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

Carl Zeiss Lenses: where is it from?
Post new topic   Reply to topic
Home   Manual Focus Lenses
View previous topic :: View next topic  


PostPosted: Tue Dec 22, 2009 4:49 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote
Excalibur wrote:
This thread is getting confusing, so:-

If the Zeiss name is mentioned on any camera now or the past, does it mean Zeiss designed the lens for that camera, not necessary actually made it?


The experience, and Zeiss' own statements, show that whenever you see the Zeiss name on a lens, that lens was either designed by Carl Zeiss and produced by an outsource company under the control of Carl Zeiss, or designed and produced directly by Carl Zeiss.

We have evidences outside of Zeiss' own reports, that support this conclusion:

- Icarex lenses that were designed by Voigtlaender and built by Zeiss at Oberkochen, are marked Carl Zeiss, because at the time this happened, Voigtlaender was already bought by Carl Zeiss and incorporated into the company;

- Contax SLR lenses that were designed and built by Carl Zeiss in Oberkochen are marked Carl Zeiss made in West Germany, or made in Germany;

- Contax SLR lenses that were designed by Carl Zeiss and outsourced to Yashica/Kyocera for building (under Zeiss control), are marked Carl Zeiss made in Japan;

- Rollei SL lenses that were designed and built by Carl Zeiss at Oberkochen, are marked Carl Zeiss made in Germany;

- Rollei SL lenses whose design by Carl Zeiss was licensed to Rollei for production (under Rollei control) are marked either Rollei made in Germany or Rollei made in Singapore, depending on the location of the factory to which Rollei outsourced the building of the lenses.

Regarding the Sony Alpha lenses, judging on the optical scheme and on Zeiss' own statement, it appears likely that the lens was either designed by Zeiss or perhaps a previous Minolta design was later revised by Zeiss, and then outsourced to the Minolta factory for the production. In any case, the fact that it bears the Carl Zeiss name implies at the very least a technical approval by Zeiss on the design and production of the lens. The brand reputation is a fundamental asset for a company like Zeiss. You can be sure that Zeiss will not act as a postal market catalogue brand when it comes to outsourcing or licensing a lens with their name on it.


PostPosted: Tue Dec 22, 2009 5:31 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote
***The experience, and Zeiss' own statements, show that whenever you see the Zeiss name on a lens, that lens was either designed by Carl Zeiss and produced by an outsource company under the control of Carl Zeiss, or designed and produced directly by Carl Zeiss.***

Thank you, that's cleared that up........side tracking but interesting, the Tesser design P&S was out classed for sharpness by a Sonnar design P&S. i.e. Yashica T4/T5 ver Nikon L35 (but Nikon don't advertise Zeiss), although I must add I've only used one film in the T5 so my view might change.


PostPosted: Tue Dec 22, 2009 7:56 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote
The Contax N Autofocus 85/1.4 was a 10 element internal focus design. Is this similar to the current Sony-mount version? Oddly, I don't see the Sony designs on the zeiss.com site, where they pretty much have all the other lines, both past and current.
http://www.zeiss.com/c12567a8003b58b9/Contents-Frame/5ed01eb620d0b1cec12570f80033cada

Arkku wrote:
no-X wrote:
seuret is somewhat right... look at Sony/Zeiss 85mm Planar - the lens scheme is different to Zeiss 85mm Planar and VERY similar to Minolta 85mm Wink


Minolta 85mm f/1.4 G has 7 elements in 6 groups, ZA Planar has 8 elements in 7 groups, and traditional Zeiss Planars (C/Y, ZF, etc) have 6 elements in 5 groups. So, all seem like different Planar-based designs…

But, actually, the Minolta G lens is really, really good, so if Zeiss made a new design using ideas from the Minolta design (now available from Sony), the result might well be a better lens. This could also be the reason why the other currently available 85mm f/1.4 Zeiss Planars are different than the ZA one; Sony may not allow the use of this design for other systems. Of course, this is pure speculation with no facts to back it up. =)

(I think it's more probable that the difference is to accommodate autofocus.)


PostPosted: Tue Dec 22, 2009 10:19 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote
eggboy wrote:
The Contax N Autofocus 85/1.4 was a 10 element internal focus design. Is this similar to the current Sony-mount version? Oddly, I don't see the Sony designs on the zeiss.com site, where they pretty much have all the other lines, both past and current.


I couldn't find the optical diagram of the ZA Planar either, but the element count was 8 in 7 groups, so at least it's not completely the same as the Contax N. Also, the ZA Planar is not internal focusing (unlike the ZA Sonnar 135mm f/1.8).


