Specifications of the upcoming Zeiss Milvus 35mm f/1.4 ZF.2 lens


Some additional information on the upcoming Milvus 35mm f/1.4 ZF.2 lens that should be announced soon:

  • Lens construction: 14 elements in 11 groups
  • Shortest shooting distance: 0.3 m
  • Maximum shooting magnification: 1:4.6
  • Filter diameter: 72 mm
  • Maximum diameter × length: 84.8 mm × 124.8 mm
  • Weight: 1174 g

Via Nokishita

This entry was posted in Nikon Lenses and tagged , , . Bookmark the permalink. Trackbacks are closed, but you can post a comment.
  • Eric Calabros

    35mm 1174 g lens
    Perfect for street exercising.

    • Glen

      Heavier than the 24-70 VR and nearly twice the weight of the Nikkor.

    • Captain Megaton

      1200g is the new 600g.

    • It’s not for street shooting. Move on.

      • Eric Calabros

        I wonder why official sample photos in Zeiss website don’t approve your comment much

  • nek4life

    Anyone tried using the Milvus lenses for video?

  • Pat Mann

    Clearly a substantial change from the classic – more elements, substantially heavier, but same filter size.

    • decentrist

      sharper,flat rendering,a pain in the ass to carry and use,expensive…35mm perfection!!

  • paige4o4

    Are we sure Zeiss didn’t forget to brand this lens an Otus? That weight and element count suggest they didn’t cut any corners for IQ.

  • EnPassant

    And I who thought the Canon 35/1.4 II (with same number of elements and groups as this Milvus) was heavy enough with 760g.
    But apparently Zeiss are on a mission building the biggest and most heavy SLR primes.
    I just wonder if the performance is worth the gym time needed to use them?

  • Well, this is what everyone’s been trained to want…all two and a half + POUNDS of it. You can’t get the extreme resolution across the entire field without resorting to these kinds of physical extremes. So, rave about DxO scores all you want, this is the result…a lens that converts a full-frame DSLR in to what might as well be a 4X5 view camera. I just hope they don’t give up on making lenses that are more portable and give still give more than acceptable sharpness, contrast and color.

  • bobgrant

    Crazy heavy and for a 35mm? Seriously silly lens and I bet the AF is lousy. I wouldn’t want this lens even if it was priced right.

    • The AF is lousy because…there isn’t any.

      • Bob Thane

        I’m guessing he was making a joke by mimicking the crazy things some people say in the comments.

        Unless he is that group of some people, but I always assume humour rather than ignorance.

        • Same here. I meant it as kind of an obnoxious backatcha.

          • bobgrant

            I used to own Zeiss glass, but that was in the days when it meant something because Zeiss was unmatched. Now they’ve been matched by lenses for less that (good lord) even have AF. Zeiss needs to try and advance into at least the 90’s. Zeiss subsists on legend and ego.

            • It’s not a lack of technology on Zeiss’ part, but a licensing issue with Canikon. Zeiss makes autofocus lenses for Sony and Fuji. My assessment of Zeiss lenses is different from yours. Zeiss provide images that have more “presence” than my Nikon glass. It’s not just resolution. It’s contrast, edge acuity, the diaphragm and how they correct for flatness of field (or not). So, images just have a different “look”, and it then becomes more a matter of taste. I wish Zeiss WERE AF. That’s all I’d have on my camera if that was the case. Nikon knows that and that may be the reason they won’t license Zeiss to integrate with their AF motors and electronics.

            • bobgrant

              I’m sorry, but I’ve heard these less than tangible and visible comments on Zeiss before, but lenses like the new Sigma ART series are also fantastic and have their own unique qualities. If someone put the Zeiss name on Sigma ART optics, we’d hear about another set of stories that don’t translate to great photography. If it makes you happy to work with good glass in a manual focusing lens, fine. But owning the Sigma 35 ART and the Zeiss distagon led me to “see” that technology has crept up on Zeiss, as well as Nikon on Canon. Lens tech has advanced FAST. Zeiss also does make AF for Sony and Fuji, so if I had to have Zeiss, I’d simply add a Sony system to my kit. Then I would have the AF and I have Zeiss. Makes a LOT more sense on most levels, plus you can STILL do manual focus if you choose.

