Jump to content

Otus vs Leica?


R3D-D0T

Recommended Posts

Compared... Otus will run circle around any S lens... but, it only covers the 135mm properly, except maybe 85mm...

 

The size and weight is about the same or more than an S lens...

 

Build quality is about the same, minus the AF issue cause it's manual focus.

 

I find the Otus is one lens that is sharp focusing at infinity and at close distance. It's a perfect all and all lens.

Link to post
Share on other sites

I have not used an Otus, but the 50mm Summicron APO asph looks to be as good on 35mm....  It depends on what you are shooting, but I would expect the S 007 files to have better tonality and colours, larger sensor/pixel size and 16bit.

 

john

I have both a Summicron APO 50, and an Otus ZE 55. I like them both, although they are very different lenses (and not just in size).
Link to post
Share on other sites

Advertisement (gone after registration)

The Otus lenses are very good. But I think the hype is sometimes somewhat excessive.

 

The difference, though, lies in the sensor when comparing with an S. While a 5DS R is going to beat the S in some regards, the S is still going to win in other ways that I find more important, namely focal, tonal and colour transitions and depth. If Leica does increase the resolution I think we are going to see the S pull away, again, significantly.

 

I find the difference being that 35mm images look more false, choppy and brittle. Something, that despite looking sharp, I find relatively off putting depending on what I'm shooting.

  • Like 1
Link to post
Share on other sites

Compared... Otus will run circle around any S lens... but, it only covers the 135mm properly, except maybe 85mm...

 

The size and weight is about the same or more than an S lens...

 

Build quality is about the same, minus the AF issue cause it's manual focus.

 

I find the Otus is one lens that is sharp focusing at infinity and at close distance. It's a perfect all and all lens.

 

Do you really think "run circle around" is appropriate when describing what, in reality is a minor difference in optical quality. The Otus lenses are spectacular, for sure, but I'm a bit over seeing small and often un-noticable differences described as huge. The S lenses are also sensational and they get to play with a sensor that has more DR, bit depth and better tonal transitions. It's the same when people tell me the Sony sensor "smashes" the SL sensor when there's about a third of a stop difference in DR. Overblown.

 

I don't own either but I have directly compared the Otus 85mm and the S 100mm Summicron. I have yet to see a shot where I would not choose the S. More to do with the sensor size and DR than anything else. The Otus is great but even the D810 or A7R2 sensor doesn't do what the S sensor can, in the right circumstances. And with either combination it's not the gear that'll be the determining issue on image quality.

 

Gordon

  • Like 5
Link to post
Share on other sites

This discussion between Zeiss and Leica is as old as the Germans themselves. This discussion is way beyond good or bad or their shades of grey at the top, but about style and what you want to convey with your image

Link to post
Share on other sites

Do you really think "run circle around" is appropriate when describing what, in reality is a minor difference in optical quality. The Otus lenses are spectacular, for sure, but I'm a bit over seeing small and often un-noticable differences described as huge. The S lenses are also sensational and they get to play with a sensor that has more DR, bit depth and better tonal transitions. It's the same when people tell me the Sony sensor "smashes" the SL sensor when there's about a third of a stop difference in DR. Overblown.

 

I don't own either but I have directly compared the Otus 85mm and the S 100mm Summicron. I have yet to see a shot where I would not choose the S. More to do with the sensor size and DR than anything else. The Otus is great but even the D810 or A7R2 sensor doesn't do what the S sensor can, in the right circumstances. And with either combination it's not the gear that'll be the determining issue on image quality.

 

Gordon

 

 

One of the guys over at Get DPI has an S system and Nikon D810 with Otus glass and he prefers the S lenses, I'll try to find his post on the subject!

Link to post
Share on other sites

When I was in the process of investing into MD I thought about the alternative "Otus Path" with my Nikon D810. I borrowed the 85mm, 55mm and the 28mm and compared them with "similar" S lenses (120, 70 and 35mm) on the S 007. The lenses play in the same technical league (prices are also similar), the Otus 28mm has a slight edge over the S 35mm, but I prefer the S 120 over the 85mm. The character (color, out of focus rendering, micro and macro contrast, etc.) is different, as often with Zeiss and Leica. Its like two types of wine, different but very good each.

 

It is difficult to compare as the sensor types and sizes and the whole image chains are so different. At the end I prefer the Leica S because of the character of these wonderful lenses, but this is very subjective.

