I am sorry, but I may differ with you. What really put Zeiss on the map originally was their Microscopes. Even Ernst Leitz worked for Zeiss for Microscopes. Both companies went on from there. Ernst Leitz of course founded Leitz that origninally made Leitz Microscopes and then Cameras. Both companies made cameras and lenses.
Rich
I don't disagree Rich. Microscopes were first, but cameras have been a big and long tradition and foundational part of both companies for a long time. Because of that I would be surprised if Zeiss got totally out of the photography business. Still I think we are already seeing that it has become less of a central part of their business, or at least it looks that way to me.
What I think is the case is they got out of production completely and just doing the design than give it to third party to build for them. A lot of companies are in the business still but don't produce anything except design. Farm everything else out
GMPhotography wrote:
Both companies are into Sport Scopes, Binoculars , microscopes and lenses. Plus other things
Hi Guy,
But, in the case of Leica which is now the name of the company and Logo, it is now broken up into 3 separate companies. 2 are public and/or part of other companies. One is the Microsystems that makes optical microscopes and such; the second public company makes surveying equipment and other equipment. Leica Camera is private and 45% is owned by the Blackstone Group. Leica Camera licenses the Leica name from Leica Microsystems and the Leica name is shared by all 3 companies. Leica Camera makes cameras, binoculars, spotting scopes, rifle scopes, etc. Wikipedia indicates that they make microscopes which I question since Leica Microsystems makes some of the worlds best optical microscopes as does Zeiss.
Steve Spencer wrote:
Well, they did come out with the Otus 100 last year that is a very high performing lens, which you would expect. What I am not sure at all about, however, is whether they are doing any separate development of stills lenses at Zeiss itself, and that may have been true for a long time. As I understand it from David, the Loxia lenses were developed for industrial purposes first and simply modified for stills. The Milvus and Otus lenses one could make a case were developed for video and modified for stills. As you say, it seems the Batis lenses were developed by Tamron. You really have to go back to the ZM 35 and the Otus 55 (and maybe the Otus 85), to find lenses that look like they were developed by Zeiss primarily for stills. I wonder if in the last 5 years they have decided that they will develop lenses for stills only when they are taking up designs that have been developed for other purposes. And this maybe why Cosina has gone all in with their development of their Voigtlander lenses. They may have known that Zeiss isn't going to be offering really any new lenses and they thought they would fill the gap. If so, they have done so very nicely....Show more →
In other words, I believe we can reasonably conclude that:
* any new Milvus designs are unlikely given the terminal decline of the DSLR market;
* similarly new Otus lenses are unlikely—why pay for an Otus when Sigma’s latest designs offer equal or better quality plus AF at a fraction of the Otus price?
* any new Loxia lens will depend upon the demand for a new industrial design;
* based on five years of inactivity the ZM line is finished.
Really, all that’s left for Zeiss is the Tamron (sorry, Batis) line, once they have papered over the Batis 40 fiasco. Though there’s still the ZX1; or is that already dead on arrival? Honestly, who amongst the Zeiss aficionados on the Alt and Sony forums would have dreamed five years ago that the Zeiss whose lens designs we loved and admired would be first supplanted then surpassed by Cosina, Sigma, and Sony?
genji wrote:
In other words, I believe we can reasonably conclude that:
* any new Milvus designs are unlikely given the terminal decline of the DSLR market;
* similarly new Otus lenses are unlikely—why pay for an Otus when Sigma’s latest designs offer equal or better quality plus AF at a fraction of the Otus price?
* any new Loxia lens will depend upon the demand for a new industrial design;
* based on five years of inactivity the ZM line is finished.
Really, all that’s left for Zeiss is the Tamron (sorry, Batis) line, once they have papered over the Batis 40 fiasco. Though there’s still the ZX1; or is that already dead on arrival? Honestly, who amongst the Zeiss aficionados on the Alt and Sony forums would have dreamed five years ago that the Zeiss whose lens designs we loved and admired would be first supplanted then surpassed by Cosina, Sigma, and Sony?...Show more →
My Milvus lenses work very well on the Z series. Why would Zeiss not produce Milvus for mirrorless cameras? I also think the work of optical redesigning is not that overwhelming once you know how to source different glass reliably, manufacture it, produce advanced coatings etc.