            • Like I said, it’s a matter of taste. I’ve used Sigma and Nikon mostly in the last seven or eight years and they are fine. My 58mm f/1.4G is a special lens that I wouldn’t trade. Many of the rest are sharp and contrasty, but lack the character that would make them truly special. It’s not that they’re bad, they just don’t have the secret sauce. The Zeiss lenses I used on my Contax G2 had that something extra. If you see it, you see it. If you don’t, then you don’t. I’m not inferring that I’m superior in any way, but my experience is pretty vast by the luck of having worked at places where I got to see and learn a lot from experts in camera optics. I also paint and draw which has given me a different way of seeing than if I had been only trained in photography. All that combines to condition my sensibilities to look for some things that are probably different than a lot of other photographers. Besides that, I pay my bills with my camera and am involved in shooting and post processing seven days a week. Again, doesn’t make me better, just different.

  • James Michael

    A serious question. Who is the target customer of this lens? It is too long for me to use for landscapes, and too short for my style of portraits. I don’t mind manual focus, but I can’t imagine walking around with it.

    • BdV

      Seeing it’s a 35mm 1.4 I thought that was me, but indeed, who would walk around with this weight for whatever categories there may be besides landscapes and portraits?

    • Captain Megaton

      A serious answer (for once!): the manual for the Distagon Zeiss 35/2 claims the lens was designed for reportage, and indeed I find the sharp and clean rendering and short, fast focus throw bear this out. You can laugh ’cause no photojournalist would use MF today, but as a classic reproduction the design is faithful to the original concept. I like that.

      This new lens? Who knows. It’s a trophy lens, no doubt, but professionally the most obvious practical niche would be fashion and advertising. Applications where you need that extra stop are few and far between of course, but as the primus inter pares of 35mm lenses it will find buyers I’m sure, MF and all.

    • amaas

      Ex-medium format users now shooting full-frame High-MP digital in the studio or on a tripod.

      It’s not a walkaround lens, it’s a setup the tripod lens, like the other large Otus & Milvus primes, designed for maximum performance on the 36MP+ FF bodies.

      Lots of shooters like 35mm for a variety of uses (I actually quite like it for landscapes, especially when you want a somewhat normal rendering rather than exaggerating the close/far relationship with an ultrawide)

      • James Michael

        Thank you all for the insightful answers. It is good to learn how other people do things. I have a 20-35mm 2.8, and find myself mostly using the wide end. For walking around I almost always use a 50mm.

  • bobgrant

    LOL. People who can’t set themselves apart with their photography will try to do it with lenses like this.

  • onthedot

    Anyone at Zeiss notice the discrepancy in size between their lens and a Leica Summilux? Doesnt concern you?

  • Ryan

    Just my opinion, very few will buy this lens. Actually this may not only be just my opinion!!

  • Piooof
    • HD10

      The neck is missing … = )

  • HD10

    Seriously, I wonder how well the lens mount of the Nikon cameras will hold out as lens manufacturers make notably longer and heavier lenses which do not have a lens collar.

    This is particularly so as Nikon transition more of its cameras to Sereebo (carbon fibre reinforced thermoplastics) as what Nikon did from the Nikon D800 to the D810.

  • HD10

    I already did that … but that lens length and weight will not do anything good for the lens mount of the Nikon Sereebo bodies with such a heavy and long lens hanging on it.

  • Dino Brusco
  • jimmy

    35mm and 1.4 is a great combo but this lens looks like it will be huge!

    I don’t get it – Zeiss already made the perfect 35mm 1.4 years ago for Rollei and Contax. That version stills ells for huge amounts on ebay. It was sharp, small, light and with more “3D” than any other 35mm lens. Why won’t they just make it again but with modern materials?

  • Konrad Dubach

    This lens is announced on http://lenspire.zeiss.com/en/milvus-14-35/

    Cheers!

  • SM
  • That’s the older Zeiss 35mm/1.4. The new Milvus is a completely new optical design, and should be much better.

  • Back to top