Zeiss Touit 32mm f/1.8 lens review with samples
Vložit
- čas přidán 12. 03. 2020
- An autofocus, fast-aperture standard lens for APS-C mirrorless cameras - Sony E and Fuji X mounts.
This is the first Zeiss lens I've reviewed in a long time (that isn't a collaboration with Sony) - and in my view, they have a tendency to base their value more on having the 'Zeiss' badge on them than on their image quality. Let's see if that truly is the case.
Find it here (Amazon affiliate link) (Be sure to get the right lens for your camera system):
geni.us/zeisstouit32mm18
All pictures taken by me on Sony a7R II and a5100 cameras.
Support me on Patreon! / christopherfrost
Equipment I use for making these reviews and other videos:
Equipment I use to make my videos (Amazon affiliate links):
Canon EOS R5: geni.us/CanonEOSR5Body
Canon EF-RF Adaptor: geni.us/CanonEFtoRF
Sigma 50mm f/1.4 'Art': geni.us/Sigma50mm14Art
Canon RF 35mm f/1.8 IS STM: geni.us/CanonRF35mm18Macro
Marumi Fit and Slim CPL Filter: geni.us/MarumiFitSlim77
AudioTechnica AT2020USB+ Microphone: geni.us/AT2020USBPlusMic
Rode Smartlav+ Microphone: geni.us/RodeSmartLavalierPlus
Rode SC3 adapter: geni.us/RodeSC3MicAdaptor
Zoom H1n Recorder: geni.us/ZoomH1nMiniRecorder
DJI Mini 2 Drone: geni.us/DJIMini2FlyMore
Music: 'Opportunity Walks', Kevin MacLeod (incompetech.com) Licensed under Creative Commons: By Attribution 3.0 creativecommons.org/licenses/b... - Jak na to + styl
Whether you like this lens or not will depend on your use cases. I replaced my Fuji 35mm f1.4 with the Zeiss 32mm f1.8 because I felt the latter had better color saturation. It worked well for photographing my family and family events. Looking back, I admit that my issue with the Fuji lens could have been due to my inexperience. But once I started using the Zeiss lens the Fuji lens not missed. i have since sold both lenses. I would probably revisit the Fuji 35mm f1.4 is I still had it.
I bought this lens back in 2018 for my Fuji cameras, and already had the 35mm f/2. This lens outperformed the 35mm f/2 in almost every aspect, except for its bokeh rendering, which was harsher than the Fuji's 35mm f/2. That being said, I sold both and bought the optically superior 35mm f/1.4. I gotta be honest, the Fuji 35mm f/1.4 was the best lens of the three, at least optically speaking, but ended up selling it and getting the Touit 32mm f/1.8 in 2020. Why? The Touit 32mm f/1.8 It has a nice pop when shooting at smaller aptures that the Fujis just don't have. So for street and cityscapes, the Touit is perfect. Now for faster apertures, the Fuji 35mm f/1.4 is still king, and it has the nicest bokeh of these three. The good thing about the Fuji system is that you have a few 35mm lenses to choose from, so there's one for every shooting style/budget for the X-Mount.
I had the x mount touit 32 as well, enjoy its colours and pop over the the fuji 35 1.4 which just seems more subdued and flat.
I chose the Touit32 for my XE-1 and sold my XF35 f2 but I never used the XF35 f1.4 and sometimes I regret not buying it... But when I am shooting with the Touit with the first generation of Xtrans and especially in monochrome, its something unique. Maybe having both is the ultimate solution though.
Alexandros Kolovos I agree, this lens on my X-Pro1 is gold. Honestly, it performs excellently on my X-T2 and X-T30 as well, so there's not much to complain about. I've found the bokeh to be identical in rendering as that of my ZEISS Planar T* 50mm f/1.4 ZE, except it had to be stopped to about f/2.8 to perform like the Zeiss Touit wide open at f/1.8.
In a nutshell, classic Zeiss rendering, but with punchy colors, and autofocus all in one small package. Add Fujifilm's film simulations, and boom, the perfect combo!
