call these cine primes. They are not T stopped and do not have teeth on the focus ring.
They sell add on focus rings.
Is there a macro lens that would be a dream for anyone to have?
Not worth the price with RF lenses being out.
they are not the same,rf lenses made for leica m are optimized for the leica thin filter stack,any lens under 50 suffers from increased aberrations.
They have the same build quality as the voigtlanders vm and zeiss zm lenses(made by cosina ),the equivalent is cheaper because are not rangefinder coupled and rf lenses if not used for some time without a range finder they'll simply decouple
So why would I pick up the Zeiss 50mm f/2 instead of Canon 50mm f/1.2?
Aesthetics, electronics integration with Sony, compact size, build quality, and a classic planar optical formula.
Some are just overpriced zm lens with adapters integrated ...and some electronic tricks for corrections.
One of my favorite lens to grab is the 35mm 2.8, love the small compact size.. Wish Sony would come out with more lenses this size. Fun lens to throw on and goto dinner or around town. These lenses are great but with such amazing autofocus in the Sony not sure these Loxia make sense.
The Sony 35/2.8 is not even close to the Loxia 35/2 in optical quality or build, and of course it’s a full stop slower.
And again u went Wakanda to buy lenses 🤸
He didn't come here to buy lenses, genius. It's called Lens Library. It's pretty self explanatory.
@@keavenwn oo man it was just joke I know it . It didn't make sense to buy soo many lens .
Time to move on to a topics other than lens price evaluations.
One of the reasons I got my Sony A7iii was the great eye auto focus. Buying a manual focus lens defeats the whole point of having a camera with a killer AF. That's why I own batis 25mm.
Then these clearly are not for you. For me, I hate AF and these lenses are perfect on my A7iv.
first
congratulations
Fourth
Its just overpriced because zeiss want. Therr are no way better than similary priced AF lenses. No point in getting these at all.
Lighter, Zeiss microcontrast, Zeiss T*, mini cine lens, Zeiss 3D Pop. Enough? You should look at Leica lenses.
No thanks. I am happy with my GMaster and Sigma Art lenses.
Still nothing compared to Leica glass
ha ha good joke !
over price! definitely! the set should be more like $3500! lack of auto focus renders the sony cameras full potential for diversity use of the lens!
They are just overpriced. Not fast, not sharp, not perfect. Just overpriced.
Not sharp? I think you better look again. I’d say the 50/2 is maybe even too sharp.
And I’m glad they’re not fast, they are tiny and match a compact mirrorless camera like the A7 perfectly.
They’re beautiful lenses.
Straight up overpriced.
1991ClarkJames Nope
I own a Loxia 25 and it's perfect for A7 line up - both img quality and size. But you have to pay a premium for E mount lenses anyways
did you ever had modern zeiss lens in hand?
God damn, they are so little, it worths each cent
God damn, they are so little, it worths each cent