Home

Please support mflenses.com if you need any graphic related work order it from us, click on above banner to order!
SearchSearch MemberlistMemberlist RegisterRegister ProfileProfile Log in to check your private messagesLog in to check your private messages Log inLog in

Voigtlander prominent nokton 1.5/50...
Post new topic   Reply to topic
Home   Manual Focus Lenses
View previous topic :: View next topic  


PostPosted: Thu Jul 02, 2015 11:43 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote
I myself am more about character than other aspects when it comes to lenses. The lens does go for 600+, and 1000+ with prominent II body so I figured if I make the purchase I could almost make my money back on selling the prominent II body and lenses, as the prominent II body is way more valueable than than prominent I. I am waiting for a call back to finalize the purchase, I appreciate all input and I appreciate the link. That looks like a good quality adapter and it isn't $300. I think it would be worth it.


PostPosted: Fri Jul 03, 2015 7:20 am    Post subject: Reply with quote
Hi there, Uhoh7 - ! Is that your Nokton in the picture? Lucky you if it is - if so, any chance of seeing some results from it Very Happy

One thing, though. Is it a Sonnar-type derivative? Arthur Cox's Photographic Optics (10th edn) classes it in the 'Symetrical and allied types' category (p. 438) and the drawing nr S10 on p. 433 shows something which is not all like a 50mm Sonnar.


PostPosted: Fri Jul 03, 2015 7:51 am    Post subject: Reply with quote
scsambrook wrote:

One thing, though. Is it a Sonnar-type derivative? Arthur Cox's Photographic Optics (10th edn) classes it in the 'Symetrical and allied types' category (p. 438) and the drawing nr S10 on p. 433 shows something which is not all like a 50mm Sonnar.

I have mentioned in the above post is is a (double)Gauss type lens. It is mentioned in the patent document.



Quote:
This invention relates to a photographic objective of the modified Gauss-type, distinguished by very high light-transmitting power and anastigmatic flatness of field, which includes two lens groups located on the opposite sides of an inner diaphragm. Such variations of the Gauss-type can be corrected spherically, chromatically and for coma with 2. simultaneously resulting anastigmatic image field flattening within a field of vision of 30 extension, even in the case of very large relative apertures.

https://www.google.com.hk/patents/US2645155


PostPosted: Fri Jul 03, 2015 8:00 am    Post subject: Reply with quote
Thanks, Calvin83 - !


PostPosted: Fri Jul 03, 2015 4:21 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote

Voigtlander 50/1.5 LTM orig by unoh7, on Flickr

This is not my copy, but in the dusty collection of the local camera shop owner, where I happened to see it attached to a Leica III x (not sure which). He lets me borrow it. But sadly the rear element has quite a bit of fungus. Everything else is fairly clean though, and I thought about swapping the prominent version's rear element, which I hear is identical.

My understanding is that it is a revised design of the basic CZJ 50/1.5, perhaps with less air, I can't remember offhand. Very few were made in LTM and the Prominent...well I'm not sure how many were sold. Nevertheless the lens was a sensation among the cognizenti of the time, and highly regarded in the late 50s as the best reportage 50 around.

It's a heavy build. I think Mandler's v1 50 Summilux is the lens which put this one off the throne. That's a great lens and they made many, but it still brings 1400 easy.


PostPosted: Fri Jul 03, 2015 4:35 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote
Nice bokeh quite similar to the new CV Nokton 50/1.5 LTM version I have:



So I don't really know whether it's worth to pay the double price just to have the "original" one if not for collection only purposes.
For my taste I would rather buy an extra lens together with the new one than spend all the budget for the old one. Wink
However, as always just a matter of taste and budget.


PostPosted: Fri Jul 03, 2015 4:39 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote
Actually, the Nokton isn't a development of the Sonnar type, it's a double gauss type, the ancestor of the Septon and Ultron SLR lenses.



Quote:
Voigtländer also made some remarkable lenses.
The most famous probably is the NOKTON 50mm f1.5 lens from 1951.
With its 7 elementen in 5 groups and splitted frontlens the NOKTON is regarded to be one of the best 50mm f/1.5 lenzen ever, better than the Leitz Summarit and certainly as good as the Zeiss Sonnar.


Voigtlander had a clear lead in lenses for 35mm in the immediate post-war period, largely due to the company having been located in the west and surviving the war largely unscathed - in the Lens Vade Mecum is an excerpt from a report by a British Commission that describes the state of the factory when they examined it in 1946.

