# DXOMark: Zeiss Otus 55mm f/1.4



## Canon Rumors Guy (Nov 26, 2013)

```
<div name="googleone_share_1" style="position:relative;z-index:5;float: right; /*margin: 70px 0 0 0;*/ top:70px; right:120px; width:0;"><g:plusone size="tall" count="1" href="http://www.canonrumors.com/2013/11/dxomark-zeiss-otus-55mm-f1-4/"></g:plusone></div><div style="float: right; margin:0 0 70px 70px;"><a href="https://twitter.com/share" class="twitter-share-button" data-count="vertical" data-url="http://www.canonrumors.com/2013/11/dxomark-zeiss-otus-55mm-f1-4/">Tweet</a></div>
<strong>Shocking news….


</strong>….. The Zeiss Otus 55mm f/1.4 is the best lens ever mounted to a Canon DSLR! DXOMark has completed their testing of the new king of the primes.</p>
<p><strong>Says DXOMark

</strong><em>“Without doubt Zeiss has achieved their goal of producing the finest fast standard prime available on the market today for full-frame DSLRs, but at a shade under $4000, image quality like that doesn’t come cheap.</em></p>
<p><em>There are a couple of other concessions to consider as well. The Zeiss lacks autofocus and being slightly larger and heavier than the firm’s <a href="http://www.dxomark.com/Lenses/Carl-Zeiss/Zeiss-Carl-Zeiss-Apo-Sonnar-T-Star-F2-135-ZE-Canon" target="_blank">Apo Sonnar T* 2,0/135</a> it’s not particularly discrete.</em></p>
<p><em>Despite that the <a href="http://www.dxomark.com/Lenses/Carl-Zeiss/Zeiss-Carl-Zeiss-Distagon-T-STAR-Otus-55mm-F14-ZE-Canon" target="_blank">Zeiss Otus T* 1,4/55</a> is a breathtaking example of what’s possible, and will likely go down in history as one of the classic fast standard designs of our time.”</em></p>
<div id="attachment_14951" style="width: 585px" class="wp-caption aligncenter"><a href="http://www.canonrumors.com/wp-content/uploads/2013/11/dxootus1.jpg"><img class="size-full wp-image-14951 " alt="Zeiss Otus 55mm f/1.4 Results on the EOS 5D Mark III" src="http://www.canonrumors.com/wp-content/uploads/2013/11/dxootus1.jpg" width="575" height="293" /></a><p class="wp-caption-text">Zeiss Otus 55mm f/1.4 Results on the EOS 5D Mark III</p></div>
<p><strong><a href="http://www.dxomark.com/Reviews/Carl-Zeiss-Distagon-T-Otus-1-4-55-ZE-Canon-mount-lens-review-Peerless-Prime" target="_blank">Read the full review</a> | <a href="http://www.bhphotovideo.com/c/product/1007599-REG/zeiss_2010_056_55mm_f_1_4_otus_lens.html/bi/2466/kbid/3296" target="_blank">Preorder the Zeiss Otus 55mm f/1.4 at B&H Photo</a></strong></p>
<p><strong><span style="color: #ff0000;">c</span>r</strong></p>
```


----------



## duydaniel (Nov 26, 2013)

The future of facebook is here 

Though I don't like Zeiss, I'd admit they impressed me with this


----------



## neuroanatomist (Nov 26, 2013)

duydaniel said:


> Though I don't like Zeiss



What's wrong with Zeiss?


----------



## Sporgon (Nov 26, 2013)

So the Otus is about $105 per dxo 'point' and the Canon 35 f2 IS is about $14 per point. 

Hmmmmm.........


----------



## dryanparker (Nov 26, 2013)

Sporgon said:


> So the Otus is about $105 per dxo 'point' and the Canon 35 f2 IS is about $14 per point.
> 
> Hmmmmm.........



??

Seems to me one of Zeiss' finest optics should be about 10x more expensive than a Canon non-L lens. Ha!


----------



## Artifex (Nov 26, 2013)

Sporgon said:


> So the Otus is about $105 per dxo 'point' and the Canon 35 f2 IS is about $14 per point.
> 
> Hmmmmm.........



By this logic, I assume you use a 50mm f/1.8 II at $4 per point!


----------



## duydaniel (Nov 26, 2013)

neuroanatomist said:


> duydaniel said:
> 
> 
> > Though I don't like Zeiss
> ...



I always group them with Leica who produces inferior cameras with over priced policy.
But I hope Canon should respond to this like Nikon with their 58mm (and lost unfortunately)


----------



## dryanparker (Nov 26, 2013)

duydaniel said:


> neuroanatomist said:
> 
> 
> > duydaniel said:
> ...



Leica is inferior? News to me.


----------



## Viggo (Nov 26, 2013)

Sweet! And very expected.

