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

Zeiss made in Japan
Post new topic   Reply to topic
Home   Manual Focus Lenses
View previous topic :: View next topic  


PostPosted: Fri Oct 26, 2007 2:57 am    Post subject: Zeiss made in Japan Reply with quote
Are they any good?
I'm talking about the ones made for Olympus, the zoom ones.
It seems that they can be bought not for much on Ebay.
So, I'm looking for some suggestions from the proud owners Very Happy


PostPosted: Fri Oct 26, 2007 3:36 am    Post subject: Reply with quote
I am unaware of any Zeiss lens made for Olympus 4/3.
I know of Zeiss AF lenses made for Sony mount.
Reports about them are good, but don't forget, they're autofocus lenses, so necessarily sporting compromise materials (autofocus motors can not move heavy metal and glass).
I don't know if the Sony AF lenses are made by Cosina or another Japanese manufacturer. As far as I know Cosina is pretty busy with the Z line of lenses.

Don't know... I would not invest in an autofocus Zeiss. I think the value of Zeiss resides in the quality of build and materials used for manual lenses. When designing autofocus lenses, they must accept compromises on the build and for this reason are not probably placing themselves much above the AF-dedicated competitors.
If you have to buy a AF zoom, then it makes more sense, I think, that you buy one that is native for your camera.


PostPosted: Fri Oct 26, 2007 7:48 am    Post subject: Reply with quote
I know about Leica zoom lens for 4/3 Olympus mount but Zeiss...
Zeiss for dSLRs there are the ZAs for Minolta-A mount and those new MF ZF, ZK and ZS primes.


PostPosted: Fri Oct 26, 2007 7:49 am    Post subject: Reply with quote
How much camera batteries does this consume? Very Happy
Anyway this is a real concern, for both precision of autofus and durability of the batteries, it was expressed clearly by Zeiss when together with Yashica they were planning to autofocus the lenses in the C/Y system, conclusion was that the use of lighter material would have compromised the quality of Zeiss lenses, so the companies split the projects, Yashica released their ill-fated autofocus system, while Contax made a revolutionary move and made the camera autofocus, creating a model that was autofocusing by moving back and forth the film plane!!


PostPosted: Fri Oct 26, 2007 10:35 am    Post subject: Reply with quote
niblue wrote:

Perhaps Zeiss just aren't very good at building AF systems?.


I was expecting this comment, it's typical of everyone who praises the autofocus lenses and dismisses Zeiss: "they don't have the technology".

Common, typical in every forum that discusses Zeiss lenses.

Too bad Zeiss build an exceptional quality autofocus medium format system with the Contax 645, but yeah, sure, crappy German factory that exists since almost two centuries, but yeah, they don't have the technology.

Comments like this one make me want to open a window and piss outside.

_


PostPosted: Fri Oct 26, 2007 10:38 am    Post subject: Reply with quote
Quote:
My only personal encounter with Contax AF was with the G1 rangefinder system I used to own and in that case the AF was one of the weaker elements of a fairly weak system.


The lenses of the G system have been tested to be amongst the sharpest ever produced for 135 systems.

The Planar 2/45 for G system has been tested as THE sharpest normal focal lenght lens ever produced for 135 system.

Yeah, but that was a weak system.

_


PostPosted: Fri Oct 26, 2007 11:02 am    Post subject: Reply with quote
I think the same as Orio Laughing

But Steve is also right
The G1 has inaccurate AF, the G2 fix problems
The AX was wonderful technologies that made every manual focus lens AF and macro lens
But the AF is slow and use a strong red light who blind people
Contax prefer to make N serie who was not a success & bring his dead

Contax and Zeiss are 2 different things, we cannot blame Zeiss for the mistake of contax

Like politics every one have the right to believe what he want. We have democracy and Steve is right to say how he see things
Steve buy a expensive G1 system and was not happy with AF performance, I would have the same reaction