Zeiss didn't get their act together in terms of new lens designs until the second half of the 1950s, and a large part of that was their acquisition of Voigtlander in 1953 - Zeiss wanted to get their hands on Albrect Tronnier and his lens design team. The Sonnar 1.5/50 is an impressive lens but it's a 1930s design from long before the use of computers so Zeiss really needed to update their lens designs to compete.

Leitz didn't start producing lenses of better quality than most of the other German makers until the 1960s, probably this was due to a conscious decision to avoid the fate of the other German camera makers by not bothering to compete with the Japanese in the mass market and instead, produce products solely for the upper-tier niche of the market.

So if you want the best RF lens made upto 1951, then you need a Zeiss Sonnar 1.5/50, if you want the best RF lens made in the 1950s, then you need the Voigtlander Nokton 1.5/50. If you want the best RF lens made after that, it;s probably, as Uhoh said, a Leitz Summilux.

I own two Sonnar 1.5/50s, coated and uncoated; still dream of owning a Nokton, doubt I will ever be able to afford a Summilux. Smile


PostPosted: Fri Jul 03, 2015 4:59 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote
iangreenhalgh1 wrote:

Zeiss didn't get their act together in terms of new lens designs until the second half of the 1950s, and a large part of that was their acquisition of Voigtlander in 1953 - Zeiss wanted to get their hands on Albrect Tronnier and his lens design team. The Sonnar 1.5/50 is an impressive lens but it's a 1930s design from long before the use of computers so Zeiss really needed to update their lens designs to compete.


A new fairy tale.

Schering AG (the owner of Voigtlaender since 1925) sold Voigtlaender to the Carl Zeiss Foundation in 1956 which resulted that Voigtlaender became a part of Zeiss Ikon AG/W. Germany thereafter.


PostPosted: Fri Jul 03, 2015 5:37 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote
tb_a wrote:
iangreenhalgh1 wrote:

Zeiss didn't get their act together in terms of new lens designs until the second half of the 1950s, and a large part of that was their acquisition of Voigtlander in 1953 - Zeiss wanted to get their hands on Albrect Tronnier and his lens design team. The Sonnar 1.5/50 is an impressive lens but it's a 1930s design from long before the use of computers so Zeiss really needed to update their lens designs to compete.


A new fairy tale.

Schering AG (the owner of Voigtlaender since 1925) sold Voigtlaender to the Carl Zeiss Foundation in 1956 which resulted that Voigtlaender became a part of Zeiss Ikon AG/W. Germany thereafter.


Hardly a fairy tale, more a matter of which source is correct. I took the year 1953 from here:

http://www.lakiere.info/Voigtlander_eng.htm

Quote:
In 1953 the Zeiss Foundation purchases Voigtländer und Sohne from the Schering Drug Company.
An important fact is that the Zeiss Foundation demanded that Voigtländer MADE MONEY, but they had to do so from their own resources, and Voigtländer lacked funds to invest in a lot of their ideas.
That huge hole in the bank-balance, the Contarex, started to tip Zeiss-Ikon into the red by 1956, and the ultimate fate was assured by 1959.
It is just a shame that the Zeiss Foundation insisted that Voigtländer be joined into the disaster, though, to be fair, the primary interest of the Zeiss Foundation in Voigtländer was acquiring their lens designers and their electronic shutter technology.
In the end, the Icarex and the Contaflex 126 were the sole contributions of Voigtländer to the Zeiss-Ikon line-up.


PostPosted: Fri Jul 03, 2015 5:45 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote
The page is inconsistent.

On top of the same page the correct information:

"1956 : De Carl Zeiss Stiftung buys Voigtlaender AG from Schering"

So the story from the bottom of the page seems to be weird and not really plausible.


PostPosted: Fri Jul 03, 2015 5:52 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote
Whether 1953 or 1956 is not important.

Unless you are the sort of person who always has to win every argument. Rolling Eyes


PostPosted: Fri Jul 03, 2015 8:04 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote
OK I am an idiot Smile

I'd always thought this was a Sonnar, but obviously not.

Oh well, live and learn Smile


PostPosted: Sat Jul 04, 2015 9:23 am    Post subject: Reply with quote
To Uhoh7 -- Thanks very much for the photo and the background to "your" Nokton. That sounds like a very interesting camera shop and I don't think you're an idiot Very Happy

And to Ian and Thomas - easy,chaps, nothing to argue about. There's a great deal still to be discovered (or at least reliably-sourced and published) about Voigtlander in the period from 1945 until their acquisition by the Zeiss organisation.

