p.1 #1 · Disgusted with Zeiss Germany re locked Loxia 21 *** WARNING ***
A few months ago, my Loxia 21 suffered the dreaded "locked at infinity" syndrome that has been reported here and elsewhere. The lens was not under warranty, but I decided to send it back to Zeiss in Germany anyway for repair via the Australian representative C R Kennedy, who initially estimated a repair caost of a few hundred dollars. However, Zeiss came back with a quote of AU$1200 (about US$900) because they said the focus mechanism was damaged and needed to be replaced.
Instead, I asked them to ship it back unrepaired, and after several months had the lens back again. Thinking I had nothing to lose, I took it to a local repair shop who dismantled the lens and instead found that the problem was simply due to a small screw in the barrel that had been dislodged. He repaired it for me for a fairly minimal cost.
I have asked the Australian distributor to pass on to Zeiss my complete and utter disgust with their "service", but also wanted to warn anyone here who is thinking of sending their Zeiss lens back to Germany to reconsider if it is not under warranty.
p.s. Is there an easy way for me to cross post this on the alt forum? Thanks.
p.1 #2 · Disgusted with Zeiss Germany re locked Loxia 21 *** WARNING ***
I assume this was a mistake on Zeiss' part, I am not inclined to believe it was on purpose, but that is because I have had very good experience with Zeiss Oberkochen (Germany).
Nonetheless a serious mistake in evaluating the problem with your Loxia 21.
I have registered all my Zeiss Loxia lenses for extended warranty of 3 years.
B.t.w. It may well be that the price quotation was not Zeiss': I once bought a second hand Makro Planar 100/2 at a camera store and it appeared that the front barrel had some play. Normally I send my Zeiss lenses directly to Zeiss, but in this case I returned it to the camera store, which in turn sent it to Zeiss. I got a 650,- euro price quotation, and was stunned.
I contacted someone I had often emailed with at Zeiss, and he gave me a much lower price quotation, which had also been given to the camera store. So it appeared the camera store felt fit to try and make a few extra euros over my back by charging me a much higher fee.... I asked my money back.
p.1 #7 · Disgusted with Zeiss Germany re locked Loxia 21 *** WARNING ***
I can't rule out the possibility that the distributor modified the quote, but a displaced screw marked up to AU$1200 seems extreme. If that did happen, Zeiss needs to know about it, so if anyone has a contact at Zeiss who could look into this, feel free to PM me. However, to me it looks more like no one even bothered to look a the lens before issuing a quote.
p.1 #8 · Disgusted with Zeiss Germany re locked Loxia 21 *** WARNING ***
rvh23 wrote:
I can't rule out the possibility that the distributor modified the quote, but a displaced screw marked up to AU$1200 seems extreme. If that did happen, Zeiss needs to know about it, so if anyone has a contact at Zeiss who could look into this, feel free to PM me. However, to me it looks more like no one even bothered to look a the lens before issuing a quote.
Also that is highly unlikely, again based purely on my own experience with Zeiss service. When I contacted Zeiss and got to know the real price estimate for the Makro Planar 100mmf2, my contact summed up a rather long list of "out of spec" performance issues with the second hand lens, apart from the loose front barrel. Zeiss had clearly put the lens in their measuring equipment, and had a clear picture of the work involved in getting the lens back within specs.
Really a bummer that you had this experience.
p.1 #9 · Disgusted with Zeiss Germany re locked Loxia 21 *** WARNING ***
Thanks Chris. However, to avoid blowing out the repair cost along those lines, I specifically asked the distributor to request from Zeiss a repair cost to simply 'unlock' the lens without any other adjustments (the lens had been performing fine for me). It was at that point I was told the lens was damaged and needed the mechanism replaced.
p.1 #10 · Disgusted with Zeiss Germany re locked Loxia 21 *** WARNING ***
It has been my experience that manufacturers warrant the repair, and the best way (from their point of view) to be sure that the problem has been 'fixed' is to do replacements, so while I agree the cost was excessive, that seems to be the way business is done now; replace rather than repair.
As an example, I had a Canon zoom that went back to them (CPS) to tighten the loose zoom control, but they also said they would have to replace the front element of the lens, which had a very small (1/16") scratch near the periphery, and which has never caused any problems.
p.1 #11 · Disgusted with Zeiss Germany re locked Loxia 21 *** WARNING ***
I've also had negative experiences with Zeiss Germany.