PostPosted: Fri Oct 26, 2007 12:07 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote
niblue wrote:

The G2 definitely improved things considerably however by then I'd been put off rangefinder systems generally


I have the G2 so I can not judge the G1, however there is nothing wrong with the G2 "system" as you call it, lenses are just top notch and the camera, although could be better, is still more than adequate to the tasks the camera was designed for, which is not extreme photography. Sure the AF is slow, and of course if I want to shoot sports I would buy a different system with faster autofocus, but this is entirely down to the intelligence of the purchaser, if someone buys a Mercedes-Benz berlin diplomatic car and expects it to perform great in climbing on pebbles roads with mud and holes, like a Range Rover would, then the limitations are in the buyer, not in the maker of the car.

As far as rangefinder goes, rangefinder photography is simply the best quality photography available, in any format, for a simple unavoidable factor of proximity of the lens to the film plane. It took me one minute to understand this after I received my first pack of developed G2 slides.

When I will have 2000-3000 Euros to spend, my purchase will be a Zeiss Ikon. A manual focus rangefinder camera that can mount both Zeiss and Leica rangefinder lenses. Only weak point: it's made by a company which does not have the technology. Well, one can not have everything.
On the other hand, it's also true that neither Leitz has the technology, so it will be a perfect match of technologically limited Zeiss camera with technologically limited Leica lenses.
Faint hearts:stay away! Very Happy

_


PostPosted: Fri Oct 26, 2007 12:12 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote
niblue wrote:
poilu wrote:

Like politics every one have the right to believe what he want. We have democracy and Steve is right to say how he see things
Steve buy a expensive G1 system and was not happy with AF performance, I would have the same reaction


It wasn't just the AF, the metering was also quite poor on the G1 - but thanks.


OK there is something wrong going on here.
I have not shut up anyone.
I never said niblue is not allowed to speak his own opinion.
So this "call to arms" is totally inappropriate.

However, just as like niblue has the freedom of writing that Zeiss is a technologically impaired company, I also have the freedom of writing that this is ridiculous bull crap.

After all, if I'd go to a Canon EF forum and wrote that Canon makes crappy wide angle autofocus lenses, I would expect to receive contrary opinions.

But the point here is: no one is shutting up anyone. Therefore, there is no reason to express any solidarity to anyone.

_


PostPosted: Fri Oct 26, 2007 3:30 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote
Here is the lens I was talking about.
Do I miss something?

Click here to see on Ebay


PostPosted: Fri Oct 26, 2007 3:55 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote
Himself wrote:
Here is the lens I was talking about.
Do I miss something?

Click here to see on Ebay


Well, I have given you an appropriate reply to your question.
If others have not, it's not my fault Smile

Back to your lens: I never saw this one! What is this?
The only Zeiss lens whose existence I know of in that range is the Contax 70-210 f/3.5

So two possibilities:

- This is a Contax 70-210 f/3.35 (too small picture to decyphre) with custom modified mount, and the seller put the aperture value wrong.

- This is another lens, whose existence I ignore.

Sorry... can't help more than this. Confused

No, actually, I can: if it's the Contax modified, it is to be grabbed immediately. The lens is normally VERY expensive, and reputed to be absolutely excellent (for what can be excellent a zoom, of course).
Careful though, if the mount has been custom modified, it could have problems. Thsi is something to verify with the seller.


PostPosted: Fri Oct 26, 2007 4:04 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote
Well well well... look at what I have found!

A Kiron zoom 70-210 f/4.5 :

Click here to see on Ebay

Can't be 100% sure, but it looks a lot like the lens in your auction.

So I would say: that isn't a Zeiss, that is a Kiron.

Now, what about the honesty of your seller? Confused Mad


PostPosted: Fri Oct 26, 2007 4:16 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote
Japanese purchased CZJ license before communism was end and their produce CZJ lenses. I have already 28mm f2.8 CZJ II lens, nice sharp lens even better than original Pentacon.


