Nat Geo shooter Ben Horton compares Canon glass to Zeiss glass (Zeiss rules!)
Ben Horton finally gave us an answer to the BIG question: Are Zeiss lenses better than Canon lenses? Oh yes! The National geographic shooter tested the Zeiss ZE lens series for Canon
“When presented with an opportunity to take a good photo, I chose the Zeiss lens over my Canon lens every time. I didn’t even have to think about it. The contrast, the clarity, and the feel of the lenses was so much better from the very beginning that I had ceased to use them just for the review, I was using them so I would get the best image that I possibly could. ”
Why is the test so important? It shows the potential of the future High-resolution APS-C and FF Sony sensors when combined with Zeiss lenses. The A77 will feature a new 24 megapixel sensor and the FF sensor is expected to have more than 30 Megapixels! To have good lenses is crucial because otherwise the Megapixel race doesn’t make any sense.
Those are the current fullframe Zeiss lenses for Sony (Click on store name to check price and availability):
- Sony 16-35mm f/2.8 ZA Lens (Amazon
- Sony 24mm f/2.0 Distagon T* lens (Amazon
- Sony 24 -70mm f/2.8 Carl Zeiss Vario Sonnar T Zoom Lens (Amazon
- Sony 85mm f1.4 Carl Zeiss Planar T Coated Telephoto Lens (Amazon
- Sony 135mm f/1.8 Carl Zeiss Sonnar T Telephoto Lens (Amazon
Related Posts
Via Photocinenews
Share
Recent comments
Comment from iwaki: fair enough.
there were some flawed log...Comment from acolyte: Most photographers don't edit their phot...
Comment from Arthur: What is the point of comparing lenses th...
b shaw
2 years ago |This isn’t a rumor; we know Zeiss is great!
qbic
2 years ago |Bullc*ap test:
Different sensor (CFA/DR) = different processing, there is no such thing as unedited in digital photography.
iwaki
2 years ago |completely agree! if the author argument to have a higher contrast higher saturation, warmth bla bla bla straight off the bat to reduce editing time then sure. But comparing unedited digital file is silly.
There are people who prefer low contrast lenses too. The obvious look difference from the canon 85L is largely due to its very low contrast.
And comparing a 1.2 to a 1.4 lens is a bit silly too, the 85L can produce a rendering that is very special and no zeiss lens has this look, it’s either you like it or not. The canon 85L has similar look to Walter Mandler’s lenses to me, some people hate it some people like it. http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Walter_Mandler
so i guess, next we will hear a zeiss 50/1.4 better than a Noctilux
acolyte
2 years ago |Most photographers don’t edit their photos.
The more photographers that knows how to edit photos, the more people take up photography and don’t know how to edit photos/what to edit them into.
And again, the author didn’t say Zeiss is absolutely better than Canon. The author just says that she likes Zeiss, and that Ben Horton likes Zeiss.
You’re free to say what you want, but these are subjective views.
And subjectively, I dislike Canon colors. Increasing contrast in most images destroys it when I try. A lot of colors are lost, even when it’s Sony lenses. I ended up scrapping them in the end.
iwaki
2 years ago |fair enough.
there were some flawed logics behind the comparison though, comparing a prime low speed wide angle resolution to a fast zoom wide angle is an orange and apple comparison.
True that zeiss lenses produces a rather more warm images, and is very hard or nearly impossible to duplicate on PP. I agree, also for me i prefer the zeiss color more than the canon. And zeiss has also its own unique way of rendering the out of focus area. I like my zeiss lens after all. But i still think the review is silly
dave
2 years ago |This news is full of fanboy smelling air. Why do you have to attack Canon like that? Just report that Zeiss give good result and it won’t leave a bad aftertaste. I’m not a canon user myself but this just sad.
admin
2 years ago |I don’t attack Canon. It’s just fact! The Zeiss lenses are better
P.S.: I use a Canon 5D at work and like that camera.
admin
2 years ago |P.S: Where is he part where you feel that I attack Canon?
subi
2 years ago |this site is about sony…what do u expect? Anyway, I don’t see any attack on Canon, just comparing glass, which, all mounts having Zeiss support. Even Zeiss are better than some Sony’s own lenses.
acolyte
2 years ago |Sounds like you haven’t been reading the Canikon fanboys attacks dave
If this is sad, I don’t know what you call those :\
acolyte
2 years ago |And also, it’s Zeiss ZE lenses FOR canon, not Sony, so it’s not directly attacking Canon. It’s like comparing Zeiss to Sony lenses.
