[Fenwoodian]

.
Of the many lenses I've owned and tested, 3 of my top 5 with the best "3D effect" are the Zeiss Milvus 50/1.4, Zeiss Milvus 85/1.4, and of course the Zeiss Milvus (and Classic) 135/2. Of course all of these lenses can be permanently adapted to Pentax K mount.

---

Last edited by Fenwoodian; 06-06-2023 at 12:30 PM.

[romay]

That was bound to happen - not much money to be made with ILC lenses compared to their other ventures. Also, current lenses can't really be improved much more - most of them are diffraction limited. That's why others like Laowa release a bunch of weird contraptions as lenses - it's just a way of fracking the oldschool photographers' wallets some more before the market finally dries up.

[DeKay]

No loss.

I have never seen a single photo made with a Zeiss lens that had anything special about it.
Not to mention the abysmal cost/benefit ratio.

Wow, that’s a bit harsh. I have a Sony DSC-F717 that has a Zeiss lens and the photos it takes are nothing short of fantastic.

[luftfluss]

Zeiss has denied the suggestion that it's left the photography industry. A widely-reported post on the Fred Miranda forum claimed Zeiss' Australian distributor had said the company is discontinuing its lenses and filters.

Zeiss says it's not leaving the photo industry: Digital Photography Review

[clackers]

Zeiss says it's not leaving the photo industry: Digital Photography Review

Yes, never say you've left the industry until you've sold the last stock on the shelves.

The distributor would know. They're also the Pentax, Hasselblad, Phase One and Sigma importer in Australia, too, BTW.

Oh, and that's a great quote from Mark Twain in your signature!

[luftfluss]

Yes, never say you've left the industry until you've sold the last stock on the shelves.

The distributor would know. They're also the Pentax, Hasselblad, Phase One and Sigma importer in Australia, too, BTW.

Oh, and that's a great quote from Mark Twain in your signature!

Zeiss would be more believable if they'd come out with a new lens or two, eh?

My guess is that they will continue to license their name for a while for cell phones and Sony.

[clackers]

Zeiss would be more believable if they'd come out with a new lens or two, eh?

My guess is that they will continue to license their name for a while for cell phones and Sony.

Yeah, there's no outlay on their part, it's sweet points of every unit. The 'Zeiss' Sonys are actually designed and manufactured by Tamron IIRC.

I think the only lenses they made in their own factory in Germany were cine ones, AFAIK everything else was done by Cosina.

[BigMackCam]

Yeah, there's no outlay on their part, it's sweet points of every unit. The 'Zeiss' Sonys are actually designed and manufactured by Tamron IIRC.

I think the only lenses they made in their own factory in Germany were cine ones, AFAIK everything else was done by Cosina.

Here's Zeiss' own article (now removed from their website) re the Sony Zeiss' partnership:

Sony and ZEISS: What photographers should know about the partnership - LENSPIRE - The new ZEISS photography platform

Within the article:

Who develops the lenses?

ZEISS lenses are developed exclusively by ZEISS. ZEISS also determines the features of the lenses, such as their focal length and internal construction, in line with the company’s product strategy.

Sony/ZEISS lenses are jointly developed by ZEISS and Sony. ZEISS supports Sony throughout the optical design and development process and then tests and approves the prototypes. Finally, ZEISS determines the test specifications for serial production.

Where are the lenses manufactured?

ZEISS still picture lenses are manufactured in Japan and ZEISS cine lenses in ZEISS’s factory in Oberkochen/Germany. It is still economical for ZEISS to produce its cine lenses in Germany due to the more sophisticated skills required to manufacture these special lenses for the film industry. In order to satisfy the much higher global demand for still picture lenses, ZEISS has established a partner network in the optics industry. During the entire development and production processes, ZEISS experts ensure that the high quality standards for which ZEISS has been famous for over 165 years are met.

Sony/ZEISS lenses are manufactured by Sony in factories across Asia. In these factories Sony uses lens testing equipment that has been developed and manufactured by ZEISS. An example is the MTF-tester K8, a versatile and compact instrument used to measure the modulation transfer function of photographic lenses, or similar systems, at an infinite object distance.

[clackers]

Here's Zeiss' own article (now removed from their website) re the Sony Zeiss' partnership:

Sony and ZEISS: What photographers should know about the partnership - LENSPIRE - The new ZEISS photography platform

Within the article:

Thanks, there's a claim in the Fred Miranda forums:

"Cine - Designed and manufactured by Zeiss
Zeiss ZE/ZF/Milvus/OTUS/Loxia - designed by Zeiss, manufactured by Cosina
Zeiss Batis and Touit - while I have never seen verbal confirmation, the designs match patents filed by Tamron. Designed by Tamron (probably) and manufactured by Cosina
Sony Zeiss - Designed by Sony, design is approved by Zeiss, Manufactured by Sony, QC overseen by Zeiss (a great disappointment to me)"

[BigMackCam]

