p.2 #1 · Are Sony-made AF Zeiss lenses in fact Zeiss lenses?
freaklikeme wrote:
None, and that's not really what they're implying. Sony makes premium-quality electronics and sensors. Zeiss makes the best-possible optics for film and video cameras. It's an unnecessary addition given the nature of their partnership, but not inaccurate, if you believe the hyperbole.
Well, the way they framed the partnership sure implied some film usage. I understand now.
p.2 #2 · Are Sony-made AF Zeiss lenses in fact Zeiss lenses?
edwardkaraa wrote:
Agreed with all what have been said above.
However, in my opinion, Zeiss/Zeiss designs always aim at creating a certain signature look that Zeiss has been known for since the Contax Yashica days in the 70s. Zeiss/Sony design may have different priorities that are dictated by Sony. So even if the ZA lens has been designed by a German designer at Oberkochen, it still has to follow certain guidelines that make it less Zeissy, and more Sonyish
Edward,
The correct terms are Zeiss-tastic or Zeiss-tacular. Please make a note of it.
Zeissy sounds like sissy.
Regards,
RM
Sep 18, 2014 at 03:27 AM
Guest
Guest
p.2 #3 · Are Sony-made AF Zeiss lenses in fact Zeiss lenses?
I'll quote the esteemed FM member eosfun on this one (from another thread here https://www.fredmiranda.com/forum/topic/1270255/2#12106108)
The question was "FE 55mm f1.8? who designed, manufactured and where this made? Sony or Zeiss?" eosfun wrote:
Design: Zeiss
Glass elements: Schott glass
Manufacturing: CNC machinery: Zeiss, Coating machinery: Zeiss, Coating chemicals: Zeiss, High Vacuum machinery: Zeiss, MTF real time measurement machinery: Zeiss, Optical cements: Zeiss, training quality assurance personnel: Zeiss Barrels: Sony Circuits and electronics: Sony, Aperture: Sony Assembly employees: Sony, Quality assurance standards: Zeiss. Final test: Sony; Sample tests: Zeiss
Production site: Sony Chonburi Thailand
There are more details but this is more or less public information that I am allowed to share. Other information is probably under NDA, anyway I can't disclose anything else.
p.2 #5 · Are Sony-made AF Zeiss lenses in fact Zeiss lenses?
glina wrote:
Guys, it's really important to detach marketing from facts here.
The ZA 85mm/1.4 is a lens nearly identical to the Minolta 85mm/1.4 LTD, even the lens schematics resemble the Minolta, not the Planar 85mm/1.4 although of course I'm aware most 85mm designs are quite similar.
ZA 135mm/1.8 has nothing to do with the Zeiss 135mm/2.0 APO. Completely different lenses.
The Sony FE 55mm 1.8 is confirmed to have been designed by Naoki Miyagawa, an employer of Sony, not Zeiss. And manufactured in Thailand, in factories of Sony, not Cosina (where Zeiss is made).
Then if you have experience with Zeiss lens build quality, you know Sony's are not quite there - the ZA lenses have their fair share of mechanical problems, and FE 24-70 is also well known for sample variation and centering issues. My brand new FE55 came with dust particles inside. Would that happened with a Zeiss quality inspeciton? Don't think so.
As funny as it sounds, the only Zeiss lens design used by Sony seems to be the A-Mount Sonnar 85mm/2.8. Not even branded as Zeiss, but seemingly identical in design to the old Sonnar 85mm/2.8.
As a bottom line, I must add that I'm an optical engineer myself, and I once got to know an engineer from Zeiss Oberkochen, Germany. Also a photography enthusiast and was using a Sony camera, but at the same time he was pretty clear about the fact that the guys there have absolutely no input into Sony designs. The exchange between Sony and Zeiss is on a marketing level, not on an engineering level....Show more →
Your technical comments are quite right, being an optical engineer and all. However, I would like to point out that the ZA 85/1.4 was designed by Zeiss based on the Contax Yashica 85/1.4 and added the rear floating group for better close up performance. If it resembles the Minolta, it's because the Minolta is also a copy of the planar and that was a known fact and admitted by Minolta itself when it was first introduced.
The ZA 135 was designed by Zeiss 6 years before the ZE and was designed for AF internal focusing from the start, so of course it's not the same design.
As for the FE 55, yes it is true that it is designed by Sony but the point you make about Cosina is not correct. Cosina has never produced any Zeiss ZA lenses. ZA have always been made in Sony factories in Japan, and it seems Sony is moving all its FE lens manufacturing to Thailand.
p.2 #6 · Are Sony-made AF Zeiss lenses in fact Zeiss lenses?
edwardkaraa wrote:
Your technical comments are quite right, being an optical engineer and all. However, I would like to point out that the ZA 85/1.4 was designed by Zeiss based on the Contax Yashica 85/1.4 and added the rear floating group for better close up performance. If it resembles the Minolta, it's because the Minolta is also a copy of the planar and that was a known fact and admitted by Minolta itself when it was first introduced.
