Jump to content

Manual focus lenses


Recommended Posts

Just curious...

With all the advances in autofocus - and the cost of modern cameras with these features, I'm curious to know why photographers buy manual focus lenses such as Zeiss Loxia to put on these cameras.

Are they much cleaner or sharper than AF lenses (which can be used manually) Obviously they are cheaper than the equivalent AF lenses - 2/3 of the price of a Zeiss Batis but I doubt people would spend prime money on a body just to save a bit on a lens.

Edited by thebeardedgroundsman
Link to post
Share on other sites

Many of those lenses have a character that the run of the  mill native lenses don't necessarily have.

The same for the craze about vintage lenses that are often even better in some conditions than the newer designs. My collection of over 250 Minolta Rokkor lenses from the MF era is a demonstration of that and i am not alone.

I actually bought both my A7R and A7II to get the most out of these and when i have the time, i am having so much fun trying to figure why some spend 2000$ plus on a GM lens when some of these oldies can often provide very impressive results.

Link to post
Share on other sites

Ah... I can understand character.

I have a similar thing in my old trade as Landscape Gardener - a terrace laid with hand cut york stone paving has that extra bit of character that the same stone cut with an angle grinder lacks - unfortunately it's only people that lay the paving in this way that seem to appreciate the character.

Perhaps this is why people buy expensive GM lenses - they don't see and appreciate the character of old lenses.

I'd like to see comparative photos from similar Batis and Loxia lenses :-) (I do like the character of Zeiss lenses)

Link to post
Share on other sites

I think your comparison is pretty spot on @thebeardedgroundsman. Mostly the Zeiss Loxia and Cosina Voigtländer lenses are modern, state of the art lenses for people who appreciate the 'vintage feel' of a proper mechanically coupled focus ring with hard stops at both ends of the focus range. You do tend to pay a premium for these, some extreme examples of which are the Zeiss Otus lenses and of course Leica's Summi-/Noctiluxes.

 

1 hour ago, thebeardedgroundsman said:

(I do like the character of Zeiss lenses)

Do beware of Blue Badge Bias! This may have been a thing back in the old days but today Zeiss barely produces any lenses anymore: they just license the T* coating, which is pretty much all the Zeiss-magic that is added to the lens. The Batis lenses for example are designed and produced by Tamron. Not saying this is a bad thing, but do know you're paying top money for that blue badge without actually getting a 'Zeiss lens'.

Edited by Pieter
Link to post
Share on other sites

I understand the danger of going for brand name over experience.

For a while I had both a 50mm F1.4 Sony Zeiss and Sigma Art and I preferred the Sony Zeiss colours so I sold the Sigma.

I have 2 other Zeiss lenses and I am well pleased with them.

I don't only use Zeiss as I enjoy my Tamron 15-30mm f/2.8, Sony G 70-400mm and Minolta 500mm reflex.

As yet, all my lenses are AF and the only primes are the 50mm above and a small 35mm and 16mm "pancake" E mounts for walk around.

Link to post
Share on other sites

For some of use, it is just an issue of control.  Some of us even prefer manual exposure -- at least some of the time.  And the auto-focusing cameras don't always focus where you want.  On top of that, one of the great features of many manual-focusing lenses is a much longer focusing "throw" which gives you finer focusing when you want to focus manually.

Link to post
Share on other sites

Create an account or sign in to comment

You need to be a member in order to leave a comment

Create an account

Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!

Register a new account

Sign in

Already have an account? Sign in here.

Sign In Now
 Share

×
×
  • Create New...