Carl Zeiss Planar T* 60mm C f/2.8 was one of the three macro prime lenses that Carl Zeiss was manufacturing in Contax/Yashica mount. The review is for MM lens manufactured by Cosina of Japan, serial number 7441513. Carl Zeiss discontinued the Makro-Planar T* 60mm C f/2.8 after Kyocera, which was its partner and joint holder of Contax brand name, discontinued manufacturing Contax-branded cameras. However, the company recently updated its Makro-Planar lineup with Makro-Planar T* 50mm f/2 and Makro-Planar T* 100mm f/2, both in ZF format for Nikon Ai-S mount as well as with Makro-Planar 120mm f/4 in ZV format for Hasselblad. The MM version of Makro-Planar T* 60mm C f/2.8 for C/Y mount is readily available on used market and you can find good copies selling for about US$400 on eBay and slightly higher at various used photo-equipment dealers. On APS-C type cameras like Digital Rebel XTi used in testing, the lens has field of view similar to that of a 96mm lens on a full-frame body.
The optical construction of the lens consists of 6 elements in 4 groups. The lens is quite lightweight and compact for a macro (the C in the name actually stands for 'Compact'), weighing only 260g (9.2oz) and measuring 6.6x5.1cm (2.5x2.1in). The lens actually extends when focusing towards macro, almost doubling in length (both the focusing ring itself as well as the cam extend forward during focusing). Both focus and aperture rings are rubberized and the lens barrel is made of lightweight metal, so the lens feel quite sturdy. The minimum focusing distance is 27cm (10.7in) and the minimum aperture is f/22. The lens offers 1:2 scale macro capabilities at 27cm but obviously can be used for general purposes as well. Like most of Zeiss Contax lenses, Makro-Planar 60mm accepts 55mm screw-in type filters.
To test the lens, I used generic Fotodiox C/Y to EOS adapter without AF confirmation chip. This means that I had to use the camera in either fully manual or aperture priority mode. The lack of connection to the camera mount also robbed me of all but center-weighted metering.
Carl Zeiss Planar T* 60mm C f/2.8 was one of the three macro prime lenses that Carl Zeiss was manufacturing in Contax/Yashica mount. The review is for MM lens manufactured by Cosina of Japan, serial number 7441513. .....
p.1 #3 · CZ Makro-Planar 60mm C f/2.8 review posted
the lens I tested was manufactured in Japan and Cosina was manufacturing lenses for Zeiss to the best of my knowledge... Kyocera manufactured lenses bear Yashica name... so unless I am missing something here, I don't understand what you mean...
p.1 #5 · CZ Makro-Planar 60mm C f/2.8 review posted
Cinstance,
I don't want to be engaging in insults, however, I'm always interested in correcting myself wherever I'm wrong. Having said that, it looks like you have some information that I don't. As I said, to the best of my knowledge, Yashica branded lenses (made in Japan) were manufactured by Yashica itself and Cosina in 70s and 80s. Zeiss lenses (made in W. Germany) were manufactured by Zeiss itself. Those Zeiss lenses that were marked as made in Japan were manufactured either by Tomioka or Cosina. After Kyocera exited Contax business in 05, Zeiss awarded manufacturing contract for its ZF range of Nikon Ai-S lenses to Cosina. If this info is not correct, pls share your insight - and kudos will go to you ;-)
p.1 #6 · CZ Makro-Planar 60mm C f/2.8 review posted
No insult intended. Cosina only makes ZF/ZS, ZM lenses. C/Y lenses were either made in Germany, or made in Japan by Kyocera (28-70 by Sigma being the only exception). Cosina was never in the equation until Zeiss and Kyocera parted ways.
p.1 #7 · CZ Makro-Planar 60mm C f/2.8 review posted
ok, thanks. Do you have a reference? I don't have manual for this lens (otherwise it would have been easy to figure out who manufactured it ;-), however, this link on wikipedia http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Cosina states that Cosina did manufacture lenses for Yashica (my guess before Kyocera acquired Yashica). I swear I saw a reference on Cosina's Japanese site to their history which also mentioned C/Y mount lenses, but I can't find their history page anymore. Also, could other members of the forum confirm that Cosina was not involved in manufacturing (any?) C/Y lenses? Appreciate your assistance...
p.1 #8 · CZ Makro-Planar 60mm C f/2.8 review posted
Cosina manufactured third-party lenses in the C/Y mount, just like many others - think Kiron, Rokinon, Soligor, Vivitar, et al. These lenses were not sold under the "Contax" or "Yashica" brand, but under their own, or rebranded by a third-party. I think that's where your confusion lies.
