Why no REAL Zeiss lenses for Sony

[OLDMAN BJ]

Only joking, sort of.

Just wondering why since Sony and Zeiss have a close relationship, we don't get the beautiful manual focus lenses from Zeiss?
They are making them for Nikon,Pentax and now Canon. I know Nikon and Canon are the biggies of the photo world but I think Sony would now have a better market share than Pentax.

If they were available would you buy them? I think they would be just the ticket for the A850/900.

BJ

[David Kilpatrick]

Most of them are not Zeiss, they are Cosina, and no better than the AF fixed focal lengths from Zeiss for Sony (all two of 'em).

The answer is there is no connection, and there may even be an preventitive clause in the Sony-Zeiss arrangement which makes Cosina unable to offer Zeiss primes for Sony.

David

[OLDMAN BJ]

Thank you David, I was really just musing and wishing that zeiss would make some wideangle primes for the Sony. I do realise the Zeiss manual focus lenses are made by Cosina, but to me that doesn't matter if they perform. BTW, where are the CZ zooms and Primes for the Sony made? are they german or from Japan

[David Kilpatrick]

Some Zeiss primes for Leica M are made in Germany, like the Biogon 18mm. I think some of the Nikon F mount designs are also made in Germany (glass) then assembled in Japan. Others are entirely the work of Cosina, who came to the attention of Zeiss when they acquired the rights to use the Voigtlander name, and introduced some of the best wide angle rangefinder lenses ever made, The 15mm Heliar (Cosina design) outperformed the Zeiss Hologon, and I guess that's what drew their attention.

All Zeiss for Sony is Japanese glass, though that can mean parts sourced from Schott (the glassmaking bit of the German Zeiss 'complex', and responsible for Zeiss, Hasselblad, Heliopan and B+W filters as well as countless lens element blanks used by makers worldwide). It could equally well mean glass sourced from Pilkington (Dow Corning) or Hoya. Some components for Zeiss lenses are manufactured by Sigma. It's a very complex industry in which specialist sub assemblies are bought from each originator, some have unique glass types. I am sure that some Zeiss glass will come from Konica Minolta - they continue to supply glass, and to make the hybrid (plastic plus glass) aspheric elements now used in so many lens designs. Next year it will be the 25th anniversary of the introduction of hybrid aspheric lenses by Minolta.

David

[pakodominguez]

Only joking, sort of.

Just wondering why since Sony and Zeiss have a close relationship, we don't get the beautiful manual focus lenses from Zeiss?
(

Why? if we were in the Canon world I could understand your request. But some Minolta glases are just as good (or better) as any Zeiss/leitz/or any fancy brand out in the market.

In other hand, the Sony's Zeiss is a different Zeiss than the manual focus Nikon/Canon Zeiss or the Hasselbald Zeiss: different designers, different manufacturers, different everything.

Regards

Pako

[David Kilpatrick]

Clarification - the Zeiss designs do not used hybrid aspherics, I did not mean to imply that. They use moulded aspherics.

David

[youpii]

Only joking, sort of.

Just wondering why since Sony and Zeiss have a close relationship, we don't get the beautiful manual focus lenses from Zeiss?
(

Why? if we were in the Canon world I could understand your request. But some Minolta glases are just as good (or better) as any Zeiss/leitz/or any fancy brand out in the market.

In other hand, the Sony's Zeiss is a different Zeiss than the manual focus Nikon/Canon Zeiss or the Hasselbald Zeiss: different designers, different manufacturers, different everything.

Regards

Pako

Maybe because there are less Minolta lenses on ebay than new Sony alpha users?

[pakodominguez]

Maybe because there are less Minolta lenses on ebay than new Sony alpha users?

Your statement doesn't make sense.
I found 9 Zeiss lenses for Nikon Ais:
- 50mm 1.4 Planar T* (550 US$)
- 28mm f2 Distangon T* (1033 US$)
- 25mm f2.8 Distangon T* (826 US$)
- 100mm f2.0 Macro Plannar T* (1450 US$)
- 21mm f2.8 Distangon T* (1490 US$)
- 18mm f3.5 Distangon T* (1240 US$)
- 85mm f.4 Planar T* (1033 US$)
- 50mm f2 Macro Planar T* (1033 US$)
- 35mm f2 Distangon T* (826 US$)

Please, help me understanding wich one of this lens will cover a gap on the actual Sony line. I only see the 18mm, that I guess is rectilinear (the 16mm Minolta/Sony is a fisheye) and, funny, the 85mm is less expensive than the Zeiss ZA version.

I do want more lenses from Sony, but I'm not ready for pay twice the price for a 100mm Macro, when the Minolta/Sony (679 US$)version is a real gem, object of desire from all the other 35mm system.

Regards

[OLDMAN BJ]

Pako,

I understand what you are saying, but most manufacturers make a big deal that their lenses are digitally optimized. I guess this means new coatings and maybe optical formula redone where necessary. The old Minolta lenses were designed for film. I'm certainly no expert on this, but from what I've read the coatings are very important. And coming from the old school, I really like the tactile feel of the old manual focus lenses. So for landscape and such, I would gladly give up auto focus for a prime which really performed at a given focal length. just a thought.

John

[pakodominguez]

I understand your point. Please, read here PhotoTraveler's posts about this issue: http://www.photoclubalpha.com/forum/vie ... ilit=zeiss

I still prefer seen a MD/MC mount dSRL in order to get "the tactile feel of the old manual focus lenses" on really good lenses at an affordable price.