More than any other German camera maker Voigtlander appears to have recast its entire business model and moved from making "affordable" equipment to one embracing a substantial element of advanced, complex high-precision products. Even by the summer of 1945 the company already had drawings for an interchangeable-lens coupled rangefinder model which seemingly was a fusion of elements from both the Contax and the Leica and for which a range of six lenses was planned. One of those was listed as a 50mm f1.4. Perhaps even more interesting was that Voigtlander was considering a 35mm single lens reflex camera.

This information was given to a British investigation team which surveyed the Voigtlander and other camera industry works in late August 1945 and is to be found in the Final Report of the British Intelleigence Objectives Sub-Committee (No. 184) published in London by HMSO in 1946. Some of this set of reports is available on-line but I've yet to see a complete version other than in print.

The BIOS reports also covered Franke & Heidecke, Leitz, Plaubel, Deckel (Compur family of shutters) and Gauthier (Pronto family of shutters) and makes a detailed picture of the strengths and weaknesses of these German firms.

I would be pleased - even delighted ! - to hear from anyone who has pointers to any other information on Voigtlander's activities between 1945 and the late 1950s.


PostPosted: Sat Jul 04, 2015 9:55 am    Post subject: Reply with quote
Excellent info, thanks. Voigtlander had that lead you mention for one simple reason - they didn't get bombed like Zeiss and others did. Consider how much Zeiss lost when Dresden was bombed - the blueprints for the Contax cameras and others were destroyed despite being stored in a safe two storeys underground!

That BIOS report is the one I referred to. The only info from it I have seen is contained in the Lens Vade Mecum and was largely an inventory and short description of the works.

It should be noted that the British did a lot to re-establish commercial industrial production in their zone of occupation, which included Voigtlander's factory in Braunschweig. Sadly we didn't show the same foresight with Volkswagen.


PostPosted: Sat Jul 04, 2015 9:57 am    Post subject: Reply with quote
Stephen,
hard to find in English. A very good source would be this book from Udo Afalter:
http://www.amazon.de/gp/offer-listing/B008OHED7C/ref=dp_olp_used?ie=UTF8&condition=used
Unfortunately only available in German.

Also this books from Claus Prochnow would be quite interesting but also Geman only:
http://www.amazon.de/Voigtlaender-Report-Kleinbild-Sucherkameras-1939-1982/dp/389506288X/ref=sr_1_1?s=books&ie=UTF8&qid=1436002571&sr=1-1&keywords=voigtl%C3%A4nder+lindemann
http://www.amazon.de/Voigtl%C3%A4nder-Report-Spiegelreflex-Stereokameras-1902-1982/dp/3895062510/ref=pd_sim_sbs_14_1?ie=UTF8&refRID=0S74R750654TS0X7PSYC
http://www.amazon.de/Voigtl%C3%A4nder-Report-3-Platten-Rollfilmkameras/dp/389506274X/ref=pd_sim_sbs_14_2?ie=UTF8&refRID=1SKV1F6W5QQ7G6G4RS2P

Most of the information is available primarily in German as this company was basically an Austrian (foundet 1756 in Vienna) and later on a German one. Johann Christoph Voigtlaender (the founder of the company) was basically Austrian and his company moved only to Braunschweig/Germany (1849) later because of the bigger glass industry there in the old times. 1898 the family company was turned into a shareholder company and 1925 Schering AG took over the majority of shares up to 1956 when they sold it to the Zeiss Foundation as already stated.
The big advantage of Voigtlaender compared to Zeiss and others was that the company was not destroyed during the 2nd WW. So it was relatively intact and also not plundered by the Russians such as Zeiss.
However, the have been without any doubt the most advanced camera producer also in terms of know how after the WW II far ahead of Zeiss and Leitz. So actually it was a pity that this company got lost somehow during the fusion with Zeiss Ikon.


PostPosted: Sat Jul 04, 2015 10:22 am    Post subject: Reply with quote
iangreenhalgh1 wrote:
Excellent info, thanks. Voigtlander had that lead you mention for one simple reason - they didn't get bombed like Zeiss and others did. Consider how much Zeiss lost when Dresden was bombed - the blueprints for the Contax cameras and others were destroyed despite being stored in a safe two storeys underground!

That BIOS report is the one I referred to. The only info from it I have seen is contained in the Lens Vade Mecum and was largely an inventory and short description of the works.

It should be noted that the British did a lot to re-establish commercial industrial production in their zone of occupation, which included Voigtlander's factory in Braunschweig. Sadly we didn't show the same foresight with Volkswagen.


