Lars Johnsson wrote:
For some people it\'s worth it. For others not. And that is exactly the same with the L lenses. And they are also made in Japan. I can\'t see why you think lenses are less good if made in Japan?
You misunderstood me. It\'s not me who think that lenses are less good if they were made in Japan. It\'s the zealous proponents of Zeiss who implied that Zeiss lenses are \"German made\" and therefore superior and deserved the higher price.
I merely implied since the new ones are going to be made in Japan, there goes that argument.
Rajan Parrikar wrote:
The chief argument for Zeiss lenses is the superior optical performance they deliver. That they are also well put together mechanically is a bonus.
I\'m sure some of them are great optically, I wouldn\'t mind owning a Zeiss 21/2.8 lens when I get myself a full frame DSLR. That said, I do recall some less than glowing reviews of their lenses. For example, the Zeiss 50/1.4 lens has a weak corner performance wide open and that Zeiss lenses usually vignette quite heavily on full frame.
A German website Photozone rated the Zeiss 50/1.4 optics only slightly higher than Sigma 50/1.4, so they\'re not always that much better. In fact, out of the 10 Zeiss lenses they reviewed, only 2 of the Makro Planar lenses and the 21/2.8 received a truly great review for the optics and even then, the 21/2.8 still suffer a tiny bit of mustache distortion.
Sep 20, 2012 at 06:33 PM
Previous versions of n0b0's message #10980214 « Zeiss' new high-end SLR lens family »