Regards

[pakodominguez]

BTW, this is a home-made solution...
http://www.leitax.com/Zeiss-Contax-lens ... meras.html

[PhotoTraveler]

Well, that linked saved me from repeating things.

I too do wish Sony would just say "ah heck with it, make it so Zeiss".

Since that thread though, hell did freeze in some way, as we ended up with Canon mount versions. My guess is Zeiss was bugging Canon, and Canon realized that there was major want for those lenses, especially as many of the canon offerings are lacking. Canon very well licensed some of the rom Info to Zeiss with a clause that they can't do AF. For canon, it means users won't switch to Nikon, and even have a one up on Nikon users using ZF lenses. And gives some good glass on Canon, and Canon probably gets a small royalty and not much of a sales loss. And Zeiss is still true to their no reversing claims.

I think a similar thing could happen with Sony. Sony should see the benefit of having those lenses too offered for the mount natively. As it means things are no longer Everyone Gets "A" and Sony gers "B" in the way of options. Sony's system could have "A and B" options.

While I don't think the lenses are super great, it's a nice thing to have an option for.

[youpii]

Maybe because there are less Minolta lenses on ebay than new Sony alpha users?

Your statement doesn't make sense.
I found 9 Zeiss lenses for Nikon Ais:
- 50mm 1.4 Planar T* (550 US$)
- 28mm f2 Distangon T* (1033 US$)
- 25mm f2.8 Distangon T* (826 US$)
- 100mm f2.0 Macro Plannar T* (1450 US$)
- 21mm f2.8 Distangon T* (1490 US$)
- 18mm f3.5 Distangon T* (1240 US$)
- 85mm f.4 Planar T* (1033 US$)
- 50mm f2 Macro Planar T* (1033 US$)
- 35mm f2 Distangon T* (826 US$)

Please, help me understanding wich one of this lens will cover a gap on the actual Sony line. I only see the 18mm, that I guess is rectilinear (the 16mm Minolta/Sony is a fisheye) and, funny, the 85mm is less expensive than the Zeiss ZA version.

I do want more lenses from Sony, but I'm not ready for pay twice the price for a 100mm Macro, when the Minolta/Sony (679 US$)version is a real gem, object of desire from all the other 35mm system.

Regards

I'm not speaking about gaps but about availability.
The Minolta F/2 series are real gems. But Minolta only made a few of them. On the other side, the Sony market share and users keeps increasing. So sooner or later, ebay supply won't meet the demand.

I agree that Minolta lenses are great. I have many: 20/2.8, 28/2, 35/2, 50/3.5Macro & 200/2.8.
But they are about 20 years old and I'm afraid that they can't be repaired if they get broken. And finding replacement on ebay is getting harder and more expensive. The last time I looked, a 100 F/2 was about $900.

[pakodominguez]

Your statement doesn't make sense.
I found 9 Zeiss lenses for Nikon Ais:
- 50mm 1.4 Planar T* (550 US$)
- 28mm f2 Distangon T* (1033 US$)
- 25mm f2.8 Distangon T* (826 US$)
- 100mm f2.0 Macro Plannar T* (1450 US$)
- 21mm f2.8 Distangon T* (1490 US$)
- 18mm f3.5 Distangon T* (1240 US$)
- 85mm f.4 Planar T* (1033 US$)
- 50mm f2 Macro Planar T* (1033 US$)
- 35mm f2 Distangon T* (826 US$)

Please, help me understanding wich one of this lens will cover a gap on the actual Sony line. I only see the 18mm, that I guess is rectilinear (the 16mm Minolta/Sony is a fisheye) and, funny, the 85mm is less expensive than the Zeiss ZA version.

I do want more lenses from Sony, but I'm not ready for pay twice the price for a 100mm Macro, when the Minolta/Sony (679 US$)version is a real gem, object of desire from all the other 35mm system.

Regards

I'm not speaking about gaps but about availability.
The Minolta F/2 series are real gems. But Minolta only made a few of them. On the other side, the Sony market share and users keeps increasing. So sooner or later, ebay supply won't meet the demand.

I agree that Minolta lenses are great. I have many: 20/2.8, 28/2, 35/2, 50/3.5Macro & 200/2.8.
But they are about 20 years old and I'm afraid that they can't be repaired if they get broken. And finding replacement on ebay is getting harder and more expensive. The last time I looked, a 100 F/2 was about $900.

I agree that we need more lenses, specialy non-that expensive (f2.0) and cheap (f2. primes and zooms (f4)

I don't agree that Zeiss have to provide those lenses.

[youpii]

I agree that we need more lenses, specialy non-that expensive (f2.0) and cheap (f2. primes and zooms (f4)

I don't agree that Zeiss have to provide those lenses.

I'm on your side when hoping for modern affordable lenses but...

From a marketing point of view, cheap primes will probably only be DT.
Mid-range might come one day, but for now Sony is stronger on the entry level and upper level markets. Also, Sony seems very reluctant to invest in these mid-range lenses for now. They'd rather rebadge Tamron lenses instead. I think we'll soon see a 17-35/2.8-4 SAM for the A850 users.

In my photo club, I see many beginners with A2xx/3xx bodies and advanced users with A900. But no A700... I'd say the A700 is a nice camera (I had one for a couple of months) but it didn't sell. The A750 will probably arrive next year. Let's see what lenses will arrive at the same time.
For example, one of the PMA 2007 mock-ups looked like a non-Zeiss 35/1.8. This one would really be welcome.