Sorry to be pedantic, but Zeiss says "including lens cap s ". The rear cap encapsulates quite some good, fresh air And I doubt that Lloyd actually measured the length, probably just read the specs.
Jan 20, 2011 at 12:57 PM
Lars Johnsson Offline • • • • • • • Upload & Sell: Off
wayne seltzer wrote:
Actually looked at Lloyd's preview and he mentions the length of 120mm.
So it is what it is.
He mentions that zeiss claim a long focus throw for this lens for pin point focusing.
Wonder if that is some of the cause in the long length?
He also claim it's 900 gr. And it's "only" 830-850 depending on mount
Yep, that should be roughly the same size as the new Distagon. The Summarit is a medium format lens though that covers more than twice the area of a full frame 35 mm sensor.
philip_pj wrote:
denoir, you need a new ruler, that one looks to be a relic from school days.
It's not a ruler but a yard stick
Jan 20, 2011 at 08:00 PM
Lars Johnsson Offline • • • • • • • Upload & Sell: Off
If you look at his lens preview (you need to log in) he says:
"The 35/1.4 Distagon is beefy at about 840 grams (29-30 ounces). By comparison, the 35/2 Distagon is about 530 grams, the 21/2.8 Distagon is about 600 grams, and Canon's 35/1.4 is about 640 grams..."
denoir wrote:
Yep, that should be roughly the same size as the new Distagon. The Summarit is a medium format lens though that covers more than twice the area of a full frame 35 mm sensor.
It's not a ruler but a yard stick
Yes, the S2 sensor is 30mm x 45mm, so the radius of the image circle needed is ~ 27mm for S2 vs the 18mm needed for 35mm. 1/3 larger radius/diameter.
Just thought it was interesting since both lenses are 11/9 elements/groups, similar length, and it was interesting comparing MTF even though the S2 lens is slower. Both have that zone b dip.
Jan 20, 2011 at 08:17 PM
Lars Johnsson Offline • • • • • • • Upload & Sell: Off
This is what he says on the first page in the link (without login)
Technical specifications
Focal length 35 mm
Aperture range f/1.4 - f/16
Number of elements/groups 11/9
Focusing area 0.3 m - infinity
Angular field** (diag./horiz./vert.) 63/54/37 °
Coverage at close range 18 x 12 cm (close-up)
Image ratio at close range 1:5 (close-up)
Filter thread M 72 x 0.75
Weight 900 g (not clear if this is ZF or ZE)
Length with caps 120 – 122 mm
Diameter 78 mm
Mounts ZF.2 (F bayonet), ZE (EF bayonet
Another comparison...
And yes, I double checked the relative scale of presentation. This is the real deal.
The S is 1+2/3 stops slower, and takes a 30% larger minimum projection. http://ezpicshare.com/images/ze3514-1295572766.jpg
When you say 96mm, what do you measure from? It's definitely not from the lens mount as the lens caps are not > 2 cm thick.
I think the most reasonable comparison would be with lens caps as the question is how much space does it take up in your bag. Once on the camera a cm here or there doesn't matter all that much.
As for the Leica Lux-R, if you are going by the values indicated by Leica then it's probably wrong. I just measured two Leica-M lenses and compared them to the official numbers and it's clear that they measure it without the mount. Zeiss on the other hand measures with mount and with both lens caps while Canon measures with mount but without lens caps...
Lars Johnsson wrote:
This is what he says on the first page in the link (without login)
Technical specifications
Focal length 35 mm
Aperture range f/1.4 - f/16
Number of elements/groups 11/9
Focusing area 0.3 m - infinity
Angular field** (diag./horiz./vert.) 63/54/37 °
Coverage at close range 18 x 12 cm (close-up)
Image ratio at close range 1:5 (close-up)
Filter thread M 72 x 0.75
Weight 900 g (not clear if this is ZF or ZE)
Length with caps 120 – 122 mm
Diameter 78 mm
Mounts ZF.2 (F bayonet), ZE (EF bayonet...Show more →
Then I guess then he is inconsistent because he mentions in the paid section that its 840g nominal.
Denoir, as I actually credit both Zeiss and maybe even Leica (though that would be a slight stretch) with SOME know-how in the picture publishing department, I'm supposing that the pictures they publish are to scale. This includes having the same X- and Y-scale.
the diameters are without doubt a very easy definition. A diameter is a diameter is a diameter. And it is usually measured at the maximum diameter point. It isn't that hard to measure.
When I make a larger (600dpi) rasterization of the Zeiss pdf, I get 98mm.
The lens is 25.5% higher from flange surface (mount surface) to front end than it is wide (ZE model, ZF will be 2mm shorter). The diameter at the maximum point is 78mm, 6mm more than the filter thread - pretty normal. 78mm x 1.255 = 97.89mm
And I don't know what caps you're thinking of, but the original back cap for the 100/2 is 14.5mm, leaving 7.5mm for the front cap to get to 22mm - which seems about right with the new Zeiss frontcaps.
Jan 20, 2011 at 09:31 PM
Lars Johnsson Offline • • • • • • • Upload & Sell: Off
Just found some pricing news on this lens; it definetely does not deserve another thread, so I'd rather post it here, I hope it is not inappropriate.
I just saw a French store offering the ZE 1.4 and quoting a price : 1961 euros !!!
I usually find this store offers quite decent prices, but am shocked at this one. At this store, I expected it to be closer to 1500 than to 2000 for sure. Lesson (1): I will probably pass on this one, there is no way I would get a 2k lens (I will get a 85ZE or a Canon 135/2 before); Lesson (2): I am extremely happy I got my 35ZE a couple of months ago; that lens is actually becoming my favorite...
Xavier Rival wrote:
Just found some pricing news on this lens; it definetely does not deserve another thread, so I'd rather post it here, I hope it is not inappropriate.
I just saw a French store offering the ZE 1.4 and quoting a price : 1961 euros !!!
I usually find this store offers quite decent prices, but am shocked at this one. At this store, I expected it to be closer to 1500 than to 2000 for sure. Lesson (1): I will probably pass on this one, there is no way I would get a 2k lens (I will get a 85ZE or a Canon 135/2 before); Lesson (2): I am extremely happy I got my 35ZE a couple of months ago; that lens is actually becoming my favorite......Show more →
Well, I found it at http://www.fotoversand-afa.de/objektive/zeiss/zeisscanon/zeissdistagon3514ze.php
listed for 1649. Still a little bit steep, but within what I would expect for the start. Problem is I will not put that lens on the NEX ( the ZF would be a candidate, but I still plan to pass and live with my ZM 35/2.0 ).
slungu wrote:
Well, I found it at http://www.fotoversand-afa.de/objektive/zeiss/zeisscanon/zeissdistagon3514ze.php
listed for 1649. Still a little bit steep, but within what I would expect for the start. Problem is I will not put that lens on the NEX ( the ZF would be a candidate, but I still plan to pass and live with my ZM 35/2.0 ).
Thanks. This does sound closer to what I expected, though indeed a little bit steep for me to consider it soon.
And I doubt that Lloyd actually measured the length, probably just read the specs.
!