I'm seriously happy with the Zeiss 50 f2 also, I use a 50 a lot up close, and it destroys any other 50 for IQ up close (and I can go VERY close) and color contrast and bokeh is really nice, quite unique look with 50mm f2 and super tight framing. And the build makes the 50 L seem a bit, well, not so great. MF is not a big issue. At 1.4 and with the heavier 55, it can be tricky I presume. 

Do I see a a 55 in my future? ;D


----------



## duydaniel (Nov 26, 2013)

dryanparker said:


> duydaniel said:
> 
> 
> > neuroanatomist said:
> ...



Their cameras in my opinion yes


----------



## Sporgon (Nov 26, 2013)

Artifex said:


> Sporgon said:
> 
> 
> > So the Otus is about $105 per dxo 'point' and the Canon 35 f2 IS is about $14 per point.
> ...


 ;D

Very close ! The 40mm @ $5 per point


----------



## neuroanatomist (Nov 26, 2013)

duydaniel said:


> neuroanatomist said:
> 
> 
> > duydaniel said:
> ...



Zeiss products aren't cheap, but they are optically excellent. I've got 6 of their cameras and >40 lenses (microscopy), great stuff...


----------



## BruinBear (Nov 26, 2013)

I know DXO scores are pretty arbitrary, but how is the zeiss 6 points higher than the 300/2.8 even though its worse in 4/5 of their "categories"


----------



## Sporgon (Nov 26, 2013)

BruinBear said:


> I know DXO scores are pretty arbitrary, but how is the zeiss 6 points higher than the 300/2.8 even though its worse in 4/5 of their "categories"



Because of the difference in speed of the two lenses. Dxo seem to load the 'transmission' score more heavily. 

But is a 1.4 lens better than a 2.8 lens _per se_ ?


----------



## neuroanatomist (Nov 26, 2013)

Sporgon said:


> BruinBear said:
> 
> 
> > I know DXO scores are pretty arbitrary, but how is the zeiss 6 points higher than the 300/2.8 even though its worse in 4/5 of their "categories"
> ...



Well, you see a Score, and you see a bunch of Measurements under it. Logically, you assume the Score represents some sort of summary or synthesis of those Measurememts. But, no...that's DxOMark's Biased Scores for you - BS. 

The Lens Score is actually based on 'performance in 150 lux illumination' - the light level of a dimly lit warehouse. So, the Lens Score is determined mainly by the T-stop of the lens...and by the camera on which the lens is tested. Like I said...BS.


----------



## RomainF (Nov 26, 2013)

[EDITED]
Nothing.....we're not gonna start a debate about Leica....


----------



## ME (Nov 27, 2013)

I was already impressed with this lens based on reviews from some other review sites that I usually go to instead of DXOMark. I would definitely get this lens if I could afford it. But I am still happy with my 50L and Zeiss f/1.4 ZE Planar T.


----------



## RGomezPhotos (Nov 27, 2013)

ME said:


> I was already impressed with this lens based on reviews from some other review sites that I usually go to instead of DXOMark. I would definitely get this lens if I could afford it. But I am still happy with my 50L and Zeiss f/1.4 ZE Planar T.



Yes, 

I love my Zeiss 50mm f1.4 too. I think it's a good thing I can't even afford the rental price of the Otis!


----------



## ME (Nov 27, 2013)

RGomezPhotos said:


> ME said:
> 
> 
> > I was already impressed with this lens based on reviews from some other review sites that I usually go to instead of DXOMark. I would definitely get this lens if I could afford it. But I am still happy with my 50L and Zeiss f/1.4 ZE Planar T.
> ...



Meaning that you might be tempted to buy it anyway if you used it? I have struggled to find a way of buying this lens, and finally sighed in resignation. :'(  There are couple of other Zeiss lenses I am dreaming of also, that I have real hopes of getting, though not inexpensive either.


----------



## M.ST (Nov 27, 2013)

I have some Zeiss lenses too. But not every Zeiss lens is usefull und worth to buy.

I like the comparison with the EF 300 2.8 II IS L lens.

But remember that the EF 300 2.8 II IS L lens is the best big white lens and the belongs to the best lenses that Canon produce.

If you see the price difference between the two lenses I highly recommend to add the fantastic EF 300 2.8 II IS L to your gear. You never regret it.


----------



## AlanF (Nov 27, 2013)

BruinBear said:


> I know DXO scores are pretty arbitrary, but how is the zeiss 6 points higher than the 300/2.8 even though its worse in 4/5 of their "categories"



It's because they don't have a Wow! score, which is a measure of the crowd attraction of the lens. The 300mm f/2.8 wins hands down as it is far more conspicuous because of colour and length and width. DxO dropped the Wow! Score because it gave Canon a higher mark than Nikon for white lenses, and substituted the DR score.


