I would really love a 35/2 which approaches the look of the RX1...
Wouldn't they then call that a sonnar?
I also don't think that Zeiss would be so daft as to simply rehouse lenses that have proven not to work. Surely? They must improve them not to become a laughing stock. How well is another question.
Big weight differences. The Loxia will be a bit longer than the ZM, but will also not need the rangefinder cam. Perhaps the auto-aperture and electronics add the weight?
I'm also interested in the 35/2 myself. Wishing the 50 was a 50/1.4 though.. I mean the 50/1.5 is a proven design so why so high @ f/2? I'll be keeping my eyes on the Loxia line f or sure.
I dig my Touits for their super lightweight design and superb IQ for the small package. Great pairing with my A6000.
carstenw wrote:
I would really love a 35/2 which approaches the look of the RX1...
Ditto, but the 35 f/1.8 in the RX1 has a huge rear element that sits a few millimetres above the sensor, which is why we didn't see a similar design launched with the camera. I don't know how much the design would have to be compromised to fit the e-mount, I'm guessing quite a bit.
I had a ZM 35 f:2.0 and tried on my A7R. Of all the lenses that didn't work on it, and I had a few, this was the worst. Only the centre was ever sharp, and that not even at infinity. It is totally unthinkable that Zeiss will release that as the Loxia 35. As Edward aptly writes: "have some faith!" All the more so as Zeiss are partners with Sony, and very probably have been involved well before the camera was realeased, and could probably have had some input into the design.
Obviously, the 50 is no Otus, but I have no doubt that it will perform as a new Zeiss design should, though probably at the lower end of the price and performance scale.
And I would LOVE to have an optimized ZM 18 f:4.0 on my A7R!
wolfloid wrote:
I also don't think that Zeiss would be so daft as to simply rehouse lenses that have proven not to work.
Agreed. And the idea that Zeiss has pulled a complete 180 in its corporate philosophy, apparently for the sake of a fast buck that for some reason has taken them nearly a year to fully realize, seems ludicrous to me. It wouldn't surprise me at all if the designs are closely related to the ZMs, since tweaking existing designs to get better performance has been and will continue to be common practice for every lens manufacturer, but the idea that the performance will be the same seems underserved to me.
Reading through this thread, I'd swear Carl Zeiss himself touched some of the participants in their "bathing suit areas" instead of creating a company that's spent a century plus producing some of the most desirable optics available to photographers in a multitude of mounts. What does it take to earn a little faith here?
I don't know if Zeiss puts much emphasis on smooth bokeh qualities overall. I've had a number of lens over the years that were anything but. CZ85 with the sawblade aperture for example.
Its unique, and some call it 'character' but I think its just part of what you can expect from many Zeiss lenses.
35 Biogon C being an exception as that lens rendered remarkable smooth
(I have placed the front and rear elements on top of each other here, but that does not have to be the case, the rear element may very well be farther from the sensor in the Loxia than in the ZM.)
Matt Grum wrote:
Ditto, but the 35 f/1.8 in the RX1 has a huge rear element that sits a few millimetres above the sensor, which is why we didn't see a similar design launched with the camera. I don't know how much the design would have to be compromised to fit the e-mount, I'm guessing quite a bit.
The RX1 has a 35/2. There is a basic principle in lens design that you can move lenses closer to or further from the sensor plane by making them more/less symmetrical, but I don't know to what extent this has limitations.
I presume that the rear element of the RX1's 35/2 is just there to project perpendicularly onto the sensor. If you moved the rest of the lens further away, then the rear element could be left out, possibly, and the next one would project directly on the sensor. I imagine that some corner colour and vignetting might result, but since it is a native lens, this could presumably be fixed in in-body processing to some extent.
Unless I am wrong somewhere, and unless this is really not practical in the end, I would certainly be willing to take a hit in size and price to see such a lens. Anyway, the Loxia 35/2 doesn't sound like it will be this lens. What a shame...
carstenw wrote:
The RX1 has a 35/2. There is a basic principle in lens design that you can move lenses closer to or further from the sensor plane by making them more/less symmetrical, but I don't know to what extent this has limitations.
I presume that the rear element of the RX1's 35/2 is just there to project perpendicularly onto the sensor. If you moved the rest of the lens further away, then the rear element could be left out, possibly, and the next one would project directly on the sensor. I imagine that some corner colour and vignetting might result, but since it is a native lens, this could presumably be fixed in in-body processing to some extent.
Unless I am wrong somewhere, and unless this is really not practical in the end, I would certainly be willing to take a hit in size and price to see such a lens. Anyway, the Loxia 35/2 doesn't sound like it will be this lens. What a shame......Show more →
my understanding is that making the lens less symmetric as you describe fundamentally changes the design but keeps the focal length. doing what you describe would create a very different lens than the rx1 lens. if I'm misunderstanding this I'd love someone with more knowledge to chime in.
The optical formula is *MORE OR LESS* the same.
The purple lens for sure indicates some special glass material, maybe ED glass, maybe aspheric, maybe high index or all together.
It's the Biogon design adapted to Sony FE.
sebboh wrote:
any idea whether purple means ED glass? I'm assuming no aspherical since there aren't any in the zm line and that is the biggest element.