Thanks for those observations, Ian.

The BIOS reports are well worth looking out. In the one on Voigtlander there's a chilling comment on the conditions under which the firm's "600 slave workers" had been housed and the Franke & Heidecke document details that company's struggle to resist takeover by the Zeiss organisation and its problems over patent disputes not only with them but also with Voigtlander. There are also some tantalising details of how the pre-war German industry was directly and covertly subsidized both at home and in key export markets and references to the key role that Zeiss played in co-ordinating those activities. It all points to a dimension that we never eally see in the readily available literature on the camera and lens industries.


PostPosted: Sat Jul 04, 2015 10:29 am    Post subject: Reply with quote
tb_a wrote:
Stephen,
hard to find in English. A very good source would be this book from Udo Afalter:
http://www.amazon.de/gp/offer-listing/B008OHED7C/ref=dp_olp_used?ie=UTF8&condition=used
Unfortunately only available in German.

Also this books from Claus Prochnow would be quite interesting but also Geman only:
http://www.amazon.de/Voigtlaender-Report-Kleinbild-Sucherkameras-1939-1982/dp/389506288X/ref=sr_1_1?s=books&ie=UTF8&qid=1436002571&sr=1-1&keywords=voigtl%C3%A4nder+lindemann
http://www.amazon.de/Voigtl%C3%A4nder-Report-Spiegelreflex-Stereokameras-1902-1982/dp/3895062510/ref=pd_sim_sbs_14_1?ie=UTF8&refRID=0S74R750654TS0X7PSYC
http://www.amazon.de/Voigtl%C3%A4nder-Report-3-Platten-Rollfilmkameras/dp/389506274X/ref=pd_sim_sbs_14_2?ie=UTF8&refRID=1SKV1F6W5QQ7G6G4RS2P

Most of the information is available primarily in German as this company was basically an Austrian (foundet 1756 in Vienna) and later on a German one. Johann Christoph Voigtlaender (the founder of the company) was basically Austrian and his company moved only to Braunschweig/Germany (1849) later because of the bigger glass industry there in the old times. 1898 the family company was turned into a shareholder company and 1925 Schering AG took over the majority of shares up to 1956 when they sold it to the Zeiss Foundation as already stated.
The big advantage of Voigtlaender compared to Zeiss and others was that the company was not destroyed during the 2nd WW. So it was relatively intact and also not plundered by the Russians such as Zeiss.
However, the have been without any doubt the most advanced camera producer also in terms of know how after the WW II far ahead of Zeiss and Leitz. So actually it was a pity that this company got lost somehow during the fusion with Zeiss Ikon.


Thomas - thanks for those linnks and comments. Even after the firm's fusion with Zeiss in the late 50s it does seem to have held on to its character for quite a while. The owner of the first photo-retail outfit I worked for in the mid-60s had a high regard for Voigtlander and regularly visited the factory. He said it was quite unlike any other firm he had first hand knowledge of. Sadly, back then I never had the sense to learn more from him.


PostPosted: Sat Jul 04, 2015 10:35 am    Post subject: Reply with quote
Yes, Zeiss Ikon, from it's foundation from four independent companies until the post-war split was totally dominant over the German camera industry, not only because it was a corporate monster but because the govt gave it preferential treatment and funding.

The whole reason why Voigtlander had to design unusual cameras like the Vitesse with it's plunger advance and the Prominent with a number of unique features or Nagel (Kodak AG) did with the Retinas is that they had to work around the Zeiss held patents. The quirky features are almost always due to having to avoid infringing a Zeiss patent.


PostPosted: Sat Jul 04, 2015 10:54 am    Post subject: Reply with quote
scsambrook wrote:

Thomas - thanks for those linnks and comments. Even after the firm's fusion with Zeiss in the late 50s it does seem to have held on to its character for quite a while. The owner of the first photo-retail outfit I worked for in the mid-60s had a high regard for Voigtlander and regularly visited the factory. He said it was quite unlike any other firm he had first hand knowledge of. Sadly, back then I never had the sense to learn more from him.