There's uniqueness with this lens. Some people don't like the classic rendering and that's OK. I bought one but it was on sale and I had tons of discount. It wasn't anymore than a new 35 f2 WR. However as much as I liked the 35 f2, up close it still wasn't that sharp and I love shooting the 50mm fov up close and wide open. The Zeiss outperforms both in that department which is the most important to me. Also its significantly wider with the zeiss being equivalent of 48mm vs 53mm. It's quite noticeable and it makes a good bit of difference with how the images feel. I really don't understand the hate, yeah it's expensive new but wait until it's on sale or get a good used copy. It's a good lens, doesn't deserve all the hate it receives. I'll be making my own review.
Hi Christopher, your reviews are so great that I would love to see the Fujinon XF100-400mm!
I used this lens and have to say that I have different experience.The copy which I used had latest issue and XT-3 behind where focus was fast and no chatter of aperture.Switching to Xpro-1 caused aperture chatter and so is also Fujifilm 35mm f1.4 too,so it might be camera dependent and not only lens. Other than that my copy was razor sharp and contrast was good straight from f1.8.
I love the colour rendition with this lens on my a6000 and a6300 I picked mine up second hand I also like the fact it's a light lens and easy to carry for street photography
I bought this lens used from my local camera store .... returned it the next day ... I agree with everything you said.
Howdy Chris thanks for another video i enjoyed it even if i have no interest in that camera or lens, keep up the good work!
The Fujifilm already made the lovely XF35mm f/1.4 and I don't need to think about others
Excellent video 😊!
My main lens for Travel Photography, I’ve the Distagon 12/2.8, but this one get’s the grand majority of my shooting time. It’s “look” reminds me so much of the vintage look of a Rolleiflex. I’ve never shot the Planar 45/2 for Contax, but several friends say the rendering is bang-on. Loving old Rollei Zeiss HFT 35mm Film Lenses, especially the Planar 50/1.4 and 1.8, I’ve yearned for a APS-C Zeiss Normal Lens, and AF is just a bonus(that sadly rules out Video), but I grab the old Rollei Zeiss HFT Lenses for any Videos.
Lastly is the price now!!! On the used market, you can get this Touit Planar for -or- less than $300 if you look hard enough, and don’t mind Pre-owned.
Satisfying when you see the same camera model like yours, make test of various lenses that you are interesting in. Keep on the tests Christopher 👍👏
Got this lens at 280GBP used in Hong Kong back in 2018. Chose this instead of the Fuji 35 1.4 which was similar priced because I have never tried a Zeiss and I preferred a lens that is slightly wider. Totally agree on your comments criticizing its optical performance and overpricing, although the auto focus performance of this lens is better on newer fuji cameras and actually is on par with the also old 35 f1.4. I always take raw and do post-editing, but I must say the color it produces is very different to Fuji lens, which I prefer. I mainly used it for street photography and personally, this is my favorite lens of X-Mount, along with the 56 f1.2.
Thank you for a honest (that actually matters) review.
great review, thank you
I love your videos. So informative. How do get the pictures that show the sharpness in the middle and edges? Brilliant thank you so much.
great review as always
what about reviewing meike 35mm 1.4?
This lens can be quite a bargain on the used market. I got a near perfect one for about half the retail price.
However, on both my Sony cameras, the focusing was hit-or-miss. Definitely not acceptable for the price.
Zeiss is aware of this, and says that they can fix it with a firmware update. The owner cannot do the update; the lens must be sent to Zeiss for service. The service is free, and I've heard that it only takes about a week.
I've sent mine in, but haven't gotten it back yet. We'll see.
I really can't recommend it
- _Chris 2020_
Sam Sen
...and hopefully a load more subscribers. People appreciate his passion for camera lenses, clear voice and his easy to understand, sincere reviews.
@@samsen3965 zeiss are over hyped over priced shite in general, their af lenses are really bad
@@Cagey7531 Any facts or just ranting...
@@Cagey7531 Batis, Fuji Touit and Sony Zeiss are AMAZING
@@hablemosde1950 if you're happy to over spend for mediocre sluggish lenses when even third party Chinese offerings are superior, then more fooled you.
Thank you for video
Hi Chris, would you please review the
Tokina ATX-i 11-16mm F2.8 CF ?
Ps. It is the latest version of ATX PRO.
Also please mention adaptability on Fuji x mount.