PostPosted: Tue Dec 22, 2009 10:22 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote
…and then I google something different related to the lens and actually find the diagram for the ZA Planar.

And a comparison of the diagrams of all the discussed 85mm f/1.4's here; they are indeed all different. Actually the Contax N version looks the most different one.


PostPosted: Wed Dec 23, 2009 12:58 am    Post subject: Reply with quote
Excalibur wrote:

Thank you, that's cleared that up........side tracking but interesting, the Tesser design P&S was out classed for sharpness by a Sonnar design P&S. i.e. Yashica T4/T5 ver Nikon L35 (but Nikon don't advertise Zeiss), although I must add I've only used one film in the T5 so my view might change.


Does the Nikon L35 have a Sonnar type lens?

I don't know the T5 but I had 3 faulty T3 of which 2 had lens problems (the other one worked fine in all aspects for half a year afther which it developed problems in its electronic circuit).
So it could be that your T5 has a slightly (my T3s were not only slightly) dejusted lens. (The one with the electronic failure was sharp, but I have no L35 to compare.)

Eugen


PostPosted: Wed Dec 23, 2009 8:43 am    Post subject: Reply with quote
***Does the Nikon L35 have a Sonnar type lens?***

Someone here said it is.


***So it could be that your T5 has a slightly (my T3s were not only slightly) dejusted lens. (The one with the electronic failure was sharp, but I have no L35 to compare.)***

Well the T5 coped well with my exposure tests, but the AF gets confused at times in that I cannot understand why a shot shouldn't be sharp but the result is OOF, also any bounce flash and that throws AF off. But hey the camera wasn't meant for serious photography, but the interest to some members here is:- It might not be very good as a backup film camera and there are better ones.


PostPosted: Wed Dec 23, 2009 8:43 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote
Arkku wrote:
…and then I google something different related to the lens and actually find the diagram for the ZA Planar.

And a comparison of the diagrams of all the discussed 85mm f/1.4's here; they are indeed all different. Actually the Contax N version looks the most different one.


That is probably because the Contax N 85/1.4 is an internal focus design which does not change length.

All other Zeiss 85/1.4 designs change length while focusing.


PostPosted: Wed Dec 23, 2009 9:40 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote
conurus wrote:
That is probably because the Contax N 85/1.4 is an internal focus design which does not change length.

All other Zeiss 85/1.4 designs change length while focusing.


Yes, I know. I think it's interesting, though, that they didn't make the newer ZA autofocus design with internal focusing, unlike e.g. the ZA 135mm f/1.8 Sonnar that came out at the same time, but still changed the optical formula from the current ZF/ZS/ZK/ZE Planar. (There was speculation above that the ZA Planar could be based on the Minolta 85mm f/1.4 G, but as the above link shows, it's probably no more similar to that than it is to the other Zeiss 85mm Planars.)


PostPosted: Thu Dec 24, 2009 3:21 am    Post subject: Reply with quote
Arkku wrote:
Yes, I know. I think it's interesting, though, that they didn't make the newer ZA autofocus design with internal focusing, unlike e.g. the ZA 135mm f/1.8 Sonnar that came out at the same time, but still changed the optical formula from the current ZF/ZS/ZK/ZE Planar. (There was speculation above that the ZA Planar could be based on the Minolta 85mm f/1.4 G, but as the above link shows, it's probably no more similar to that than it is to the other Zeiss 85mm Planars.)


I don't think Zeiss has anything to do with SONY glass except of putting their name on it. Hence the new design for the 85/1.4. Otherwise, they could simply reuse that Contax N beast of a lens which by the way has reportedly better AF and constant dimensions (IF), quite unlike the "new" SONY lens.


PostPosted: Thu Dec 24, 2009 9:50 am    Post subject: Reply with quote
aoleg wrote:

I don't think Zeiss has anything to do with SONY glass except of putting their name on it. Hence the new design for the 85/1.4.


See above (i.e. on the previous page) for the quote from Zeiss, describing their involvement in the design and manufacture of ZA lenses. It's explicitly stated on the Zeiss website that they design these lenses at Zeiss Oberkochen.


PostPosted: Thu Dec 24, 2009 9:58 am    Post subject: Reply with quote
aoleg wrote:
Otherwise, they could simply reuse that Contax N beast of a lens which by the way has reportedly better AF and constant dimensions (IF), quite unlike the "new" SONY lens.


Yes, that's exactly what I was wondering about above; if the difference between the ZA Planar and the older (but still available) manual focus Planars is due to autofocus, why didn't they use the Contax N design… Is it too complicated or heavy, or just not as good optically as the other Planars?