p.1 #9 · CZ Makro-Planar 60mm C f/2.8 review posted
Aha, I see.... I stand corrected then and will change the review to reflect this info... This is good - in general if anyone finds discrepancies/typos/etc. in the reviews, please post your constructive comments, after all the reviews are for the community and it's in my and community's interest to make sure they contain accurate information. Thanks.
p.1 #10 · CZ Makro-Planar 60mm C f/2.8 review posted
As a long-time maker of lenses and SLR cameras for rebranding, Cosina has broad experience with Japanese mounts (e.g. Contax/Yashica, Nikon F, Olympus OM). As already mentioned, the Zeiss relationship was established after the Kyocera debacle, after which Cosina released Zeiss-branded lenses (and cameras). In the current era, Cosina has released SLR lenses under its Voigtlaender name, some of which have the same optical formulae as their RF lenses. Most of these "SL" lenses were available in C/Y mount - at least, on request. The Cosina web site doesn't appear to mention the fact, but the US importer (Steve Gandy) gives the details:
p.1 #11 · CZ Makro-Planar 60mm C f/2.8 review posted
Thanks for the effort to put up the review. Your site is nicely designed BUT...
1. I'm totally not interested in your test using APS sized sensor. If u can afford to get these lenses, I'm sure u are financially sound to acquire yourself a FF cam.
2. I've kind of glanced through and find that some basic facts are wrongly stated. That leaves me doubting the accuracy of all your test.
The whole impression that I've is that it is just another lens-reviewer-wannabe. A newbie who is trying hard to gain respect from the community...
p.1 #12 · CZ Makro-Planar 60mm C f/2.8 review posted
weekh,
First thing first - most lenses are borrowed, although I do own some Zeiss, Canon and Nikon lenses (Zeiss lenses are from my old RTS days), but again, bulk is actually borrowed from friends etc...
Secondly, while you might not be interested in results with APS-C camera, others have expressed different opinions. There's simply no way (and I don't intend to try) to satisfy everyone. I started with APS-C type camera simply due to the fact that there are bunch of EF-S lenses that obviously cannot really be tested on full-frame camera and because I wanted to do the initial pass using the same platform. Since this platform is here to stay for some time (most dSLRs manufactured right now are actually either APS-C or APS-H formats) I don't personally see anything wrong with testing lenses using APS-C camera. Can I afford a full-frame camera - sure, but I'm not going to buy one anytime soon, because I'm more interested in playing with a new system/lenses (say Leica, Pentax, Hasselblad) then upgrading my Canon platform (also considering that while Canon is the dominant platform, it is still only one of many). Having said that, I will ultimately get a full-frame Canon and redo some of the tests, but this is on my long-term road map...
Thirdly, as I have stated here and on other forums, while I don't see anything wrong with having a respect of the community, this is not my goal and my life is not gonna end if I don't have the respect of the this or any other forum (no disrespect intended obviously). I do tests/reviews for personal fun and if the outcome of it is useful to the community (and I'm hoping they are actually) - great, if somebody doesn't like what I write/say etc - just ignore the post and don't visit the site, nobody is forcing you. But that doesn't mean I'm gonna stop doing what I am enjoying. Yes, I do receive occasional rant and flame etc., but this is a minority so far.
Fourthly, instead of being vague saying 'some basic facts are wrongly stated' why don't you point to where the discrepancy is - I'm human (as you and everybody else is) and am prone to occasional mistakes. The good news is that I don't see a problem admitting where I've erred (if I'm pointed to it;-) and trying to correct the result. Some individuals on this and other forums were more then willing to help with reviews/opinions/additional info, if you fall into this group then your feedback is appreciated, if not then what's the point of this discussion?
And finally, I never said that I'm a professional doing these reviews for money, and unless you fall into this category, then you (and anybody else) is as much of a wannabe/amateur as me ;-)
p.1 #13 · CZ Makro-Planar 60mm C f/2.8 review posted
eosslr wrote:
And finally, I never said that I'm a professional doing these reviews for money, and unless you fall into this category, then you (and anybody else) is as much of a wannabe/amateur as me ;-)
Hmm. So, then, the photozone.de and photodo.com sites are mere wannabe amateurs?