PostPosted: Sat Oct 27, 2007 9:37 am    Post subject: Reply with quote
http://www.mflenses.com/gallery/v/japenese/othermaker/carl_zeiss_jena_II_28mm_f2_8/


PostPosted: Sat Oct 27, 2007 9:41 am    Post subject: Reply with quote
LensLunatic wrote:
Attila wrote:
Japanese purchased CZJ license before communism was end and their produce CZJ lenses. I have already 28mm f2.8 CZJ II lens, nice sharp lens even better than original Pentacon.

From the 2nd half of the eighties, "Carl Zeiss Jena" (East German, GDR) desperately tried to maintain a foothold in the photo market. In consequence, they started a number of co-operations with Asian manufacturers, including Sungyang in Korea and others in China (People's Republic of, not Taiwan). The result was a wild mixture of lenses (mostly standard or tele-zooms) bearing half a dozen of brand names, so one and the same lens type could bear the "Exakta" label, others the "Polar" or "Centon" (or some other) labels, and some also bore the "Carl Zeiss Jena" label, particularly those which were made for sale in the GDR. Most of all these lenses were made with a variety of bayonet mounts and sold very cheap. Quality-wise, they're IMHO absolutely nothing to write home about.


Correct. I've come late on this thread, but I would have said earlier this lens is the Jenazoom brand, with the CZJ name but made by God knows who in the far east. I wouldn't bother with it. If you really want a 70-210 zoom, go for a Tamrom 19A SP instead.


PostPosted: Sat Oct 27, 2007 9:53 am    Post subject: Reply with quote
I have same opinion before I bought this 28mm lens "crap japananese". Now it is different, this lens is better than any 28mm genuine DDR lens.


PostPosted: Sat Oct 27, 2007 2:06 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote
LensLunatic wrote:
Leica seems to have quite an intensive co-op relationship with Panasonic, and thus more conrol over the lens production quality, whereas Zeiss doesn't seem to bother much what Sony does quality-wise. It looks like Zeiss are making the same mistakes now they made with Kyocera in the past.


hmm... I'd like to dispute this. Contax lenses made in Japan by Kyocera are of excellent quality. The supposed superiority of Made in West Germany lenses is a marketing myth. Kyocera used Zeiss tools, made glass using Zeiss recipes, and the severe quality control was made by Zeiss engineers on Zeiss machinery.

On the contrary, already in the past Leica did broker lenses for their system to other manufacturers who made mediocre work - not just the production, mind, the lens design itself. The Elmarit-R 24, for instance, was designed and produced by Minolta, all Leica did was to put their name on it, but the lens is mediocre and not at all comparable in quality with the other Elmarit-Rs like the 28mm or 35mm.

_


PostPosted: Sun Oct 28, 2007 5:23 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote
LensLunatic wrote:

A lot of Leitz glass (particularly zooms, but also other lenses) were made by Minolta and even Sigma in Japan. None of these lenses ever were 3rd-party developments, they were all 100% based on Leitz' formulae and blueprints.


I have a very accurate book on Leica lenses, recently updated to 2nd edition, and it states clearly that the Elmarit-R 24mm is a lens designed (and realized) by Minolta - just like the R4 camera by the way.


PostPosted: Sun Oct 28, 2007 6:19 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote
Hi LensLunatic
Very interesting facts you told us.
Quote:
Now that I know of these "secrets", I prefer Zeiss, personally

Thanks, I will think twice before buy a Leica R
You prefer Zeiss, that show you are someone with taste Wink


PostPosted: Sun Oct 28, 2007 8:12 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote
LensLunatic wrote:
I happen to know people who worked for Leitz in Wetzlar, and some who still work now at Leica in Solms - and they keep telling a different story.


well, if you have direct sources Smile
Post new topic   Reply to topic
Home   Manual Focus Lenses
Goto page 1, 2  Next
Page 1 of 2