Every lens listed on the Zeiss site was at least designed by Zeiss, but most of them are manufactured by Cosina. I don't know if the ZA-series is manufactured by Sony.
kroyston wrote:
The Sony product pages for the A7R explicitly state the camera has gap less on sensor lenses and that these are optimally positioned relative to their position on the sensor:
Now this is certainly not conclusive, but given the fact they mentioned it on the A7R page, they know it's a marketable feature. So I would expect had they been present they would have mentioned this for the A7.
Now I'm also in the camp that could care less if the lenses are offset. I just want solid results, regardless of how it is achieved.
Thanks. Yes that is quite indicative.
Agree to the last, it doesnt matter. I just want the A7 to be better as the A7r doesnt rhime that well with some of the lenses I am interested in. The discussion about offset microlenses is just another proof were still fumbling in the dark :-)
Emacs wrote:
Sony, not zeiss. Every za "zeiss", as well as all fe-s and both 24/1.8, 16-70/4 are designed and manufactured by sony. The only zeiss thing is badge
Jochenb wrote:
Hmm I've heard that Zeiss designs them, but Sony does the manufacturing.
Ron Pfister wrote:
Every lens listed on the Zeiss site was at least designed by Zeiss, but most of them are manufactured by Cosina. I don't know if the ZA-series is manufactured by Sony.
Exactly. If all that Zeiss provides is "the badge", how is it that the Zeiss website states that the A-mount and E-mount lenses are based on Zeiss designs (Distagon, Planar, Sonnar, Vario-Sonnar) and use Zeiss T* coatings.
Are the Zeiss ZF and ZE and Touit X-mount lenses "designed and manufactured" by Nikon, Canon, and Fuji respectively?
genji wrote:
Are the Zeiss ZF and ZE and Touit X-mount lenses "designed and manufactured" by Nikon, Canon, and Fuji respectively?
ZE and ZF.2 are almost all manufactured by Cosina (the Distagon 2.8/15 being the only German-made exception, I believe). Canon and Nikon don't endorse the ZE and ZF.2 lenses, BTW - Zeiss 'enjoys' the same 3rd party status as do Sigma, Tamron, etc. I believe the Touit lenses are also manufactured by Cosina (they certainly are made in Japan), and the Otus series is manufactured in Germany.
Edit: I'd like to stress that the Zeiss-label on the ZA lenses means they're every bit as good as the ZE/ZF.2 lenses, and it's not just some marketing ploy. I think ZA users can attest to that fact. The fact that Zeiss designed the optics in these lenses means a lot. Clearly, manufacturing tolerances are a very important factor in lens quality, as well. But both Cosina and Sony have proven that they're capable of doing an excellent job in that space, as long as they're not restricted by low price points of products that are aimed at a mass market. Tight tolerances and the associated quality control result in a very high fraction of the cost of high-quality optics (hence the price points of lenses by the likes of Leica, Schneider, Zeiss).
Thanks, Toothwalker! I stand humbly corrected. Just saw this confirmed in a response to a customer question on the Zeiss site. Thought I had read otherwise when the lens was released...
Edit: this goes to show, though, that Cosina can certainly be trusted to do a stellar job if the budget allows for it, which makes me look forward to Zeiss' forthcoming FE-offerings.
36Mp and about comparison, has any one mention this before? http://www.imaging-resource.com/camera-reviews/sony/a7r/#IQC
Sony looks good even in comparison with Pentax 645, Canon 5dmk3 looks smeared and blurry in same comparison and d800 with little USM looks equal to Sony
Ron Pfister wrote:
The fact that Zeiss designed the optics in these lenses means a lot.
I think your "fact" is wrong.
Some time ago I wrote Zeiss Germany an email asking about how the cooperation works and their response was this: "In der Entwicklung von Produkten teilen sich beide Firmen die Aufgaben - einige Objektive wurden hauptsächlich von Carl Zeiss entwickelt, andere wiederum überwiegend von Sony.
Mit freundlichen Grüßen
Bertram Hoenlinger"
Which translates to that both companies cooperate in the development of products, some lenses were in fact mainly developed by CZ, others mainly by Sony.
No, the 15mm ZE/ZF.2 is manufactured by Cosina to Zeiss specifications (and I believe their QC tolerances) as well. The ZM version is made in Germany AFAIK.
-Tim
Ron Pfister wrote:
ZE and ZF.2 are almost all manufactured by Cosina (the Distagon 2.8/15 being the only German-made exception, I believe). Canon and Nikon don't endorse the ZE and ZF.2 lenses, BTW - Zeiss 'enjoys' the same 3rd party status as do Sigma, Tamron, etc. I believe the Touit lenses are also manufactured by Cosina (they certainly are made in Japan), and the Otus series is manufactured in Germany.