Any chance at reviewing the inexpensive 7Artisans 60mm f/2.8 macro lens? For only $160 it's getting some nice reviews.
I'd love it if you could review that whole line!
For fuji as well...
Solid.
Many thanks
Hi Chris, what do you think about Fujinon 35/2.0?
Yea, I think it is a bit overpriced and noisy when focusing but I love this lens. It is my favorite lens for street and portrait when using my old A6000.
Hi! Which is the best macro lens for Sony e mount 6400? Better if stabilized...
Hi Chris, can you make a review about the Helios 40-2 85mm 1.5?
This lens have a gorgeos swirly bokeh.
Regards from Portugal
I feel like every Zeiss review I see, shows issues that are heavily emphasized by the lens price.
Hmmm. I mean. Zeiss got their rep originally by coming up with the first somewhat good 50s I think. Like back in the film days. Now their af lenses sometimes play the size game, the same route as Sigma art, and are just as supers harp. Sometimes, like with the 55 1.8,they try a balance of sharp but small. In that case going for only 1.8. And that lens isn't perfect but still widely praised and kinda close. The price sure is hefty though. Disappointments seem rare but happen, the Zeiss 24-70f4sony isn't all that great I heard and I've used a dslr mount Zeiss 24_70 that wasn't anything special either
@@gur262 Zeiss is not great in making zoom lenses. Their most of the Milvus line up is great if you can manual focus. I waited to get a steal of a deal on those lenses and I am very happy. Now I shoot more manual lenses that af ones. I used af lenes in heavy populated situations - eg when shooting on the street between traffic light intervals.
Their cine zooms are good tho. Those just costs an arm and a leg.
I have mixed feelings about Sigma. I have never tried their Art lenses, which seems to be good based on popular opinion. I just remember Sigma as the company that made super clunky clone lenses with poor AF. When they came up with the EX series they somewhat caught up with the regular line up of the 1st-party lenses. Interestingly, Sigma lenses used to be all-metal but while their optical quality improved they moved to use mostly plastic and glue. Albeit with higher tolerances for internal play.
that stopped down aperture noise sounds like a bad gun shot 😂
Nice!
Hello Chris, can you do a review of samyang 85mm f1.4 for canon ef?
hope that you can make a comparison with the new xc35f2
Tokina 16-28 f2.8? Considering this lense as an alternative to canons 16-35 but can’t find any solid reviews of it.
You might even prefer the Fuji XF 35mm f/2 for its very tiny size, quiet and fast focus, sharp optics, closer focus, better bokeh, build quality, weather sealing, in camera distortion/vignette corrections, and low price. Note that the apertures are almost identical. Zeiss 32/1.8 = 17.8mm aperture. Fuji 35/2 = 17.5mm aperture. So DOF vey close. Fuji just has slightly narrower FOV.
one thing zeiss seems to do very well is color rendition. i might be wrong, but i always have the impression zeiss lenses perform above average, maybe among the top 3.
The lens is at least good enough to know that Crystal Pepsi expired in 2017.
Hello Chris, great video as always. I have to point out that the AF performance does change when upgrade the camera. If you want to show the actual AF performance on current day gears, it would be nice for you to upgrade the body. For exemple, a Nikon Z mount lens will always beat E mount for AF performance in your testing. The reason is not E mount lens is inferior, but A7R2 is really NOT the best AF performer (neither is a5100).
I think you have a point about the performance, but actually the most problems with af is in the lens itself and also the most users don't use the very last camera bodys, so I believe the variety of camera body he had bought is just about right, Christopher widely says that he is a independent reviewer so as his money's tree to invest in new gear, cheers!
@@davidvicencio5259 What you said is true for most of the DSLR systems. But I assure you that for mirrorless systems, the camera body accounts for 80% of the AF performance. The reason is very simple, there's NO second sensor above the mirror for fast and reliable optical AF as in DSLRs. Thus the AF purely depends on software and algorithm, hence the hesitation. You cannot cheat physics.
Take another example. Take a DSLR and a lens, shoot through view finder, you'll get a normal AF. Then shoot on live view, most of the time the AF is a lot worse. That's the same lens, you see? Mirrorless systems are pure live view AF.
I use A7III body and the most "AF hesitation" showed by Chris does not appear in my use case.
