Well I really dont think we will see the EOS mount. I asked them for information about new mounts a couple of weeks ago before I bought the ZF18mm. They told me to use an adapter and that it wasnt possible to make the lens in Canon mount without agreement.
I have NO inside knowledge, but I am a Zeiss dealer and I'll add this: when they came out with Pentax mount, they were very matter of fact about it. "Oh, by the way, we've added Pentax." They're really pumped up about whatever is coming in September, which makes me believe its NOT a 4/3 mount.
Interesting. There is really not a lot of different possibilities. It's not going to be "OM" mount, it's not going to be Leica R mount, and it's not going to be 4/3rds mount (this would be very surprising). So, what's left? Contax RTS mount, Sony Alpha/Minolta mount, or Canon EF.
Contax RTS? probably not, only if Zeiss is feeling nostalgic
Sony Alpha/Minolta? Perhaps. Don't know the details of Sony's licensing agreement with Zeiss. Other than participation in the design process, Zeiss appears to have little involvement in the Sony Alpha ZA Zeiss lenses. Zeiss could produce a manual focus option for the Alpha cameras. This might not be prohibited in the licensing agreement, and even if it is, Sony might welcome it as it might help them sell bodies -- which might help them gain critical mass in the market to be a viable long-term alternative to Canon/Nikon.
Canon EF? Possibly. The physical mount is most likely out of patent protection by now, and they really don't need AF protocols (obviously). Clearly it would be the biggest potential market of the 3 for Zeiss. Not sure what Canon can do to protect a patent over 20 years old, and they certainly haven't done anything to prevent anyone else using the mount at least over over the last decade. So who knows.
We'll just have to wait until September 15 to find out.
Since we are speculating.... could Zeiss be releasing one of the following mounts....
4/3rds or Micro 4/3rds ?
Mamiya ?
Hassleblad ?
If they did decide to come up with an EF mount lens - manual focus and manual aperture stop down, how many people would jump at these.
Canon has something no other OEM has - they have the fastest AF system available and their zooms have improved quite a bit over the years. How many would choose a manual focus/manual aperture ZE 24mm f2.8 which will probably retail for $1000+ over the 24-70mm f2.8 L ? Canon has the 35L, 50L, 85L, and 135L which are pretty good. If anything, Zeiss could offer something under 35mm that might interest EF users.
They have the ZF line for Nikon.... I don't see these flying off the shelves. They are, in most cases, pricey and don't offer AF over the relatively good decent lenses ?
A majority of Nikon owners choose the Nikon 85mm f1.4 over the ZF 85mm f1.4.... The ZF 18mm is out but would nikon owners chose the Nikon 14-24mm f2.8 or the ZF 18mm f3.5 for their full frame D3/D700 ?
I just don't think Zeiss sees the potential for the Canon EF mount..... the volume sales simply wouldn't be there....
pascal03 wrote:
Since we are speculating.... could Zeiss be releasing one of the following mounts....
4/3rds or Micro 4/3rds ?
Mamiya ?
Hassleblad ?
If they did decide to come up with an EF mount lens - manual focus and manual aperture stop down, how many people would jump at these.
Canon has something no other OEM has - they have the fastest AF system available and their zooms have improved quite a bit over the years. How many would choose a manual focus/manual aperture ZE 24mm f2.8 which will probably retail for $1000+ over the 24-70mm f2.8 L ? Canon has the 35L, 50L, 85L, and 135L which are pretty good. If anything, Zeiss could offer something under 35mm that might interest EF users.
They have the ZF line for Nikon.... I don't see these flying off the shelves. They are, in most cases, pricey and don't offer AF over the relatively good decent lenses ?
A majority of Nikon owners choose the Nikon 85mm f1.4 over the ZF 85mm f1.4.... The ZF 18mm is out but would nikon owners chose the Nikon 14-24mm f2.8 or the ZF 18mm f3.5 for their full frame D3/D700 ?
I just don't think Zeiss sees the potential for the Canon EF mount..... the volume sales simply wouldn't be there.......Show more →
These lenses are all the same aside from the mount differences, so the majority of the development costs are already spent. The incremental cost of the EF mount would likely be covered by a very small number of sales, and we know that's technically possible since Cosina has already produced lenses with this mount (along with electronically controlled aperture) The number of potential sales is much higher with EF than Leica R, or 4/3 so logically the Canon EF mount seems to make the most sense.
That being said, Leica R is also a possibility, especially if Zeiss knows something that we don't about Leica's plans for the R series. I don't think that the 4/3 makes much sense though, too small a market, and the 2x crop factor makes many of the lenses less desirable.
pascal03 wrote:
Canon has something no other OEM has - they have the fastest AF system available and their zooms have improved quite a bit over the years. How many would choose a manual focus/manual aperture ZE 24mm f2.8 which will probably retail for $1000+ over the 24-70mm f2.8 L ? Canon has the 35L, 50L, 85L, and 135L which are pretty good. If anything, Zeiss could offer something under 35mm that might interest EF users.