Carl
2 years ago |While the colours and contrast aren’t as good, the 85L does have nice bokeh.
mugen
2 years ago |Sony Zeiss lenses are not ZE/ZF MF lenses.
Sky_walker
2 years ago |Yep, that’s the problem. Zeiss lenses available for Canon/Nikon/M42 aren’t what the ZA lenses are.
So in general such discussion is kinda like… what’s better: Canon DSLR or Nikon DSLR. It can’t be resolved as it varies from camera to camera. And so it does with lenses.
But yes, it’s nice to see that Zeiss makes great glass for Canon. Pity that MF only. But still great. If they’d be available for Sony mount I’d consider getting one for sure.
Myst
2 years ago |the zeiss 85mm ZF is different from the sony zeiss lens, i am sure the bokeh is better for the sony mount lens, contrast might be the same and resolution again better on the sony, CA might be higher on the sony model, though there is no doubt that zeiss is a class of it’s own when it comes to FF dslr lenses.
Panfruit
2 years ago |Yes, the Sony Zeiss is based on the Minolta 85mm. Not the same as the ZF 85mm at all.
Myst
2 years ago |i don’t know how much it’s based on the old minolta lens, cause it’s designed by zeiss, not sony. Sony only manufactures the lens under zeiss quality control conditions.
John Peter
2 years ago |Not surprised that Zeiss lenses are that good. Own the 16-80mm and it is just great. Sad to note SR5 rumour that future Sony fit Zeiss lenses will be FF only. If the other rumour is right that A77 APS-C sensor will be 24Mp and FF “only” 30Mp or thereabouts then surely the Zeiss lenses are required for APS-C as well. I know you can use FF lenses on APS-C but they tend to be heavier and not so suited for a W/A enthusiast like me. 24-70 translates into 36-105 and really no good to me. 16-35 becomes 24-54 and very restriced at the long end. I doubt any current Sony, Tamron or Sigma lens can fully resolve a 24Mp APS-C sensor output.
transformation
2 years ago |As of today, the Sony SLT Alpha 55 is officially the highest-scoring cropped-frame sensor according to DxO, besting the D90.
http://dxomark.com/index.php/en/Camera-Sensor/Sensor-rankings
And the translucent mirror design is supposed to come with a penalty of 1/2-2/3 stop. I wonder how well this sensor would have tested without the translucent mirror.
I’m anxious to see what the Nikon D7000 can bring to the table.
b shaw
2 years ago |@transformation
Actually – it has the same score overall score as the the Nikon D90. The D90 has about 20% better rating for low light ISO component of their rating. Also, note Canon’s slightly larger sensor (1.3X multiplier) in the Canon EOS 1D Mark IV has a slightly higher result, too.
Nonetheless, the result is quite remarkable – considering there is a pellicle mirror in front of the sensor. Sony has come a long way since 2006 – Pretty good in just four years. Kudos to them.
Thanks for this – now I’m getting interested in these cameras – this good result from the DxO’s fairly independent, objective test results help to make the case for me …
transformation
2 years ago |@b shaw
Remember that ISO is not a linear scale. The difference between 816 ISO (Sony SLT Alpha 55) and 977 ISO (Nikon D90) is less than 1/3 stop.
Also, the D90 still fares better on all fronts with the 100% crop component scores, but the resolution boost is definitely noticeable and appreciated.
Edgars
2 years ago |I always liked Minolta/Sony lenses over Nikon lenses and Nikon over Canon. Zeiss micro-contrast is in its own class, while Minolta/Sony colors and bokeh I like much more.
It is just my personal preferences and only partially based on measurable IQ characteristics. Overall digital post-processing could solve almost any color problems in Raw.
Doug
2 years ago |I’m lucky enough to own two Zeiss lenses – the 135/f1.8 and the 24-70/f2.8. They are without a doubt two of the finest lenses ever made for any camera. If it were legal, I’d probably marry them.
EE
2 years ago |The Leica won. Oh, wait….Leica wasn’t compared, was it? Hrmm….
Arthur
2 years ago |What is the point of comparing lenses that have proprietary mounts. We can’t use Canon glass on Sony cameras, nor can we use Zeiss/Sony on Canon bodies.
acolyte
2 years ago |So what’s being compared is that Zeiss (Canon) is better than Canon lenses at Canon mounts. In a way we’re hoping that Zeiss (Sony) is better than Sony lenses at Sony mounts, and hopefully Canon lenses too.