They refused to admit that the 2 first 21mm Loxias that I bought were clearly decentered. They even said that our ways of testing here (like a "Gletscherbruch test" @ infinity) are completely flawed.
Luckily my third 21 Loxia was fine.
p.1 #12 · Disgusted with Zeiss Germany re locked Loxia 21 *** WARNING ***
I had a ZF.2 18/3.5 which was decentered. Rather than doing a "Gletscherbruch" test, I photographed straight lines in the form of board on a wooden building at horisontal and vertical orientations, and the lens displayed an obvious asymmetri. In fact I did no "Gletscherbruch" test at all. There were no problems convincing Zeiss in Oberkochen that the lens needed adjustment. The lens came back and performance was great. The price for the repair/adjustment was around EUR 120.
p.1 #13 · Disgusted with Zeiss Germany re locked Loxia 21 *** WARNING ***
Jochenb wrote:
I've also had negative experiences with Zeiss Germany.
They refused to admit that the 2 first 21mm Loxias that I bought were clearly decentered. They even said that our ways of testing here (like a "Gletscherbruch test" @ infinity) are completely flawed.
Luckily my third 21 Loxia was fine.
I had the same experience with a Loxia 21. I took pics using this method as well and Zeiss rejected it as invalid for some reason. I then took pictures pursuant to their instructions and after wasting days doing this and them being on the fence if there was an issue (not denying it but not authorizing me to send it to them), I sent the lens to the retail store where I purchased it. The reason i did not do that to start was that I bought it from Robert White in England and I contacted Zeiss in USA and they said I had to contact Zeiss in Germany. After the above somewhat frustrating experience with Zeiss in Germany, I contacted Robert White and shipped it to them. After that, all went smoothly and Zeiss in Germany repaired it (confirming it was out of spec) and the lens was in perfect shape on its return. By the way, I cannot say anything but good things about Robert White. They seem to me to be a fine outfit--pleasant, prompt, and professional.
p.1 #14 · Disgusted with Zeiss Germany re locked Loxia 21 *** WARNING ***
bjornthun wrote:
I had a ZF.2 18/3.5 which was decentered. Rather than doing a "Gletscherbruch" test, I photographed straight lines in the form of board on a wooden building at horisontal and vertical orientations, and the lens displayed an obvious asymmetri. In fact I did no "Gletscherbruch" test at all. There were no problems convincing Zeiss in Oberkochen that the lens needed adjustment. The lens came back and performance was great. The price for the repair/adjustment was around EUR 120.
Hello: I'd like to know more about the test approach you used. Very interesting the other commenter wrote Zeiss does not consider the "Gletscherbruch" test results. If you still have it , would you PM access to your test photo with the board on a wooden building horisontal and vertical orientations that shows the asymmetry? Just curious. Did you perform this test at multiple apertures or just wide open? Thanks in advance
p.1 #16 · Disgusted with Zeiss Germany re locked Loxia 21 *** WARNING ***
LBJ2 wrote:
Hello: I'd like to know more about the test approach you used. Very interesting the other commenter wrote Zeiss does not consider the "Gletscherbruch" test results. If you still have it , would you PM access to your test photo with the board on a wooden building horisontal and vertical orientations that shows the asymmetry? Just curious. Did you perform this test at multiple apertures or just wide open? Thanks in advance
I no longer have the test photos, but I can try to explain what I did.
First I got suspicious that something was wrong when looking at images I had taken. Some parts appeared sharp, others didn't and sharpness did not seem to depend on the focused distance, which was really odd.
I attached the camera to a tripod, made sure the wall was parallell with the sensor plane and sensor in landscape orientation. The wall was about 5-6m away. The boards on this particular are vertically oriented. Then I shot all apertures. After this I oriented the camera with sensor in portrait position, and re-shot all apertures. So, now I had images of the wall and boards in both orientations. I tried focusing in the image centre and away from the centre.
On my computer, I downloaded the images (raw, btw.) and could evaluate sharpness. It was clear that the left side was visibly less sharp than the right side viewed in landscape orientation.
Also I could check out if the lines created by the boards were equally sharp in hoth orientations. If they were not, it could be an indication of astigmatism, as I re-oriented the lens. The astigmatism should not change by turning the lens around its' optical axis, which is what I did by turning from landscape to portrait orientation. Unfortunately the lines created by the boards weren't equally sharp in both orientations, with this lens.