They have the ZF line for Nikon.... I don't see these flying off the shelves. They are, in most cases, pricey and don't offer AF over the relatively good decent lenses ?
A majority of Nikon owners choose the Nikon 85mm f1.4 over the ZF 85mm f1.4.... The ZF 18mm is out but would nikon owners chose the Nikon 14-24mm f2.8 or the ZF 18mm f3.5 for their full frame D3/D700 ? ....Show more →
Hmmm. I think we disagree about the conclusion of the analysis. First, I would say that Zeiss doesn't expect the ZF lenses to "fly off the shelves". In fact, given the expansion of the lens to other lens mounts suggests that it's acceptance in the market is exceeding or at least meeting expectations. Zeiss knows and expects these lenses to be small volume, niche market products for people that either: like manual focus, like the signature Zeiss look, appreciate the quality of manufacture and design, value brand loyalty and/or don't mind giving up AF for the advantages they see the lenses offering -- whatever their reasons might be. That is certainly not everyone and Zeiss, I believe, fully understands that. But there appears to be enough buyers to support continued manufacture of the lenses and justify continued expansion of the product line.
Edited by Lotusm50 on Sep 02, 2008 at 04:46 PM GMT
CVickery wrote:
These lenses are all the same aside from the mount differences, so the majority of the development costs are already spent. The incremental cost of the EF mount would likely be covered by a very small number of sales, and we know that's technically possible since Cosina has already produced lenses with this mount (along with electronically controlled aperture) The number of potential sales is much higher with EF than Leica R, or 4/3 so logically the Canon EF mount seems to make the most sense.
That being said, Leica R is also a possibility, especially if Zeiss knows something that we don't about Leica's plans for the R series. I don't think that the 4/3 makes much sense though, too small a market, and the 2x crop factor makes many of the lenses less desirable....Show more →
This is pretty much spot on. However, I see less of possibility that it would be a Leica R mount. People would buy a Leica R body so they can use Leica lenses. There may be a small fraction of the small population of people buying a Leica R body that would consider using a Zeiss lens instead of a Leica lens. But a small fraction or a small population means a really tiny potential market, so I rate the probability of this as low (note that the situation with the Leica M and the Zeiss ZM lenses is different than with the Leica R).
RobertP wrote:
So far the ZA lenses are MUCH better than the ZF lenses which makes Sony quite attractive. It's just that there's only 2 ZA primes so far. .
What is your basis for that statement?
It seems to me that it is very difficult to draw that, or any, conclusion. There is only one comparable lens -- the 85/1.4, and they are very different in design and construction.
From handling lenses from both lines, the ZF lenses from a tactile perspective, seem to be better built/higher quality -- but I'm not sure that sense will matter in use or in realized durability.
I think the jury is still out in the ZF vs ZA debate, and Sony does not appear to be rushing out new ZA lenses to add new data points to help us conclude the debate.
Lotusm50 wrote:
What is your basis for that statement?
It seems to me that it is very difficult to draw that, or any, conclusion. There is only one comparable lens -- the 85/1.4, and they are very different in design and construction.
From handling lenses from both lines, the ZF lenses from a tactile perspective, seem to be better built/higher quality -- but I'm not sure that sense will matter in use or in realized durability.
I think the jury is still out in the ZF vs ZA debate, and Sony does not appear to be rushing out new ZA lenses to add new data points to help us conclude the debate.
Maybe they'll come out with lenses in the Nikon RF mount. It's pretty insane, but, then again, so are rumblings about Nikon coming out with a full-frame rangefinder. (Also note that Zeiss has not denied that they'll come out with a digital rangefinder - they merely said they'll wait until the technology is where they want it to be, which means affordable full frame sensors. They could probably make a FF rangefinder these days, with the Nikon chips, for half the price of an M8.)
shiwan wrote:
Maybe they'll come out with lenses in the Nikon RF mount. It's pretty insane, but, then again, so are rumblings about Nikon coming out with a full-frame rangefinder. (Also note that Zeiss has not denied that they'll come out with a digital rangefinder - they merely said they'll wait until the technology is where they want it to be, which means affordable full frame sensors. They could probably make a FF rangefinder these days, with the Nikon chips, for half the price of an M8.)
But any potential Nikon RF lenses would be based, most probably, on the ZM lenses, not on the ZF/ZS/ZK lenses as implied by the Zeiss' image.
Lotusm50 wrote:
But any potential Nikon RF lenses would be based, most probably, on the ZM lenses, not on the ZF/ZS/ZK lenses as implied by the Zeiss' image.
Exactly. It is the line-up in the image that makes this so interesting. A RF or MF lens stuck on the end of that image would look like a turd in a punch bowl.
There are very few mounts that would make a lot of sense to plug into that image. Canon EF makes the most sense.
EOS seems obvious. How hard can be to stop down the lens and pass EXIF info? Unlike everyone else they don't have to get autofocus working.
What are the gems of the new Zeiss line? In particular where is Zeiss strong compared to the Canon counterpart? It seems to me most of their lenses sit between the L and non-L Canon lenses (in price and speed)