Well, the deadly competition between the state sponsored GDR camera industry (VEB CZJ and VEB Pentacon) and the independent Zeiss Ikon/W. Germany counterpart led finally to the dead of the Western German part of it and consequently also to the dead of the eastern part because of the end of the regime. Maybe it would have been a better idea to leave the Voigtlaender brand instead to avoid the direct competition between the two Zeiss companies with totally different quality and price politics. Leitz finally survived because of the lack of direct competition from the eastern side of the German camera industry and with a little bit of help from an Austrian photo enthusiast with deep pockets till date. Today both Voigtlaender and Zeiss are more or less brands of Cosina/Japan. Happy end? I don't know.
So, Voigtlaender moved from Austria to Germany to die and Leitz camera business was taken over by an Austrian to survive. Wink


PostPosted: Sat Jul 04, 2015 12:10 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote
As far as I know , Cosina has a license to use Voigtländer name for its lenses. Are you sure that the brand Zeiss is in the same hands.
Don't you think that Zeiss uses Cosina as a subcontractant for production ?


PostPosted: Sat Jul 04, 2015 12:20 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote
It had very little to do with East vs West, it was the Japanese success and the German lack of progress that killed the German camera industry.

The Japanese success was in no small part due to the legal position in Japan over the German patents - the German patents were simply not valid so the Japanese were free to copy the best German designs and that is what they did, they then improved on those designs.

Zeiss Ikon and Voigtlander both managed to make a complete mess of the transition to SLRs too. ZI produced the outdated leaf shutter Contaflex with only 3 lens options and the ridiculously complex and overpriced Contarex; both looked very unattractive copared to the Japanese competition. Voigtlander produced the hideously complex leaf shutter Bessamatic and Ultramatic and by the time they came up with a good focal plane design in the Icarex, the Japanese had long passed them by in technology and it has to be said, reliability too. Today, repairmen run in fear of German SLRs of the 50s and 60s as they are so complex and hard to repair.

The Exakta and Praktica from the East were good cameras when released, but failed to keep up with technology too so were looking outdated within a few years and never came close to selling in the numbers cameras like the Pentax Spotmatic and Nikkormat sold in. Pentacon sold well in the West because they were priced below most of the Japanese options, but if you could afford a Spotmatic, you didn't bother with a Praktica. Russian Zenits sold well too because they were the cheapest SLRs on the market and they had the M42 mount so you could put all kinds of lenses on them, not just the Russian lenses.


PostPosted: Sat Jul 04, 2015 12:31 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote
memetph wrote:
As far as I know , Cosina has a license to use Voigtländer name for its lenses. Are you sure that the brand Zeiss is in the same hands.
Don't you think that Zeiss uses Cosina as a subcontractant for production ?


When Thomas talks about Zeiss, best to ignore him, he seems to have this irrational dislike of Zeiss.

He is talking nonsense when he says Zeiss is a brand of a Japanese company.

Zeiss is still a German company, they still design their lenses in Germany and they still make lenses in Germany.

However, since the mid 1970s, they have had partnerships with lensmakers in Japan to produce some of their lenses. This began with the short-lived working arrangement with Pentax and really got going with the production of the Contax SLR camera bodies by Yashica and some of the lenses for the Contax SLR system by the optical division of Yashica (Yashica had bought out the Tomioka factory a few years earlier). That partnership continued after Kyocera bought Yashica in the mid 1980s and the Contax G RF/AF system cameras were made by Kyocera and the lenses by the ex-Tomioka plant.

Today, Zeiss and Leica both contract with Japanese companies for some of their production. Both are quite tight-lipped about the exact arrangements however.

Zeiss licenses their name to Sony to be used on lenses designed by Zeiss but produced by Sony. Leica does the same thing with Panasonic and Schneider-Kreuznach does too with Samsung and Kodak. This is nothing new. Zeiss Ikon cameras often carried lenses made by outside contractors - Rodenstock made the Pantar lenses for the Contaflex and the Hensoldt factory made most of the low-end triplets found on the cheaper fixed lens ZI cameras.


PostPosted: Sat Jul 04, 2015 12:38 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote
memetph wrote:
As far as I know , Cosina has a license to use Voigtländer name for its lenses. Are you sure that the brand Zeiss is in the same hands.
Don't you think that Zeiss uses Cosina as a subcontractant for production ?


Yes, that's true. Basically Cosina is producing for Zeiss and does not own the patent right's opposite to Voigtlaender where everything is owned by Cosina. However, actually both are lenses manufactured by Cosina.


PostPosted: Sat Jul 04, 2015 1:11 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote
It really is irrelevant where the factory that makes the Zeiss lenses is located.

They remain Zeiss designs and are built to Zeiss standards.

Voigtlander lenses are Cosina designs made to Cosina standards.