Thanks, there's a claim in the Fred Miranda forums:

"Cine - Designed and manufactured by Zeiss
Zeiss ZE/ZF/Milvus/OTUS/Loxia - designed by Zeiss, manufactured by Cosina
Zeiss Batis and Touit - while I have never seen verbal confirmation, the designs match patents filed by Tamron. Designed by Tamron (probably) and manufactured by Cosina
Sony Zeiss - Designed by Sony, design is approved by Zeiss, Manufactured by Sony, QC overseen by Zeiss (a great disappointment to me)"

Wouldn't surprise me if those claims are true, in whole or part. Everyone partners with everyone else these days, for all sorts of reasons that usually - directly or indirectly - relate to efficiency and profitability, and premium brands are no different in that respect. So long as the performance and quality of the lenses are worthy of the Zeiss name and price tag, I don't think it really matters. Without wishing to seem unkind, the only folks I think have valid claims for "great disappointment" are those who bought Zeiss partly for bragging rights and subsequently found out their lenses were designed and/or manufactured by someone else with a less premium reputation. Those who bought them for image quality lost nothing by such revelations

[UncleVanya]

Without wishing to seem unkind, the only folks I think have valid claims for "great disappointment" are those who bought Zeiss partly for bragging rights and subsequently found out their lenses were designed and/or manufactured by someone else with a less premium reputation. Those who bought them for image quality lost nothing by such revelations

The great disappointment may refer to the copy variation found in the ZA Sony/Zeiss lenses. The 24-70/4 for example is a lens many dislike due to reputation of softness outside of center. However some copies reviewed have been far sharper than others. It’s a lens that people keep if they get a “good one” and sell if they get a “bad one” or just listen to the hype without doing real world testing.

[BigMackCam]

The great disappointment may refer to the copy variation found in the ZA Sony/Zeiss lenses. The 24-70/4 for example is a lens many dislike due to reputation of softness outside of center. However some copies reviewed have been far sharper than others. It’s a lens that people keep if they get a “good one” and sell if they get a “bad one” or just listen to the hype without doing real world testing.

Ah, that's interesting. Thanks for the insight, Brad. The way I'd read it, I thought the author of that Fred Miranda post was disappointed that it wasn't Zeiss who manufactured the lens.

Anecdotally, Hasselblad hand-picked the 24-70 lenses that were shipped in the HV kits like I own (I can't remember where I read that, but I do remember reading it somewhere). Whether that's the reason I have a good copy, I don't know... but a good copy it most certainly is...

[Rondec]

First of all, Zeiss won't stop lending their name to Sony for their lenses, as long as they continue to get paid -- even if they have little to do with the lenses themselves.

Second, Zeiss isn't going to admit a shifting of focus away from still photography imaging, even if that is exactly what they are doing. As long as there is product on the shelves to be sold, they will keep selling it and in the end, they may never make an announcement, but simply not release any new lenses.

I don't think Pentax has ever made an official announcement about the Q or the 645 lines of cameras, have they? Eventually, their users get the hint as fewer lenses remain available new and no new camera bodies are forth coming in the mount.

Zeiss doesn't really have to say anything and with the plethora of mirrorless options out there, it probably isn't a big deal if the original mount you bought your Zeiss lens for isn't available -- you should be able to adapt it to a different mount without any problem. Most of them are manual focus lenses anyway...

[UncleVanya]

Ah, that's interesting. Thanks for the insight, Brad. The way I'd read it, I thought the author of that Fred Miranda post was disappointed that it wasn't Zeiss who manufactured the lens.

Anecdotally, Hasselblad hand-picked the 24-70 lenses that were shipped in the HV kits like I own (I can't remember where I read that, but I do remember reading it somewhere). Whether that's the reason I have a good copy, I don't know... but a good copy it most certainly is...

My copy was refurbished by Sony after the owner before my dad didn’t like the results he got. Since then it’s been very good. So clearly if attention is paid to the lens it can shine.

---------- Post added 06-09-23 at 09:21 AM ----------

First of all, Zeiss won't stop lending their name to Sony for their lenses, as long as they continue to get paid -- even if they have little to do with the lenses themselves.

Bear in mind Sony has released newer lenses that largely overshadow the ZA lenses. It looks to me like Sony is distancing themselves from the Zeiss relationship or Zeiss has pulled back.

Second, Zeiss isn't going to admit a shifting of focus away from still photography imaging, even if that is exactly what they are doing. As long as there is product on the shelves to be sold, they will keep selling it and in the end, they may never make an announcement, but simply not release any new lenses.

Agreed.

[BigMackCam]

My copy was refurbished by Sony after the owner before my dad didn’t like the results he got. Since then it’s been very good. So clearly if attention is paid to the lens it can shine.

Looking at dxomark, it's interesting to see that the original version of the 24-70 that I own - rather than the later "II" model - seems to have better uniformity of sharpness across the field at certain focal lengths. They even mention this in their review of the "II".