In any case, as the optical diagrams linked above show, the "new" lens is indeed a new design, it's not a re-badged Minolta 85mm f/1.4 G (a pity, actually; in my opinion the Minolta is optically a better lens than the Planars, and unfortunately it shows in its used prices… would be great to have it available new with the ZA build quality).


PostPosted: Thu Dec 24, 2009 2:04 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote
Excalibur wrote:
***Does the Nikon L35 have a Sonnar type lens?***

Someone here said it is.


Any other compacts with Sonnars except the Rollei35? Can be AF or manual focus.

Quote:

***So it could be that your T5 has a slightly (my T3s were not only slightly) dejusted lens. (The one with the electronic failure was sharp, but I have no L35 to compare.)***

Well the T5 coped well with my exposure tests, but the AF gets confused at times in that I cannot understand why a shot shouldn't be sharp but the result is OOF, also any bounce flash and that throws AF off.


My second T3 focused always behind the subject. Well, it was sharp there but blurry on the subject. The third one had a tilted lens.

Quote:

But hey the camera wasn't meant for serious photography, but the interest to some members here is:- It might not be very good as a backup film camera and there are better ones.


I don't know the T5 as I only had it in my hands some years ago but never used it (was of somebody else) and at the prices today I can't afford it. But I liked it more compact size than that of the T3. I can not imagine that it is so much worse than that one (which is more than a performant backup camera). I always thougt of the T5 as a combination of the advantages of the T3 and an Olympus mju-II.

Eugen


PostPosted: Thu Dec 24, 2009 5:28 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote
Eugen Mezei wrote:
Does the Nikon L35 have a Sonnar type lens?


The L35AF does...according to Nikon...

http://imaging.nikon.com/products/imaging/technology/nikkor/n33_e.htm


PostPosted: Thu Dec 24, 2009 5:53 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote
***Any other compacts with Sonnars except the Rollei35? Can be AF or manual focus.**

No idea, the only other sonnar lens I've had was a 250mm medium format lens.


PostPosted: Sat Dec 26, 2009 5:34 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote
Orio wrote:
This thread is getting confusing, so:-

We have evidences outside of Zeiss' own reports, that support this conclusion:

- Icarex lenses that were designed by Voigtlaender and built by Zeiss at Oberkochen, are marked Carl Zeiss, because at the time this happened, Voigtlaender was already bought by Carl Zeiss and incorporated into the company;

(...)
- Rollei SL lenses that were designed and built by Carl Zeiss at Oberkochen, are marked Carl Zeiss made in Germany;


Sorry, that's WRONG.

Just for the records:

Both the Icarex and the Rolleiflex SL 35 lenses were made in Braunschweig, none at Zeiss in South Germany.

The Icarex lenses were designs of Voigtlaender (A.W. Tronnier who worked in Goettingen for Voigtlaender, which is close located). Even if Voigtlaender was property of Zeiss-Ikon since 1956 (why the company name was Zeiss-Ikon Voigtlaender that time) the patents were held by Voigtlaender and all Icarex lenses were build in Braunschweig by Voigtlaender, none in Stuttgart or Oberkochen. Some of the Icarex lens designs were used by the Bessamatic/Ultramatic line before, also made in Braunschweig, the "Carl Zeiss" Ultron (380 lines per mm resolution on glass plate) was brand new. Different from the Contarex lenses which came from Zeiss-Ikon Stuttgart (made in much smaller series). The Icarex cameras were also build in Goettingen, until 1972 (ceasing production and closing the old Zeiss-Ikon Voigtlaender works)

The Rolleiflex (SL) lenses were build by Rollei (licenced by Zeiss) in Braunschweig. These were indeed Zeiss (Oberkochen) designs. After the breakup of Zeiss-Ikon (1971/72) when Voigtlaender was sold to Rollei and WestLB - new name "Optische Werke Voigtlaender", the lenses were made at Voigtlaender too. The production lines were soon transferred to Singapore (1974) and German production of Rolleiflex SL lenses were mostly closed. For cost cutting reasons, the management decided not to produce the Ultron in the Rollei lens line, but a cheaper Planar type. As some sources say, when transferred to Singapore the 7-elements Planar (as pictured in brochures) was changed into a 6-element type (alike the later Rolleinar). But this is something still to prove. To complete confusion, also a "Voigtlaender COLOR-Ultron" for the SL35 was build in Singapore, but this was exactly the same lens as the Rollei HFT Planar just with a different lens ring.

cheers,
Post new topic   Reply to topic
Home   Manual Focus Lenses
Goto page Previous  1, 2
Page 2 of 2