Zeiss Milvus 50/1.4 vs Zeiss Otus 55/1.4 vs Zeiss Planar 50/1.4 – Comparative Lens Review

Let’s start with official specification comparison.

	Zeiss Otus 55/1.4	Zeiss Milvus 50/1.4	Zeiss Planar 50/1.4
Focal length	55 mm	50 mm	50 mm
Aperture range	f/1.4 – f/16	f/1.4 – f/16	f/1,4 – f/16
Lens elements / Groups	12/10	10/8	7/6
Focusing range	0,5 m – ∞	0,45 m – ∞	0,45 m – ∞
Free working distance	0,33 m – ∞	0,34 m – ∞	0,35 m – ∞
Angular field (ref. to 36mm format) (diag. / horiz. / vert.)	43,7° / 36,7° / 24,9°	46° / 39° / 26°	45° / 38° / 26°
Diameter of image field	43 mm	43 mm	43 mm
Flange focal distance	ZF.2: 46,50 mm ZE: 44,00 mm	ZF.2: 46,50 mm ZE: 44,00 mm	ZF, ZF.2: 46,50 mm ZE: 44,00 mm
Coverage at close range (MOD) Ref. to 36mm format	246 x 1 63 mm	245 mm x 162 mm	160 x 240 mm
Image ratio at MOD	1 : 6.8	1 : 6.7	1 : 6.7
Filter thread	M77 x 0.75	M67 x 0.75	M58 x 0.75
Entrance pupil position ( in front of image plane)	101 mm	80,26 mm	54,13 mm
Rotation angle of focusing ring (inf – MOD)	248°	225 °	223°
Diameter max.	92.4 mm	ZF.2: 82,9 mm ZE: 82,5 mm	ZF, ZF.2: 66,0 mm ZE: 71 ,3 mm
Diameter of focusing ring	83 mm	79,5 mm	ZF, ZF.2: 66,0 mm ZE: 71 ,3 mm
Length (without lens caps)	ZF.2: 1 25.3 mm ZE: 127,3 mm	ZF.2: 94,0 mm ZE: 97,5 mm	ZF, ZF.2: 45 mm ZE: 48 mm
Length (with lens caps)	ZF.2: 141 mm ZE: 144 mm	ZF.2: 106,4 mm ZE: 109,0 mm	ZF, ZF.2: 69 mm ZE: 71 mm
Weight	ZF.2: 970 g ZE: 1030 g	ZF.2: 875 g ZE: 922 g	ZF, ZF.2: 330 g ZE: 380 g
Price (at the time of publishing this review in EUR)	3449	1199	598(ZE) – 649(ZF.2)

Most significant differences are focal length (Otus is 55mm, Milvus and Planar 50mm), rotation angle of focusing ring (Otus has some 30° longer focus throw), size and weight (where Planar shows its strength in terms of compactness) and of course – price…

Let’s take a look at lens construction diagrams. All data and images were taken from the official site – www.Zeiss.com

Unlike with 85mm versions where all three are based on Planar design, within fifties only Planar 50/1.4 Classic is loyal to this traditional design. Otus and Milvus are both Distagon based.

Otus has most complex design with 12 elements in 10 groups, with no less than 6 elements made of extra low dispersion glass and one aspheric lens element. Milvus is not far behind with 10 elements in 8 groups, 4 are extra low dispersion glasses and 1 is aspheric element. Planar is much simpler with 7 elements in 6 groups without “special” glass.

Here are official MTF, vignetting and distortion charts, obtained from www.zeiss.com.

Looking at MTF above, we can see that Otus has visible edge across the frame, with Milvus following especially in the mid frame and Planar catching up at smaller aperture. On our visual studio tests bellow, those results manifests accordingly.

Zeiss Otus 55/1.4 at f/1.4 (Nikon D800E)

Zeiss Milvus 50/1.4 at f/1.4 (Nikon D800E)

Zeiss Planar 50/1.4 “Classic” at f/1.4 (Nikon D800E)

Bellow is a slider tool with 100% crops for easier comparison of the key areas.
Center Area

Top Left Corner

Top Right Corner

Mid Bottom Edge

Put in a simple words, Otus shines in all areas – center sharpness, lack of CA, and even sharpness across the frame. Milvus is very close in the center, but slightly higher CA, makes it look a bit softer on the edges, while extreme corners are notably worse. Planar is old school lens, spherical aberration cause soft rendering, but on a positive side, corners doesn’t lay far beyond center.

By stopping down all lenses, already at f/2.8 differences are much smaller, while at f/5.6 it is hard to tell them apart. If you’d like to explore LAB shots in detail and at all apertures, you can visit related Flickr albums (be sure to choose – original size in the viewer options).

Zeiss Otus 55/1.4 ISO 12333
Zeiss Milvus 50/1.4 ISO 12333
Zeiss Planar 50/1.4 ISO 12333

>To help this page survive, your donation will be highly appreciated.