----------



## MLfan3 (Nov 27, 2013)

get over it, getting too annoying about this issue.
the Otus is a great lens but as even DXO says , it is huge and impractical for most of handheld apps.
I tried it and it is amazing but so what?
if Canon or any one design a 50mm without AF , as big as the Otus , any Asian brand lens company can do it too.
but the fact is Westerns do not pay a lot of money for an Asian lens , I think Samyong or Sigma can do it too , but if they do and try to charge 4k for a 50mm , what will happen?
so while the Otus is a great lens in terms of pure optical , tripod based performance tests, it is not really a practical or that amazing in real life use.
imagine what most of Western buyers would react if Sigma or Samyong try to design something like that and charge 4k?
sadly, there are many many name worshippers , if it says Leica , Zeiss , Hassel Blad , then many people love it and willing to pay whatever the price asked regardless of its performance in real life.
the Pana Leica primes are actually designed by KM but they say Leica design in EU or US because of the above reason , but in Pana's original Japanese site it clearly says it is not Leica lenses just Leica baranded..............


----------



## infared (Nov 27, 2013)

duydaniel said:


> neuroanatomist said:
> 
> 
> > duydaniel said:
> ...



Can hardly call that a "response" from Nikon... :


----------



## docsmith (Nov 27, 2013)

MLfan3 said:


> ....
> if Canon or any one design a 50mm without AF , as big as the Otus , any Asian brand lens company can do it too.
> but the fact is Westerns do not pay a lot of money for an Asian lens , I think Samyong or Sigma can do it too , but if they do and try to charge 4k for a 50mm , what will happen?
> so while the Otus is a great lens in terms of pure optical , tripod based performance tests, it is not really a practical or that amazing in real life use.
> ...


I don't like what you are insinuating and think you are completely incorrect. Zeiss has a history of excellent optics and people are willing to pay a little more for that history, sure. But I think location has next to nothing to do with it. Think about cars. It used to be that luxury cars were primarily from Germany (BMW, Audi, Mercedes, etc). Then Acura, Lexus, and Infiniti came along. Guess what, "westerners" are buying Lexus, Acuras and Infinitis. A lot of them. If Samyang, Canon, Nikon, Sigma, Tamron, etc, can build a lens as good as the Otus, and they think they can make money on that lens....then they should do it. People will buy it. Personally, competition in that high end market would be great. 

And personally speaking, this westerner has spent a lot of money on "Asian" lenses, camera bodies, etc.


----------



## mackguyver (Nov 27, 2013)

BruinBear said:


> I know DXO scores are pretty arbitrary, but how is the zeiss 6 points higher than the 300/2.8 even though its worse in 4/5 of their "categories"


Exactly why I plan to pass on this lens and keep using my 300. Sure the perspective is _slightly_ different and I have to stand _just a little _further back to get the same framing, but I get IS, AF, and an even sharper result


----------



## traveller (Nov 27, 2013)

neuroanatomist said:


> Sporgon said:
> 
> 
> > BruinBear said:
> ...



I find DXO Mark's measurements OK, as long as you're willing to look past the headlines and read the actual results (and not just the summary table). Like most journalism, it catches audience attention with simplistic headlines, not long lists of qualifications and caveats. There are complicating factors when you're trying to compare the resolution of a normal to a 300mm lens; Photozone comments: 

"Some may be surprised that all these long tele lenses don't deliver a better performance than many wide-angle lenses. Please note that there's QUITE a bit more space between the test chart with super tele lenses so the longer the focal length the higher is the amount of air diffusion" [http://www.photozone.de/canon-eos/173-canon-ef-400mm-f56-usm-l-lab-test-report--review?start=1]

although this is in relation to the 400mm f/5.6L on APS-C, the principle remains. If I were to criticize DXO Mark's comparison, it would be for making this sort of facile comparison at all. From a photographic point of view comparing a 55mm to a 300mm lens makes about as much sense as comparing a sports car to a tractor.


----------



## Eldar (Nov 27, 2013)

MLfan3 said:


> I tried it and it is amazing but so what?


Exactly, it´s amazing! Apparently nothing for you, but definitely something for me. We are different and we do different things. 
A Bugatti Veyron is an amazing car ... but only two seats, noisy as hell, too low to drive on dirt roads and no room for my fishing gear ... Who the hell would want such a car


----------



## AlanF (Nov 27, 2013)

Zeiss is a very good company whose ethos for many decades has been to be the best in the world at what they do. Their latest Otus is for a niche market and will not be a huge mass market money spinner. It isn't fair to say that Westerners would not buy such a lens from an Asian company. We pay far more for the top Canon telephoto lenses. And I doubt whether Zeiss would even try and compete with those telephoto lenses because they know that it is one of the areas where Zeiss would be hard pressed to be the best in the world.


----------