 

The main point is that the Leica 1) has AF (although not perfect) and has a good mechanical manual focus also (not as buttery soft as Zeiss but good enough). And 2)  Leica S has a whole family of lenses and I have no idea when, even if, the Otus family will grow one day to this size. So there is really no comparison if you want a system and if you need a broader range of lenses.

  • Like 3
Link to post
Share on other sites

When I was in the process of investing into MD I thought about the alternative "Otus Path" with my Nikon D810. I borrowed the 85mm, 55mm and the 28mm and compared them with "similar" S lenses (120, 70 and 35mm) on the S 007. The lenses play in the same technical league (prices are also similar), the Otus 28mm has a slight edge over the S 35mm, but I prefer the S 120 over the 85mm. The character (color, out of focus rendering, micro and macro contrast, etc.) is different, as often with Zeiss and Leica. Its like two types of wine, different but very good each.

 

It is difficult to compare as the sensor types and sizes and the whole image chains are so different. At the end I prefer the Leica S because of the character of these wonderful lenses, but this is very subjective.

 

The main point is that the Leica 1) has AF (although not perfect) and has a good mechanical manual focus also (not as buttery soft as Zeiss but good enough). And 2)  Leica S has a whole family of lenses and I have no idea when, even if, the Otus family will grow one day to this size. So there is really no comparison if you want a system and if you need a broader range of lenses.

 

180 APO is spectacular and the 24mm is extremely impressive , I'd like to see Leica make an APO summicron in the 60-70 range!!

Link to post
Share on other sites

I have 35,70, 100 S glass. I have the 55Otus, have used 85Otus. The copy of 55 I have is a notch above S glass I will say, simply for its f1.4 performance and APO correction. At f1.4, It sharper than S glass at f2.5 or F2, not only edge and corner but center also show more macro contrast. With a little extra sharpening, S can match at center but S glass doesn't have the same CA correction.

 

Having said that, the difference are mostly academic. 70 S is almost as good as 50APO m, and 35S is my favorite WA by a big margin. I love its rendering and sharpness, a very fidelity lens.

 

If you need f1.4, then you have no choice but OTUS.

Edited by ZHNL
  • Like 1
Link to post
Share on other sites

I woud expect the differences to be acadamic as others said.

Even if the Otus is slightly sharper, it doesnt cover a S sensor so you compromise in regards of sensor.

Also AF helps a lot for accurate focus, as long as you dont shoot static subjects with live view.

If I focus manually I prefer the 50 APO on the M, small and lovely.

If I want better IQ I prefer to have AF for most subjects, and while my favorites are the S45 and S100, I really think there is nothing to complain about the 70mm S. I find all S lenses to be so good, that I just choose based on focal length most of the times.

  • Like 3
Link to post
Share on other sites

To put it more objectively, f1.4 lens is a lot harder to design than f2.5 or f2 lens. and S format is not much larger. My dream for S system would be a summilux 70mm with character. 

 

OTUS 55mm might be my favorite lens, it is not just about sharpness, it is flawless every way including beautiful rendering. I don't have the same desire for 85 and 28mm simply for their size/weight and focal length. and use for its max potential in real world could post some challenge as posted above. (but S AF is not good enough to show its glass potential as well, especially under challenge conditions.)

 

in most case, I don't require lens to sharp to extreme corner at wide aperture. so I don't feel S glasses limit me in any meaningful way,(Corner at WO are actually very good, just fall short compare to 55OTUS and 135APO ZEISS I have) though CA could be problem sometime, especially 100cron. On the other hand, S glasses rendering are very beautiful which I seldom see from 35mm format. (it might be the lens or larger format), All S glass I have show 'relax rendering' and consistent Bokeh cross frame, not much vignette, no jittery or double edge, line etc...(a common problem for most fast 35mm format glasses, even good ones.) 

  • Like 1
Link to post
Share on other sites

Join the conversation

You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.
Note: Your post will require moderator approval before it will be visible.

Guest
Reply to this topic...

×   Pasted as rich text.   Paste as plain text instead

  Only 75 emoji are allowed.

×   Your link has been automatically embedded.   Display as a link instead

×   Your previous content has been restored.   Clear editor

×   You cannot paste images directly. Upload or insert images from URL.

×
×
  • Create New...