I explained to Zeiss repair what I did and submitted a photo. I also explained what I saw in the landscape photos. They repaired the lens, and the problem was fixed. A well adjusted ZF.2 18/3.5 is actually a fine lens.
I think the essence here is that you need to test more than the very corners of the image. Find out what happens in all of the image and describe it. Try all apertures and different focus distances. Don't just shoot a wall, try a landscape and a garden with various objects around. This to give you a three dimensional test of what is going on. This was also helpful when explaing the problem to Zeiss, in writing.
I suspect that the "Gletscherbruch" test may be susceptible to measurement error or operator error, but I've not tried to verify this speculation of mine. It is possible to gain a lot more information about the performance of your lens sample than "Gletscherbruch" alone can provide.
p.1 #17 · Disgusted with Zeiss Germany re locked Loxia 21 *** WARNING ***
On a different note, I think Zeiss recently updated the focusing mechanism of the Loxia 21. I used like 5 copies in the past and the focus ring on all of them was stiff compared to other Loxias. I tried two new copies and the focus ring feels a lot smoother now.
p.1 #18 · Disgusted with Zeiss Germany re locked Loxia 21 *** WARNING ***
ysultan wrote:
On a different note, I think Zeiss recently updated the focusing mechanism of the Loxia 21. I used like 5 copies in the past and the focus ring on all of them was stiff compared to other Loxias. I tried two new copies and the focus ring feels a lot smoother now.
All three Loxia's I have are recent copies and have extremely smooth focus action. Certainly compared to the Classic Zeiss lenses that I had previously.
But I have to admit to the dubious mounting/unmounting. I can imagine that using the hard infinity focus or close focus stop, or the aperture limit stops, as a means of mounting/unmounting these Loxias lenses, will in time loosen the small screws involved in these stops, and thus damage the lens. I always only use the solid rear part of the lens tube, and use the protruding dot as a means of increasing rotational force.
Even if Zeiss assures me that the Loxia lenses can take that force (of using the hard stops and aperture limits as a means of aiding rotational force for mounting/unmounting), it does not feel right. The little screws in these lenses tend to loosen up over time as it is (as with my Makro Planar 50mm f2), leading to obligatory servicing at Zeiss.
p.1 #19 · Disgusted with Zeiss Germany re locked Loxia 21 *** WARNING ***
rvh23 wrote:
Thanks Chris. However, to avoid blowing out the repair cost along those lines, I specifically asked the distributor to request from Zeiss a repair cost to simply 'unlock' the lens without any other adjustments (the lens had been performing fine for me). It was at that point I was told the lens was damaged and needed the mechanism replaced.
Interesting Thom Hogan just posted this regarding Nikon service:
"Warning: when you send a camera back to Nikon for service, they won't service it at all unless they can bring it up to full manufacturing standards. That means that if there's a broken part, they're going to want to fix that and charge for it, too. You can definitely send a camera in for a CLA expecting a low three-digit cost and getting a repair estimate for US$500-1000 when the technician examines the camera and finds something clearly needing fixing."
Makes me wonder if that's what happened with the Zeiss estimate.
p.1 #20 · Disgusted with Zeiss Germany re locked Loxia 21 *** WARNING ***
This leads me to classify the failure the OP experienced as a design/manufacturing flaw. Despite the 'official' warranty period it would be considered fair and reasonable under Australian consumer Law to expect a product marketed and sold as premium to last a significant amount of time under normal use conditions.
I would simply have contacted the ACCC and paid nothing @rvh23@
ChrisMak wrote:
All three Loxia's I have are recent copies and have extremely smooth focus action. Certainly compared to the Classic Zeiss lenses that I had previously.
But I have to admit to the dubious mounting/unmounting. I can imagine that using the hard infinity focus or close focus stop, or the aperture limit stops, as a means of mounting/unmounting these Loxias lenses, will in time loosen the small screws involved in these stops, and thus damage the lens. I always only use the solid rear part of the lens tube, and use the protruding dot as a means of increasing rotational force.
Even if Zeiss assures me that the Loxia lenses can take that force (of using the hard stops and aperture limits as a means of aiding rotational force for mounting/unmounting), it does not feel right. The little screws in these lenses tend to loosen up over time as it is (as with my Makro Planar 50mm f2), leading to obligatory servicing at Zeiss.
because they said the focus mechanism was damaged and needed to be replaced.