Edit: I'd like to stress that the Zeiss-label on the ZA lenses means they're every bit as good as the ZE/ZF.2 lenses, and it's not just some marketing ploy. I think ZA users can attest to that fact. The fact that Zeiss designed the optics in these lenses means a lot. Clearly, manufacturing tolerances are a very important factor in lens quality, as well. But both Cosina and Sony have proven that they're capable of doing an excellent job in that space, as long as they're not restricted by low price points of products that are aimed at a mass market. Tight tolerances and the associated quality control result in a very high fraction of the cost of high-quality optics (hence the price points of lenses by the likes of Leica, Schneider, Zeiss)....Show more →
Mikael Risedal wrote:
36Mp and about comparison, has any one mention this before? http://www.imaging-resource.com/camera-reviews/sony/a7r/#IQC
Sony looks good even in comparison with Pentax 645, Canon 5dmk3 looks smeared and blurry in same comparison and d800 with little USM looks equal to Sony
Yeah, I mentioned it a while back but unless you exclusively shoot jpeg, it doesn't mean much (it's really a test of jpeg engines and noise algorithms). From the comparison:
"NOTE: These images are best quality JPEGs straight out of the camera, at default settings including noise reduction."
wfrank wrote:
The CY 28/2 (Hollywoood) is an amazing lens all aspects. I'd be surprised if it wont shine even more on an A7 (or r - wont matter) than on Canons etc. Steep light angles is not a problem with this lens. But it is huge in comparison to the 28/2.8.
The 28/2 is even more digital friendly than the 28/2.8. Here are some angle of incidence plots for the chief ray at infinity focus. Red is the danger zone (just as an illustration, for a hypothetical sensor).
Wow! The A7R shows considerably more detail than the D800E! I'm curious to what extent differences in lens characteristics, focusing accuracy and JPEG processing affected the results. Can't wait to do my own side-by-side comparisons with identical glass on both bodies and using RAW...
Toothwalker wrote:
The 28/2 is even more digital friendly than the 28/2.8. Here are some angle of incidence plots for the chief ray at infinity focus. Red is the danger zone (just as an illustration, for a hypothetical sensor).
Very interesting plots! Do you by chance have plots available for the Biogon 2.8/21 ZM and the Heliar 4.5/15? I'd be very curious to see these.
Phillip Reeve wrote:
I think your "fact" is wrong.
Some time ago I wrote Zeiss Germany an email asking about how the cooperation works and their response was this: "In der Entwicklung von Produkten teilen sich beide Firmen die Aufgaben - einige Objektive wurden hauptsächlich von Carl Zeiss entwickelt, andere wiederum überwiegend von Sony.
Mit freundlichen Grüßen
Bertram Hoenlinger"
Which translates to that both companies cooperate in the development of products, some lenses were in fact mainly developed by CZ, others mainly by Sony.
Interesting - thanks for sharing this. It does indicate that Zeiss is playing a part in the development of every lens - hopefully beyond approving where the Zeiss badge is placed .
Ron Pfister wrote:
Very interesting plots! Do you by chance have plots available for the Biogon 2.8/21 ZM and the Heliar 4.5/15? I'd be very curious to see these.
Unfortunately, no. Zeiss stopped specifying the position of the exit pupil after the Contax era, and I can't find it for the Heliar either.
Toothwalker wrote:
Unfortunately, no. Zeiss stopped specifying the position of the exit pupil after the Contax era, and I can't find it for the Heliar either.
Shame! How about Leica? I'd be interested in plots of the Elmarit 19, 28 and 35 (latest versions of each).
Ron Pfister wrote:
Shame! How about Leica? I'd be interested in plots of the Elmarit 19, 28 and 35 (latest versions of each).
Edit: I mean Elmarit-R
Nope. There is no exit pupil in the Leica lens sheets. It is safe to assume though, that all SLR lenses are a safe bet as far as the angle of incidence is concerned.
Toothwalker wrote:
The 28/2 is even more digital friendly than the 28/2.8. Here are some angle of incidence plots for the chief ray at infinity focus. Red is the danger zone (just as an illustration, for a hypothetical sensor).
Interesting. Guess we wont see any particular price drop for that lens in the near future.
Hi guys, like you I'm also interested in the Sony a7 and RF lenses combo. Seems like some Voigtländer and Leica APO lenses could really be life-long investments, with modern Zeiss lenses filling the gaps and the eventual need for AF.
However, at the moment I'm waiting because I don't think this generation of cameras are really good for that. The a7r seems to be better in terms of microlenses design, but consider that the very high resolution is going to exharcebate every such imperfection. Not to mention that even with focus peaking, obtaining critical focus wide-open is not going to be easy.
I think I'll wait til Sony (or whoever) releases a camera like the a7r but downscaled to 18-22 megapixels. That's going to give plenty of resolution without stressing other factors beyond their limits. Sony itself is rumoured to have 2 new a7 next year, and I don't think it's going to take too long before other players join in.
.