Dante Stella's piece from Camera Lens News No. 3:
Quote:

In a time, when the cost of maufacturing high quality optics in Germany was on the rise, but was flat in Japan, lens price became the limiting factor for the success of the new Contax. To free the young system of this limit, Carl Zeiss transferred the production of lenses for the Contax system to the country that was buying most of them anyway. In favour of this decision was the fact that Japan has, as well as Germany, a very mature infrastructure regarding the production of photo optics. Also, Carl Zeiss has had a strong presence there already. So Carl Zeiss transferred machinery, know-how, and personnel to Japan and built up a lens production facility that could produce Contax lenses in accordance with Carl Zeiss quality standards.

In recent years the cost advantage of quality optics production in favour of Japan has decreased. Top quality optics made in Japan are no longer really cheaper than those made in Germany. Today, manufacturing costs alone could not justify the move from Oberkochen to Oume. But the strong demand from the Japanese market for Contax lenses would again lead to the de-cision, to manufacture them where most of the customers are anyway.


http://www.dantestella.com/zeiss/japan.html

B&H has a good article too:

http://www.bhphotovideo.com/find/newsLetter/Carl-Zeiss.jsp

Quote:
The name Carl Zeiss has been synonymous with fine photographic optics for well over a hundred years. Today, in a world dominated by the likes of Nikon and Canon (not that there's anything wrong with that mind you), the Zeiss nameplate not only continues to survive, but continues to represent the highest standards of lens design and optical performance. For SLR and DSLR enthusiasts, Zeiss currently manufacturers a short lineup of manual focus, fixed focal length optics that produce imagery that has a look and feel quite different from most all of the optics available from OEM and third-party lens manufacturers.

Though no longer physically manufactured in Germany, the current offerings from Zeiss are manufactured in Japan under the supervision of Zeiss technicians whose job it is maintain a century old reputation of building the finest optics.

From a construction standpoint the new Zeiss lenses speak to you the moment you pick them up. Unlike most lenses made these days the Zeiss optics are manufactured from honest-to-gosh metal alloy and have the heft and solidity of lenses made back in the pre- polycarbonate days. The focusing barrel is tight and smooth throughout the range, and the aperture rings (remember aperture rings?) are equally smooth with clearly defined detents in half-stop intervals. Each lens features a depth-of-field scale, aperture/center index scale, distance scale, and infrared scale. The word 'Oooooh' is commonly heard from those picking up any of these lenses for the first time.

Optically speaking, the Zeiss lenses we tested maintain the highest standards of resolution and bokeh qualities. What's in focus is dead-sharp - even wide open - and what isn't in focus displays the loveliest qualities of tone and color gradations. Each lens utilizes 9 curved aperture blades to best ensure natural looking, circular characteristics in out-of-focus highlight areas. In a nutshell, these lenses are awfully sweet to use, and you can ditto these comments for the photographs they produce. All of the lenses in this series feature Zeiss T* coatings to ensure neutral color, high contrast and color saturation levels, and minimal flare.


PostPosted: Sat Jul 04, 2015 1:22 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote
iangreenhalgh1 wrote:

When Thomas talks about Zeiss, best to ignore him, he seems to have this irrational dislike of Zeiss.

He is talking nonsense when he says Zeiss is a brand of a Japanese company.

Zeiss is still a German company, they still design their lenses in Germany and they still make lenses in Germany.



Your offensive and aggressive way of communication is very annoying to say it very politely.

Zeiss is nowadays nothing else than a design office for optical lenses in various fields, especially for the industry. No camera lenses are produced in Germany nowadays. The ZM lenses are all produced by Cosina/Japan.
If something is labeled as "Zeiss" nowadays it does only indicate that the product was originally designed by Zeiss but nothing else. Even my Logitech web cam carries a "Carl Zeiss Tessar" logo.

I never had anything against Zeiss. I take it as it is and see the difference between the various products produced with a Zeiss branding in various factories over the years. Not everything which is carrying such a label is automatically "state of the art". That is the big difference between us. No brand in no field is automatically "the best". Obviously you are blind in that respect.
For instance in the field of spectacle lenses I can tell you that the Hoya plastic lenses are far superior compared to the Zeiss ones in terms of durability. That is my personal experience which you cannot deny or state as nonsense. Never.

At least since the 1980's no photo camera lens was ever produced by Zeiss in W. Germany and since the 1990's neither in Jena.

Don't tell fairy tales and don't blame me to state nonsense!
Post new topic   Reply to topic
Home   Manual Focus Lenses
Goto page 1, 2, 3  Next
Page 1 of 3