AcuteShadows wrote:
My Milvus lenses work very well on the Z series. Why would Zeiss not produce Milvus for mirrorless cameras? I also think the work of optical redesigning is not that overwhelming once you know how to source different glass reliably, manufacture it, produce advanced coatings etc.
There would be no reason at all for Zeiss not to produce Milvus lenses for mirrorless cameras. But that wasn't my point, which is that new Milvus designs are unlikely. Warmed-up versions of existing designs totally exemplify what the current "it's all about the marketing because we're coasting on the fumes of our once great reputation" Zeiss has been reduced to.
genji wrote:
There would be no reason at all for Zeiss not to produce Milvus lenses for mirrorless cameras. But that wasn't my point, which is that new Milvus designs are unlikely. Warmed-up versions of existing designs totally exemplify what the current "it's all about the marketing because we're coasting on the fumes of our once great reputation" Zeiss has been reduced to.
The Milvus lenses, especially those with new optical formulae, are a huge improvement over the Zeiss Classic lenses. Why would Zeiss be unable to make new designs and further improvements? In particular, past designs were limited by unsophisticated coating (limiting number and arrangement of lenses), lack of efficient aspherical lens manufacturing capabilities and mount distance and diameter. So there is a lot of room for improment in the future.
I can fit 3 lenses plus A7RIII in my PD 5L if the lenses are the right size. Below I have the CV 40 on the camera with the CV 21/3.5 and CV 10 on the sides. I would like to fit the CV 40, 24GM, and CV 10 in the 5L, but it's just too tight and is hard when switching lenses to get the right fit. It looks like the Cooper 8 may have a little more room. Sorry this is off topic but it is helpful!
Yea the PD 5 is a three lens bag but small lenses. Like the CV 15,21 3.5, Loxia 21,35 and lenses these kinds of sizes. Turnstyle 5 is a little bigger but still hard with my glass like the 21 1.4,50 1.2 and the 75 1.5. Now if you jump to the Turnstlye 10 you can get my collection plus a 12 or 15
The Tenba Cooper 8 I just got I can fit my 21,50,75 plus you get some extra room for filters , batteries , your phone. I removed the pad from the shoulder strap. Removed a divider and the stacking dividers. Slide the insert to one side leaving a blank space for a lens. Look at that photo again. I may pull that one divider and replace with a thinner one. I also took off my extension grip. Now I’m figuring once I get the A7rIV I may not need that extension grip as it looks like the IV I may not need it. I’m planning ahead.
I can also get my little RRS table top in the Tenba . I feel it is the better travel bag. Maybe not the best bag to shoot from but what bag is . Plus it’s really nice looking so you don’t look like a bum.
There is also a loop on one end. I could put my 12 in a small pouch and attach it .
I’m thinking on more photo trips than I could go to the Turnstyle 10 for 4 lenses with a lot of room or throw in a AF lens like my 24
I know this is way off topic but frankly to me it’s right on topic. You need to know how these type of lenses fit in bags. I’ll buy lenses just for bag size. I walk a lot in NY and LA areas for stock shooting. I don’t want to stand out but look normal . The Tenba is actually understated
AcuteShadows wrote:
The Milvus lenses, especially those with new optical formulae, are a huge improvement over the Zeiss Classic lenses. Why would Zeiss be unable to make new designs and further improvements? In particular, past designs were limited by unsophisticated coating (limiting number and arrangement of lenses), lack of efficient aspherical lens manufacturing capabilities and mount distance and diameter. So there is a lot of room for improment in the future.
Perhaps best that we agree to disagree. You may well be correct though I believe that Zeiss has neither the resources for nor the commitment to making still camera lenses that would be required to do what you suggest. But time will tell.