The ZA 135 was designed by Zeiss 6 years before the ZE and was designed for AF internal focusing from the start, so of course it's not the same design.
As for the FE 55, yes it is true that it is designed by Sony but the point you make about Cosina is not correct. Cosina has never produced any Zeiss ZA lenses. ZA have always been made in Sony factories in Japan, and it seems Sony is moving all its FE lens manufacturing to Thailand. ...Show more →
Edward,
I was under the impression according to the Zeiss National Sales Manager, Richard Schleuning at PhotoPlus in NYC in October of 2013 that the Zeiss branded Sony lenses were designed by Zeiss, manufactured by Sony and inspected for QA by Zeiss. Perhaps in the case of the 55mm 1.8 lens Zeiss participated in the design. But, I still believe as part of the agreement, Zeiss must perform QA and inspect a certain number of lenses per lot for the Zeiss name to be used on lenses.
p.2 #7 · Are Sony-made AF Zeiss lenses in fact Zeiss lenses?
naturephoto1 wrote:
Edward,
I was under the impression according to the Zeiss National Sales Manager, Richard Schleuning at PhotoPlus in NYC in October of 2013 that the Zeiss branded Sony lenses were designed by Zeiss, manufactured by Sony and inspected for QA by Zeiss. Perhaps in the case of the 55mm 1.8 lens Zeiss participated in the design. But, I still believe as part of the agreement, Zeiss must perform QA and inspect a certain number of lenses per lot for the Zeiss name to be used on lenses.
Rich
Hi Rich! This is the official story that Richard Schleuning has to adhere to, but the reality is much more complex, as it was mentioned by several posters above. Indeed the machinery comes from Zeiss, as well as the T* coatings. The design has to receive Zeiss blessing but not necessarily designed by Zeiss. The QC is theoretically done by Sony according to Zeiss standards, but in reality it's nowhere near these standards.
p.2 #8 · Are Sony-made AF Zeiss lenses in fact Zeiss lenses?
I was (and still am) under the impression that Zeiss and Leica branding does wonders for marketing. Recurring discussions like this one only seem to prove that point.
p.2 #9 · Are Sony-made AF Zeiss lenses in fact Zeiss lenses?
glina wrote:
I was (and still am) under the impression that Zeiss and Leica branding does wonders for marketing. Recurring discussions like this one only seem to prove that point.
p.2 #10 · Are Sony-made AF Zeiss lenses in fact Zeiss lenses?
Anything "Zeiss" or "Sony" is always "just a branding thing," unless you think that German corporate registration necessarily produces better results than registering in Japan. Zeiss is a brand and nothing more.
I think we all agree that the end results--optical quality, handling, reliability, etc--are what matter, not the name engraved on the lens. Mostly, branding is used to signal sets of traits to the consumer, but that is entirely implicit and therefore unreliable information. (The closest we get is when asking what company stands behind the warranty, but even that is a poor measure as it doesn't reflect quality, only failure, and warranties themselves are more an investment vehicle than a measure of reliability.) I would much rather have a non-G, non-Zeiss lens that 20 Sony engineers worked on for two years to perfect than a 100% German lens that Zeiss had their secretarial pool design and manufacture in a one month, team-building bonanza. That kind of information, though, about how much effort went into a design, isn't public. We simply don't know. The closest we get can be seen in the Walter Mandler thread, where there's debate about whether a particular engineer was associated with certain lenses, though it doesn't touch upon how much influence he had on a given design. Again, we don't know. Our best and only recourse is to look at a number of different tests to begin to shape an informed opinion.
Does brand matter to me? Absolutely. Brands are a kind of shorthand. If Sony does spend 40 engineer-years on a lens, they'll want to market it with premium branding, so I look primarily at those premium-branded lenses for the few jewels I might buy. Knowing about a brand, though, is no substitute for knowing about individual products. [Insert reference to recent Hasselblad products.]
The same applies to location of manufacture.
tl;dr -- Brands might influence how you research products, but they shouldn't influence which products you use.
p.2 #11 · Are Sony-made AF Zeiss lenses in fact Zeiss lenses?
this thread reminds me of my LF days, when Carl Zeiss Jena was looked down on because it was in East Germany, and Ober......chen was in West Germany. Never mind that CZ Jena was the original factory.
p.2 #12 · Are Sony-made AF Zeiss lenses in fact Zeiss lenses?