@@leoren5128 thank you for your answer, really kind of you, I get it... I guess Chris can add this detail in further videos because is something to consider, maybe always to think about a certain development in performance in newer cameras, I'm really ok with how it is because I have a a6000 and like to manual focus and im not thinking of buying new gear... Glad of this conversation, see you!
No way Nikon beats Sony E mount in AF especially eye AF in a6600 series.
I would love to see the comparison performance between Sony 35mm, Zeiss 32mm, and Sigma 30mm.
Hey Chris, is there any chance of seeing a review of Sony 70-200 f4?
Yup
@@christopherfrost Thanks Chris you are the best
What lens would you recommend for shooting lightning?I have a lightning trigger on order now,Thanks.
Any zoomable lens should be fine
How does this lens compare to Sigma 30mm 1.4? Great video as always. :) I am waiting for a review of those ugly looking Viltrox lenses for APS-C mirrorless cameras. Did you have a chance to test them out?
The Sigma 30mm f1.4 is a good lens for the price and it's very very sharp, but I didn't love using it.
It has a very big problem with chromatic aberration, the worst I've seen and it's autofocus is below average especially at lower apertures, plus the focus ring got very dirty and I couldn't clean it.
Błażko The release of the Viltrox f/1.4 Trio has been postponed due to the coronavirus. Viltrox hasn't provided a time frame for their release. It seems like they are working with Tokina since they will also be releasing the same rebadged lenses. They have already done so with the Viltrox PFU RBMH 85mm f/1.8 STM and the Tokina atx-m 85mm F/1.8 FE, and both lenses share the same optical formula.
Check out this article: www.diyphotography.net/tokina-promises-five-new-e-mount-lenses-in-2020-including-23mm-33mm-and-56mm-f-1-4-for-aps-c/
Abdon Phir'athon Thanks, I've seen those, and they look much nicer, but at the time it is not so important unfortunately. :(
@@saadazzahrani this is a perfect summation of this lens. I used to have the Sony 35mm 1.8 OSS but when it was unfortunately stolen, I replaced it with the Sigma 30mm 1.4. while it IS sharper, it misses a lot more shots and performs much worse in low light despite the faster aperture.
That rolling shutter tho
I will like to see a review of the Kamlan 85mm f/1.4
I thought the angry Geiger counter noises the two Samyang AF 35mm lenses made was annoying but this is something else. (Even if it is reasonably quiet.)
Surprisingly low performance for this brand. Personally, I have the Mitakon Speedmaster 35/0.95 mark II which you have also happened to review, and I'm quite happy with it.
The Mitakon would blow the hell out of it. Only thing is that it's manual focus. Which I prefer in any case.
Test for the sony 10-18mm ultra wide! theres not much detailed review online and it is a very old lens with no alternatives and seemed to be decentered in most of the copies
The issues you have on your Sony Camera, I dont see it on my Fuji X-T100, and yes i mean the problem with aperture and the Autofocus. The image quality is awesome, much way better than the fuji 35mm f1.4 and comparable with Fuji 35mm f2.
I decided to go with zeiss 32mm because it's wider and have better aperture, also the logo of "Carl zeiss" makse Photography more enjoyable.
You get it 😉
Hi Christopher.
I always watch and follow your videos. I would like to know if you would ever make a comparison between different generation lenses. For example: Tamron 28-75 vs Tamron 24-70 vs Tamron 24-70 G2 or Tamron 70-200 IF LD vs Tamron 70-700 VC vs Tamron 70-200 G2.
I think it would be interesting in many ways.
Thanks for your time in all your videos. Excellent work.
Greetings from Mexico.
For a change could you please review Sony 135mm 1.8 gm, i really want to pull the trigger on this one but but a bit unsure compare to the sigma 105 1.4 art
By the way i always consider your opinion on lenses before get one ofbthem myself, thanks
One day I will but not any time very soon
can i request to review Zeiss 24mm f1.8? thanks
Fuji 55-140 mm and meike 25mm f 1.8 for fuji please
make review for ziess touit 12mm f2.8 🙏🏻😉
Can you please test the sigma 105 f2.8 macro OS in one of your next videos. Thx.
