Ricker Loc: Salt Lake City, Utah

Greetings. I just joined. I have Nikon equipment and a couple of inexpensive Canon cameras. I recently have been thinking of buying a new lens for my Nikon but I read a few articles about Zeiss lenses, which are considerably more expensive than a Nikon lens, and I wonder WHY Zeiss, or Carl Zeiss, lenses are so expensive. Are Zeiss lenses really much better than lenses manufactured by Nikon, Canon etc., assuming that the lens speed is the same (1.4 for example) ?? So many of you folks have considerably more experience and understanding about lens quality than I have so I'm really looking forward to hearing what you think. Best regards, Ricker

rgrenaderphoto Loc: Hollywood, CA

Yes they are. Now, that being said, you have to decide what German engineering and quality are worth.

What Nikon body do you have?

jim quist Loc: Missouri

Yes, you wont regret buying one, except for maybe the price.

Ricker Loc: Salt Lake City, Utah

I have a Nikon D610 and a 1968 Nikon F Photomic.

ken_stern Loc: Yorba Linda, Ca

The only downside -- that is other then price -- Is that they don't AUTOFOCUS

Ricker Loc: Salt Lake City, Utah

I don't mind having to focus manually. I guess I should have asked the following question:
Assuming that two photos were taken with an identical exposure, one with a Nikon camera with a fast 1.4 50 mm Nikon lens and another with the same Nikon camera with a fast 1.4 50 mm Zeiss lens. Is it likely that the photo taken with the Zeiss lens would be significantly sharper and crisper and would there be a difference in color saturation?
Thank you for your consideration.

mas24 Loc: Southern CA

Some Sony lenses in A-mount and E-mount employ Zeiss lenses. The Zeiss lenses accompanied with the Sony a7R2 full frame mirrorless camera, are as good or better than Nikon or Canon's top notch lenses.

oldtigger Loc: Roanoke Virginia-USA

i find color and contrast better on the Zeiss but I have to put images side by side to see it on my baby Zeiss planar T 50/1.4.
However with the Uber Zeiss (borrowed) there was no comparison, nikon lost.

davidrb Loc: Half way there on the 45th Parallel

You need to identify the model of Zeiss lens. Do not bother comparing any other manufacturer against a Zeiss 50mm Otus. Sells for about $4500.00usd. They make other series that become more competitive. Establish your Zeiss price range and then make your comparisons. Your interest in Zeiss lenses is justified but keep in mind that even Ferrari built the Dino.

forjava Loc: Half Moon Bay, CA

You should get different responses depending on the lens and the focal length of interest. Some feel that Nikkor tops Zeiss for some lenses but not for others. In the case of the lenses you mention, Nikkor has issued 12 releases of its 50mm 1.4, as of the D, so the question is maybe a little soft.

Some better lenses can have attributes which may not be valuable to you. For example, portraits have less need of sharpness than...whatever other subfield. The Zeiss Milvus is majorly close to the Zeiss Otus, from my reading; just an opinion. There is a differentiator, if not several, like use in the movies, but is that differentiation worth an extra dollar to you? 2,000 extra?

If I get what you are trying to understand, I'll make just one remark about Zeiss lenses vs. Nikkors that suggests the age of the lens counts for something: you are more likely to acquire a Zeiss lens made with lead in the optical glass than in Nikkors because Zeiss has kept using lead longer than did Nikkor. Now, nobody knows for that sure, so that's just my observation, but there are enough indicators. Lead can be a strong contributor to rendering, for example, in black and white work and much more. Tying it all together, Zeiss excels in several ways, but the appeal involves the lens-issuance timeframe, what you shoot, and what you care about.

bull drink water Loc: pontiac mi.

zeiss makes a fine line of lenses for sony, they all auto focus.

kymarto Loc: Portland OR and Milan Italy

The answer is: it depends. I would suggest you go to DxOMark is photozone.de to get quantitative answers. Especially with photozone (also lenstip.com) you will find figures for sharpness in different parts of the frame at different apertures, vignetting, aberrations of various kinds, flare, etc. some Zeiss lenses are spectacular, others less so. Some Nikon lenses are better than others.

I think that you would see most differences away from the center of frame near maximum aperture. You'll get clearer answers on the review sites.

If you are looking at 50mm lenses, for examples, the Nikon lenses are pretty mediocre, including the new 58mm f1.4. The Zeiss Otus is absolutely top of the line, BUT, the Sigma Art 50mm f1.4, at a fraction of the price, is nearly the equal of the Otus. Do check out the newest Sigma lenses, which pretty much outshine all their OEM rivals, and measure up to or surpass equivalent Zeiss offerings in most areas.

RWR Loc: La Mesa, CA

I’ve not used a Canon or Nikon f/1.4 lens, but bought a Nikon mount 55 f/1.4 APO Otus Distagon T* 10 months ago after comparing it side by side with a 50 f/1.4 Sigma Art, which is generally considered to be “better” than the Canon or Nikon equivalents. Comparing Velvia-50 slides on the light box with a 15x Peak loupe, the contrast, color rendering and sharpness of the Zeiss looked better to my eye, especially close-ups (maybe because it has floating elements). Its heavy enough to easily hand-hold with slow shutter speeds, focusing is a snap with the extended rotational angle of the focus ring, it has an aperture ring so I can use it on any of my cameras, and the depth of field scale is real handy. My 55 f/3.5 Micro-Nikkor is like a little toy next to the Zeiss!

billnikon Loc: Pennsylvania/Ohio/Florida/Maui/Oregon/Vermont

Yes, Zeiss lenses are THAT good. But cost has never determined a great photograph. Technique and training are still be best accessories you can get for your camera. I have a Zeiss for Nikon and on a 24X30 print I cannot see the difference in the IQ between that Zeiss 28 and my Nikon AF-S NIKKOR 28mm f/1.8G Lens. Oh, but that Zeiss lens feels GOOD in my hands when mounted on my D4s. Yes indeed.

JimMullinaux Loc: Austin, Texas

Yes, Zeiss lens are very good. But keep in mind that today's computer-generated post processing capabilities quickly mimic the sharpness, color, and contrast qualities of higher priced lenses. Unless you are planning for your photos to be used on billboards, or reproduced in high quality magazines, or if your livelihood depends on it, then it is not likely the high cost of Zeiss lenses would be justified. I would suggest spending your money to get the most pixel-power you can.