Opticallimits

Full Version: Zeiss Touit 32mm f/1.8 ...
You're currently viewing a stripped down version of our content. View the full version with proper formatting.
Pages: 1 2
... you knew it already I guess ... our sample is decentered and goes back for an exchange. Things were already a bit fishy in the lab (unsure AF, some haze) but the field results are just bad.

 

Honestly, this industry is a joke. The next time I will test a coke bottle - it has a proven design for more than a century. Their bottles are certainly perfectly centered by now.

I don't recall when I saw the last coke bottle made of glass  Rolleyes

neither are the lens elements in some lenses ...
I think the new fashionable term is  "eccentric"

 

 

   No comments on the 55mm Otus?

Do you want me to test it ? 

If you buy it for 90% after testing ... sure. :-)

Other than that the weight is just prohibitive for such a focal length/aperture prime.

Guest

I'm kind of disappointed given the price point. I don't remember things being this bad a couple of years ago and it seems most of the micro-4/3 lenses were not this bad; have things gotten worse or are you more atune to the issue ?
Quote:Do you want me to test it ? 

If you buy it for 90% after testing ... sure. :-)

Other than that the weight is just prohibitive for such a focal length/aperture prime.
I'm afraid that it is not available in the Pentax mount, I just thought that maybe you would comment on the Otus's  performance as you were the first to bring the lens to our attention and that also it is claimed to be the best standard lens available! 

Sylvain

Klaus, I think it's time to step up and maybe allocate your time for a greater project. Associate with other websites (lensrentals, dpreview, imaging-resource, german sites, german, petapixel, ..., ...) and try to establish a HUGE lobbying campaign. I think you would, at the very least, release frustration. Use social networks,

 

Photographic lenses are extremely expensive object. We tend to think "it's normal" and we get used to their price tag but I think we lost our critical thinking. Paying 400€ for a simple prime lens for aps-c to find out it's dodgy from day 0 is inacceptable, regardeless of its intended use (large printing or not). And don't get me started on the bonky 17-55 and the likes at 1000€ a pop. Europeans have perhaps stopped "mentally converting" to their old currency but when you do, it's sure is scary expensive. I agree that there must be "limited pixel peeping" involved too, and that we should mostly look at visible issues.

 

You could possibly even look for industry support (albeit challenging the venture itself). We need to wait for more feedback but what if Sigma's efforts were actually successful and measurable and that they could pressure others into QC ?

 

Sigma got it well lined it seems, new materials, new optics (hoya), new QC, still competitive on the price. What about others?

 

I feel like you don't really want to do this anymore :-)

 

Quote:... you knew it already I guess ... our sample is decentered and goes back for an exchange. Things were already a bit fishy in the lab (unsure AF, some haze) but the field results are just bad.

 

Honestly, this industry is a joke. The next time I will test a coke bottle - it has a proven design for more than a century. Their bottles are certainly perfectly centered by now.

Guest

Yea lensrental had a comment about not only decenetered lenses but the hopelessness of having them fixed:

-

http://www.lensrentals.com/blog/2013/11/...-spec-lens

 

-

Hum. You know I'm really impressed how sigma has improved things over the last couple of years.
Quote:Klaus, I think it's time to step up and maybe allocate your time for a greater project. Associate with other websites (lensrentals, dpreview, imaging-resource, german sites, german, petapixel, ..., ...) and try to establish a HUGE lobbying campaign. I think you would, at the very least, release frustration. Use social networks,

 

Photographic lenses are extremely expensive object. We tend to think "it's normal" and we get used to their price tag but I think we lost our critical thinking. Paying 400€ for a simple prime lens for aps-c to find out it's dodgy from day 0 is inacceptable, regardeless of its intended use (large printing or not). And don't get me started on the bonky 17-55 and the likes at 1000€ a pop. Europeans have perhaps stopped "mentally converting" to their old currency but when you do, it's sure is scary expensive. I agree that there must be "limited pixel peeping" involved too, and that we should mostly look at visible issues.

 

You could possibly even look for industry support (albeit challenging the venture itself). We need to wait for more feedback but what if Sigma's efforts were actually successful and measurable and that they could pressure others into QC ?

 

Sigma got it well lined it seems, new materials, new optics (hoya), new QC, still competitive on the price. What about others?

 

I feel like you don't really want to do this anymore :-)
 

Lenses are cheap these days, compared to e.g. the 70ies.  When I got my Pentax FA 50/1.4 in 2000, it cost as much (same figure) as a Pentax 50/1.4 for a Spotmatic was in the early 70ies. 

 

These days most consumer products fall of a conveyor belt somewhere into the chiping box.  Fixing things is expensive, lots of one-off work etc.
Pages: 1 2