Touit ...

[pakodominguez]

"We reveal the best-kept secret about the new family of lenses for mirrorless systems cameras" [sic]
http://blogs.zeiss.com/photo/en/?p=3518

Touit 2.8/12
http://lenses.zeiss.com/camera-lenses/c ... t2812.html
Touit 1.8/32
http://lenses.zeiss.com/camera-lenses/c ... t1832.html

[David Kilpatrick]

This is one of the lenses I flagged up from Zeiss at their Focus on Imaging stand.

David

[pakodominguez]

I recall they announced a 50mm Macro also?

[pakodominguez]

Test on Fujifilm X (in Spanish)
http://www.dslrmagazine.com/pruebas/pru ... cnica.html
Looks good to me

[agorabasta]

The 12mm appears quite fine indeed.

But the 32mm was not tested there for bokeh/blur properties. And that's exactly the very weak point of that lens, and it really makes its larger apertures' usability very limited.
The problem is that the lens PSF acts to create very hard-edge circles from defocused point sources. This increases subjective DoF around focus plane, but then farther from the plane it acts to double all the thin lines and creates quite an abominable bokeh.

I could forgive the bokeh, as that's a rather secondary property of a lens. But I cannot forgive the totally unnatural appearance of the small/medium blur that lens delivers - that's because the small/medium blur happens in the pictures done at 32mm virtually always, and that line-doubling is a very apparent and highly distracting artifact.

P.S. here's a dpr thread with samples of the problem - http://www.dpreview.com/forums/post/51634348

[pakodominguez]

The 12mm appears quite fine indeed.

But the 32mm was not tested there for bokeh/blur properties. And that's exactly the very weak point of that lens, and it really makes its larger apertures' usability very limited.
The problem is that the lens PSF acts to create very hard-edge circles from defocused point sources. This increases subjective DoF around focus plane, but then farther from the plane it acts to double all the thin lines and creates quite an abominable bokeh.

I could forgive the bokeh, as that's a rather secondary property of a lens. But I cannot forgive the totally unnatural appearance of the small/medium blur that lens delivers - that's because the small/medium blur happens in the pictures done at 32mm virtually always, and that line-doubling is a very apparent and highly distracting artifact.

P.S. here's a dpr thread with samples of the problem - http://www.dpreview.com/forums/post/51634348

German lens design is well know for (high) resolution, not for bokeh, that is a Japanese trend. Anyways, if I'll buy a e-mount 35mm I think 450$ of the Sony lens is more than enough, while the 900$ of the touit... well, is always the same thing, you will have the blue Zeiss tag on your lens!

[agorabasta]

Pako,

I don't care of those pseudo-'German' trends/tales, especially considering that neither Leica nor Schneider are subject to that ugly Zeiss rendering while being as sharp/high-contrast or better.

The matter is - 90% of shots with that Touit 32mm would be showing very ugly and obvious artifacts. And what's worse yet, those artifacts don't easily disappear with downsampling as the spectral components of the artifacts spread well down the whole image spacial spectrum.

[pakodominguez]

Pako,

I don't care of those pseudo-'German' trends/tales, especially considering that neither Leica nor Schneider are subject to that ugly Zeiss rendering while being as sharp/high-contrast or better.

The matter is - 90% of shots with that Touit 32mm would be showing very ugly and obvious artifacts. And what's worse yet, those artifacts don't easily disappear with downsampling as the spectral components of the artifacts spread well down the whole image spacial spectrum.

Probably Zeiss haven't learn much from the Sony-Minolta (Minolta because Sony did absorbed Minolta engineers, Minolta lens designs, etc) collaboration, the way Leitz supposedly learned from Minolta back in the CLE and Leica R era.

I don't really need any of these lenses, and even if I want a macro on E-mount, I don't believe the Zeiss 50 f2.8 will seduce me (The Sigma had not seduced me either). I think the e-mount kit will be complete with a 70 to 90 Macro, a high quality standard zoom and a 50-135 f2.8 or similar tele-zoom.

[pakodominguez]

P.S. here's a dpr thread with samples of the problem - http://www.dpreview.com/forums/post/51634348

http://www.dpreview.com/forums/post/51640865
Nasty bokeh

[Birma]

P.S. here's a dpr thread with samples of the problem - http://www.dpreview.com/forums/post/51634348

http://www.dpreview.com/forums/post/51640865
Nasty bokeh

Ouch!

[bfitzgerald]

That's very uncomfortable and downright nasty rendering qualities of that Touit. I've used quite a few lenses and some are so so in that dept, some are good. But I've yet to use one that is really bad, this new Zeiss looks like one of the worst I've seen samples wise. Not everyone loves the Sigma 50mm f1.4 super creamy look (a lot do) but this is likely to cause a few problems. I'd not buy a lens like that, yes it's important and quite a factor. Nasty edgy blur isn't good.

[pakodominguez]

our friend Brian Smith just publish a review of this two lens on his blog:
http://briansmith.com/field-test-zeiss- ... -sony-nex/