Concordantly, if I were to charge money for my reviews, that would instantly make my reviews "better" than those aforementioned sites?
p.1 #14 · CZ Makro-Planar 60mm C f/2.8 review posted
Definition of amateur according to the webster dictionary is:
* engaged in as a pastime
* someone who pursues a study or sport as a pastime
* does not play for pay
* etc...
As I recall, the gentleman who owns photozone is a full-time software engineer - I don't know whether he is making any money writing his reviews, but that is besides the point - you seem to be concentrating on the word 'amateur' as negative descriptor, whereby I am using it in its strict definition... Also, since you brought up photozone, photodo - whoever behind these sites started from zero and arrived where they are now over time. It does not happen in one day...
With regards to your second sentence - I do not understand how it is connected to what I said in my previous post and what exactly it means...
[EDIT] Just visited photozone.de site and in 'The Zone' section the author states:
Hobbies
* This site
* etc
p.1 #15 · CZ Makro-Planar 60mm C f/2.8 review posted
Cool it pal... I just stating my impression. Does not necessary mean that u are so.
I understand your well intention. But wouldn't it be better if u test out the full ability of a full frame lens on a full frame camera? It could be rather misleading for those who just glance at your graphs and interpret the results to be from a full-frame.
And getting your facts right will help in gaining credibility of your test. Sorry but I can't remember which articles. It was some time ago and seeing that glaring mistake, I just tell myself take your review with a 'pail' of salt. With so many reviews on the net, that how I do my screening on which site to trust and which to write off.
p.1 #16 · CZ Makro-Planar 60mm C f/2.8 review posted
weekh,
My tirade above was not intended to escalate argument - just stating my my line of thought. As mentioned, I fully realize the limitations of the APS-C sensors and disappointment of some members, like yourself, in the reviews not done with the full-frame camera - it's duly noted. I will eventually get to the full-frame, there's just too much stuff to do right now...
And if you see a glaring mistake in any of my articles, do me a favor - shoot a quick email or post a reply on thread. I want to know where I'm made the mistake.
p.1 #17 · CZ Makro-Planar 60mm C f/2.8 review posted
eosslr, I applaud you not only for posting a review, even if there are errors in it, but also for how elegantly you are dealing with, frankly, ridiculous criticism. The least someone can do if they want to criticise is to be specific, and not just post some "I saw an error somewhere" comment.
Wee Keng Hor: if you want to criticise, then please try to provide details. eosslr is trying to get into reviewing, so this vague, unfocused criticism is really not useful at all.
p.1 #18 · CZ Makro-Planar 60mm C f/2.8 review posted
Until someone else goes to the effort to do similar work for similar compensation (e.g. NADA) , then I suggest we gratefully use eos's (and others) work for what it was intended - as a (FREE) aide to those of us making lens-buying decisions.
Last time I looked at his or other's lens tests, they were NOT put forth as definitive product historys for Cosina/Contax/Leica/Hassy, et al. In short - tests by one photog for other photogs with some background material for color.
As for the 'color', I personally don't care when a lens was made by blind elves in a dark cave in the Gobi desert vs. 1-armed lepers in the Black Forest. I'm not collecting these suckers, I'm taking photos with them.
Thus -- what type of results does it deliver and how well built is it? In short, is it worth the effort/$$?
p.1 #19 · CZ Makro-Planar 60mm C f/2.8 review posted
Yeah, help the man.
Although this approach may have not been done as a full review before, but we do have the alt lens survey.
eosslr - it's safer to post this stuff in the Canon forum. We average about 40 fewer IQ points, and will believe just about anything written in a semi-official tone. Add in a diagram and it's a lock. A photo of a naked woman is accepted as supporting documentation for any conjecture.
p.1 #20 · CZ Makro-Planar 60mm C f/2.8 review posted
dcmiller wrote:
it's safer to post this stuff in the Canon forum. We average about 40 fewer IQ points, and will believe just about anything written in a semi-official tone. Add in a diagram and it's a lock. A photo of a naked woman is accepted as supporting documentation for any conjecture.
the lens I tested was manufactured in Japan and Cosina was manufacturing lenses for Zeiss to the best of my knowledge... Kyocera manufactured lenses bear Yashica name... so unless I am missing something here, I don't understand what you mean...
(no disrespect intended obviously). I do tests/reviews for personal fun and if the outcome of it is useful to the community (and I'm hoping they are actually) - great, if somebody doesn't like what I write/say etc - just ignore the post and don't visit the site, nobody is forcing you. But that doesn't mean I'm gonna stop doing what I am enjoying. Yes, I do receive occasional rant and flame etc., but this is a minority so far.