As a side note, if you go over to DPreview there is a video of a Panasonic fellow discussing the relationship of Leica and Panasonic and how they divy up responsibilities. I would surmise that Sony's relationship with Zeiss is similar.
p.2 #13 · Are Sony-made AF Zeiss lenses in fact Zeiss lenses?
Perhaps Zeiss engineers and optical designers provide input and feedback to the Sony/Minolta designs. The Sony manufacturing facilities and processes compile with Zeiss QA standards, especially the T* coating process, for all the Zeiss labored Sony lenses. Zeiss ZA/FE lenses are manufactured in Sony's manufacturing facilities. But Zeiss also use other Japanese facility for make Zeiss ZF, ZE, and ZE lenses, including the Otus 55/1.4.
p.2 #14 · Are Sony-made AF Zeiss lenses in fact Zeiss lenses?
glina wrote:
I was (and still am) under the impression that Zeiss and Leica branding does wonders for marketing. Recurring discussions like this one only seem to prove that point.
sure, but you have to keep in mind the same is true for non-sony zeiss lenses and non-panasonic leica lenses. there is no magic imbued by the name, just price.
p.2 #15 · Are Sony-made AF Zeiss lenses in fact Zeiss lenses?
Zeiss and Leica have worked for decades to gain their impeccable reputation. Even if the quality of lenses have been matched or even at times bested by modern Japanese designs, they are still a legend.
I find it a bit sad that they were willing to sell their names to Panasonic or Sony to be used on consumer electronics with no pedigree (cell phone cameras, superzoom compacts).
Sony and Panasonic know very well it takes decades to make a name for themselves. Surprisingly Zeiss and Leica forgot it may only take moments to lose it.
p.2 #16 · Are Sony-made AF Zeiss lenses in fact Zeiss lenses?
glina wrote:
Zeiss and Leica have worked for decades to gain their impeccable reputation. Even if the quality of lenses have been matched or even at times bested by modern Japanese designs, they are still a legend.
I find it a bit sad that they were willing to sell their names to Panasonic or Sony to be used on consumer electronics with no pedigree (cell phone cameras, superzoom compacts).
Sony and Panasonic know very well it takes decades to make a name for themselves. Surprisingly Zeiss and Leica forgot it may only take moments to lose it.
it'll only fade if they over do it and the lenses consistently suck.
zeiss should probably stop putting it's name on sony zooms. i don't think the primes are hurting their reputation any.
the cell phones and superzooms do seem sort of leica cash grab in most cases. i doubt the zeiss or leica name really help them sell such consumer products with the exception of the rx100 style cameras and maybe that nokia with the 41mp sensor (they probably really needed zeiss's expertise for that).
p.2 #17 · Are Sony-made AF Zeiss lenses in fact Zeiss lenses?
Question, T* coatings have been around for a long time. Are they not due a revamp with modern methods such as nano coating? Is it such a plus to advertise a a 40 year old coating process on modern lenses? T* is just Zeiss's term for muti coating after all. Is it really still the magic pixie dust that legend seems to grant it?
p.2 #18 · Are Sony-made AF Zeiss lenses in fact Zeiss lenses?
Zeiss seems to follow a low key policy about its product description and upgrades. Many Zeiss lenses are APO but are not advertised as such. Many have FLE but are not advertised as such. When they improve a model, they do it silently. They are the essence of German understatement. You wouldn't expect the T* coatings of 40 years ago to be the same as today. They have been improved along the years, and nowadays they are the most flare resistant of any brand and they do miracles to micro contrast, but unfortunately their scratch resistance is as poor as it was 40 years ago.
p.2 #19 · Are Sony-made AF Zeiss lenses in fact Zeiss lenses?
Beni wrote:
Question, T* coatings have been around for a long time. Are they not due a revamp with modern methods such as nano coating? Is it such a plus to advertise a a 40 year old coating process on modern lenses? T* is just Zeiss's term for muti coating after all. Is it really still the magic pixie dust that legend seems to grant it?
the T* coating is continually revamped and definitely not the same as it was 40 years ago when zeiss (and pentax) were clearly better than everybody else). even within the contax line of lenses you can see that the coating evolved with time. the current T* coating is still one of the best in terms of light transmission, the competition is a lot closer these days than it was 40 years ago and even upstarts like samyang can put a pretty decent coating on lenses. nano coating is just a marketing term (anything with the word nano in it is really), and probably trademarked just like the T*.
p.2 #20 · Are Sony-made AF Zeiss lenses in fact Zeiss lenses?
According to Zeiss the T* coating is just a name for a technique to add multiple layers of film to the surface of a lens. It is not a single sauce added to every lens but it varies from lens to another.