And also if you do a review for this lens try this. Turn on the camera with both the AF and OS on, than turn the OS off. After that turn the AF off and than turn the AF back on. See if the AF doesn't work or if it is only my copy of the lens. By the way, I use the Nikon mount version. Thanks.
If it has a coating to ward off COVID-19 virus from sticking then it’s a game changer.
Has your lens been updated?
JFYI in German "Zeiss" would be pronounced more like "Tseiss" (basically the "st" in "must" in reverse).
Unfortunately pronounciation changes around the globe. As long as it is understood there nothing to worry.
"this zeiss lens is not bad"
did you mean: "what the crap is rhis?"
Thanks for the review Chris. I can't speak for Sony users, but for Fujifilm shooters, Fuji's excellent 35mm f/2 seems like a better bet - IQ is similar, faster and quieter autofocus, even more compact, arguably better looking and cheaper too.
Probably also made by Tamron as Zeiss Batis series lenses, looks very similar and some materials are also identical, also with new Tamron series lenses. But all of them are great lenses, including Tamron lenses. Of course this lens is totally overpriced.
Good review, whilst a Zeiss user and fan but felt /feel that the Fuji versions were not good value and out performed by Fuji glass. I also have worries about the aging of that rubber ring. Nor Zeiss's best efforts. 😎😎😎
but i am haveing a small camera for that you are having any les for that
?
Ooo
Yeah this lens is really only good if you are into that planar character (which all have that same kind of bokeh.)
I love it but I can see how it's not for everyone or for every moment.
Compare it with sigma 30mm
The Sigma 30mm f1.4 is by far better than this Zeiss lens and way more cheaper
What kind of joke is this lens supposed to be, when Sigma primes exist and don't sound and focus like a shitty RC car from Family Dollar? And have optical quality an order of magnitude greater for half the cost? Great review btw.
for this price its bad , what about doing retest about the cheap canon 50mm STM on this same chart
With so many great and affordable lenses around today (Sigma 30mm 1.4, Samyang 35mm 2.8, Tamron 35mm 2.8 ) I dont really get it ..... why would anybody buy such an expensive lense ?
It's useful for Canon m50?
no. sony and fuji only. for the m50 get the Canon 32/1.4 or the Sigma 30/1.4 if you want fast, standard prime.
Here's a guy, self proclaimed lens expert, that knows very little about lenses. I simply laughed when you said at 4:17 "busyness" and "sloppy" about the bokeh. If i were you i would present the lens, show everything about it and refrain from giving an opinion.
Yeah, the Sigma 30mm f/1.4 gives *MUCH better and "blended in" bokeh* than this Zeiss lens, not to mention the fact that the AF on this thing is beyond DOGSHIT compared to the Sigma or even the *Zeiss branded* Sony 24mm f/1.8!!
@@odeiraoloap I hate the rendering on all Sigma lenses, no micro contrast, absolutely boring bokeh. Too bad because they are very affordable
I have the sigma 30 mm f 1.4 , sony 35 mm f 1.8 and this lens, this lens is way better than the other two as far as sharpness and colours are concerned. The problem is that most of the reviewers who reviewed this lens did it on a sony NEX camera or an A6000 where the autofocus sucked, I use it with a new ZVE10, the autofocus works fine! There is a new firmware update for this lens which fixes most of its AF issues. The planar lens design gives it the legendary '3D pop' effect that the zeiss lens are known for. The T* coating handles light very well, unlike the cheap sigma or viltrox. The videos and photos are way more cinematic with this lens, and the bokeh has a special character to it which some might like, some might not.
Sigma 30/1.4 is better for half the price.
So one word
NOPE
Don't trust modern Zeiss lenses without the "Otus" or "Milvus" label
Far cry from a nifty fifty...
The bokeh is terrible...😂
not picture -- video must better then 500$ gopro9
The bokeh is harsh to my taste, and maybe is the camera but the photos look with the colors and over sharpened rendering of a kit lens u.u
Well, over the last decade or so, Zeiss has mainly been known for good manufacturing and build quality, rather than supreme image quality (always on the good side though, just rarely the best) or outstanding technical features, but I have to say that this one is a particularly awful example. Definitely no recommendation for it, even if it was half the price!
You are definitely paying for a "Zeiss" label. For that price it's a garbage of a lens.