It’s rare to find both Loxia in Stock in USA. Here they are:
50mm Loxia in Stock at Adorama, [shoplink 38519 ebay]KenMoreCamera[/shoplink], [shoplink 38520 ebay]Popflash[/shoplink].
35mm Loxia in Stock at Amazon, [shoplink 38518 ebay]KenMoreCamera[/shoplink].
And in USA tomorrow the first new Batis lenses will ship to early preorders:
Zeiss Batis 85mm f/1.8 lens in US at Adorama, Bhphoto. In Eu at Amazon DE, WexUK. In Asia at Digitalrev.
Zeiss Batis 25mm f/2.0 lens at Adorama, Bhphoto. In EU at Amazon DE, WexUK. In Asia at Digitalrev.
27 Responses
Are the loxias actually worth it? They get good reviews from what I’ve seen but I havent seen them used in any actual work. I’m looking at the 35mm for video work
Are the loxias any good from anyones personal experience? they seem to get good reviews but I haven’t seen them in any actual real world examples. Im weighing up the loxia 35 and the sigma art 35 for video use.
digging these loxia’s. yes more loxia please. love that distortion free design. makes proofing RAW to clients much nicer, without having to correct every freaking image first.
See… if a designer uses image for comp placement, and completes a design around that, the final may change if distortion is corrected later. Best to have no distortion to begin with.
wish the aperture ring went in opposite direction to match Leica, Contax, Minolta MD, Mitakon (and most others) direction.
What are you getting at here, it’s only a 35 & 50, even we managed that trick 35 years ago. It’s not like trying to design and build a wide zoom. Have you tried our wide zooms?
Which Nikon wide zoom is f2.0? Which Nikkor 35/50mm lenses are distortion free, T* coated, impervious to CA, and native emount?
Now I need Sony to ship A7rII to go with the Batis 85mm.
Expected availability: July 23 2015
Now it’s saying mid-august on B&H…
yes disappointing , the camera will come before that
Where are the 6 rumored new lenses ?
I have the 50 and I find it pretty amazing. I don’t really care about video though so I can’t help you there. The image quality is very good and the images just seem to have a special rendering not seen in many other lenses
B&H has suddenly changed the availability dates for both Batis lenses to “mid August”. Another failure for Zeiss, just like with the Loxia non-availability over the last 10 months since they allegedly became available.
Interesting. What kind of clients do you work for? (Honestly just curious.) I would think a JPEG (with lens correction, etc. applied) would be the only thing you’d want to show a client who’s looking over your shoulder anyway. If you’re showing them RAW images isn’t there already a significant process involved already? Like I said, just curious..
Hi Larry. I’m a working commercial advertising and fashion photographer for 35 years self employed. I shoot magazine editorial and corporate campaigns for catalog, brochure and large retail display.
My current campaign for instance is for midwestern electric company (finishing last shoot tomorrow). Working high up the poles in bucket trucks to demonstrate new safety gear for the linemen. To keep cameras running fast, and editing simple and fast, I don’t burden the system with shooting RAW+JPG. Only shoot RAW, always, writing two files on a99. Only use Emount when absolute resolution is necessary. This project requires 24×36″ posters. The 14bit a99 is perfectly suited for that and more. Shooting dark swarthy faced linemen against bright sky (without fill flash) requires a lens/camera combination with heft. I’m not going anywhere near a JPG with that.
I don’t use Lightroom. Just go from Bridge, to RAW file converter, to writing JPG proof for client, then upload to Google Drive. I can appreciate why a photographer might use auto correct… this and that… for this and that. I don’t, because I’d rather know the true nature of the glass I’m working with, without some computer algorithm trying to perfect it with mathematics. That’s like buying a lens with soul, then using a computer to kill the soul away again.
So yes, I can take extra time correcting CA and distortion for multiple lenses on a single session… which ads time to my bottom line, lowering my salary. Or I can use distortion free CA free glass to begin with and not worry about Adobe math.
Passing the final RAW selection to an art director would require them to be using the same post production workflow as I do. Can’t guarantee that. They may forget to correct for the anomalies.
A well corrected lens does more than just shoot nicely. It removes variables that might occur during the fulfillment chain. If you cannot pass good quality no hassle images along easily and efficiently, then you cannot compete in today’s competitive marketplace.
The Loxia’s may look average on the surface. But the testing sites demonstrate they have addressed professional nuances, like the Voigtlander 125mm macro, and Otus twins.
I know the Loxias are good– and different lenses than the Batis line entirely– but it sure seems like you get a lot more for your money with the Batis. I know that having great optics in that small package is worth something, but Loxias also do without AF and IS, making the small package much easier, and most likely cheaper on the whole.
Not complaining, because having these great lenses for the E/FE mount is amazing. But damn, Sony’s lens options are not cheap. 🙂 The FE 35mm f/2.8 does not need to retail for $799. That should be a $399 lens, in my humble opinion. (I know it’s sharp, I know, I know…)
The Batis 25mm isn’t stabilized either.
Yep, good to point out. In FF lenses that focal length generally isn’t stabilized, so I was going off the premise that 35mm and above can, and sometimes are.
I sound like a complainer but I’m not trying to be a b_____ about it. It’s mid-2015 and neither Nikon nor Canon build a stabilized standard FF 2.8 zoom. (Don’t is exempt because of their IBIS). Not talking E-mount here, as I don’t think a 2.8 zoom was ever planned, though they might end up making one.
Annnnywayyyy, I’d love to buy all the Zeiss glass for E-mount. It’s amazing stuff for the money when you look at what similar quality optics and features cost 10 or 15 years ago (and still do in Leica land).
You get even more with the A mount 24mm Zeiss F2. It goes for under 8 bills- 7 even. I mean, it’s so stupid cheap now it’s practically free.
Is that the lens that’s sometimes referred to as one of the best Zeiss a-mount (what’s it called now) lenses? I saw it on EBay new/refurb for $800 and was pretty surprised.
It’s a classy lens. I mean, I think you could score it for 700 bucks. Save yourself at MINIMUM 500 plus tax over the Batis 25. You can then use that 700 to buy a lot of cuban cigars or a closet of twinkies. The real insult is when you get it in your hands- it’s all metal unlike the Batis. You’ll feel like you’ve gotten away with murder.
It’s a beautiful lens. Its 50mm and 85mm counterparts are some of the best looking, well designed lenses, IMHO. They have a minimal, timeless, industrial look to them. When looking at a Canon or Nikkor prime from the same period, all the unnecessary design flourishes make them look dated and firmly fixed to a decade.
Of course lenses are for taking pictures, and some people would think I’m full of sht for saying any of that.
What’s so exciting about paying full price? Thanks for nothing SAR.
For video use, being able to pull focus smoothly and having clickless aperture with the Loxia would be quite a bit more user friendly than the focus by wire and discrete aperture design of the Sigma. Plus you don’t need a converter.
“makes proofing RAW to clients much nicer”- Excellent point!
Loxia is all about the user experience. It’s ALL about the user experience. As in- 900 dollars is the user experience and the rest is the lens. For some, it’s worth it.
Did anyone in US receive shipping confirmation from BH yet? I just check my BH account, it still show “On Order”.
I have both lenses on pre-order on May 27th. Crossing my fingers on the first patch :))
I ordered May 11th and haven’t heard anything. B&H showing mid-august now for expected availability.