Who is the real sucker here ?

LuckyStudio 13

LuckyStudio 13

The Tapeless One
quote "

[FONT=Arial, Helvetica, sans-serif]Some years ago Zeiss licensed Kyrocera of Japan to use the name Zeiss on some lenses made for the Contax brand of cameras. Life was good.[/FONT]​

[FONT=Arial, Helvetica, sans-serif]Contax went out of business in 2005, ending the need for these lenses. As soon as the agreement expired in 2006, Zeiss looked for something to do with the Japanese manufacturing capacity.[/FONT]
​
[FONT=Arial, Helvetica, sans-serif]Zeiss decided to put these former Contax mount lenses in Nikon mounts instead, and that's how we get these ZF lenses. These are new lenses made in Nikon mount. [/FONT]​
[FONT=Arial, Helvetica, sans-serif]
This lens is not made in Germany and it is not made in a Zeiss factory. It is made in Japan by Cosina, the same company that made the cheap [/FONT][FONT=Arial, Helvetica, sans-serif]FM-10 for Nikon and many other inexpensive lenses and cameras for third-party makers for many decades.[/FONT][FONT=Arial, Helvetica, sans-serif]It feels exactly like a third-party manual focus lens from the 1970s, and for good reason. Cosina, who makes this lens, made many of the third-party lenses of the 1970s. This Zeiss branded lens even has the same focus ring finish as my very first ever third-party lens. I got a Vivitar 200mm f/3.5 T-mount lens for Christmas in 1973. It has the same anodized aluminum finish, engraved markings and straight-ribbed focus ring of this Zeiss lens. Ditto for the 25mm f/3.5 Lentar lens I bought for my Minolta at Fortunoff in 1974 before I could afford camera-brand lenses. I was only 12 years old back then.[/FONT][FONT=Arial, Helvetica, sans-serif]"

[/FONT]http://www.kenrockwell.com/zeiss/zf50.htm

What is the truth here ?? He is mentioning the [FONT=Arial, Helvetica, sans-serif] Zeiss Planar T* f/1,4 50 mm ZF.


[/FONT]
 
The truth is that lens manufacturers have been licensing their names for years. You don't think Zeiss actually builds the lens in the Nokia N93 cell phone, do you?

Now, with that said, just because someone else is making the actual product, that doesn't inherently make it "bad". By all guesses the Red zoom lens is a rehoused Sigma 18-50, but I've heard nothing but praise for its optical performance (at least at its price point; mechanical is a whole other issue).

If Zeiss specifies the design, and Cosina or Sigma or Kyocera builds it exactly as specified, to Zeiss' specifications and tolerances, then does it really matter whether it's assembled by Kyocera or Cosina or by German engineers in the Zeiss factory?

And, the corollary goes: if these non-German-made lenses DON'T perform up to Zeiss standards, either Zeiss will have to pull the line from them, or risk tarnishing their name and losing the value that goes with such a premium brand.

So the question becomes: do the Zeiss ZF lenses perform as a Zeiss should? I've seen reviews both ways. Some people seem extraordinarily thrilled with them, and some others (like Ken) find fault with them -- then again, Ken's review seems quite hostile from the opening paragraph. He clearly has no use for such a lens and sounds like he hated even writing a review of it.

Suffice it to say, Zeiss paints a rather different picture of how and why these lenses came about. Check out this review:
http://www.imaging-resource.com/NEWS/1148502427.html

I mean, he says that the focusing is superior, the build quality is superior, feels more durable and the aperture ring is more precise -- kind of opposite of the things Mr. Rockwell said.

Another review here:
http://www.digitaldarrell.com/Review%20-%20ZeissLenses4NikonFMount.asp

With such a disparity in the published reviews, you're probably gonna have to try 'em for yourself.
 
Last edited:
Wow, Red Lens is actually a rebranded Sigma ? thats news to me ! I guess, potential lens buyers should go do serious research in terms of performance on the Nikon f/1.4 vs Zeiss f/1.4 before spending nearly 75% more for the Zeiss.

thanks Barry for the info !!!
 
Note: we don't KNOW that the Red lens is a rebranded Sigma, I'm just repeating the scuttlebutt that seems to have decided that it's *probably* made by Sigma. We don't know and won't know because Red hasn't revealed who's the manufacturer; I'm just saying that the rumors were all saying that Cooke was making them but that's been pretty well refuted; I spent some time talking to some people from Cooke and they were quite adamant that they're not making the Red lenses; at least not the zooms. But people have pointed out that the Sigma lenses have the same focal length and basic specifications, and seem to be agreeing that yes the Red 18-50 and 50-150 are probably rebadged Sigmas. Much discussion on reduser.net about this.

Nothing wrong with that, as long as it performs as you'd expect a Red lens should perform. And nothing wrong with Cosina or others making the Zeiss lens, as long as the Zeiss performs the way you'd expect a Zeiss to perform. Sony camcorders have had "Zeiss" lenses for at least a decade, yet I sincerely doubt there are thousands of German engineers cranking out lenses for 1/6" CCD camcorders! I think it's a pretty safe bet that the Sony "Zeiss" lenses are made in Japan, and yes, probably by one of the lower-cost manufacturers. But as long as they perform to spec, does it matter?
 
Not really, but Nikon glasses are known to be better than Sigma's.

If only there is an optic company that can take the Nikons and "re-house" them with cine style amenities with reasonable prices. I think there is a market for such product (with RED One and the future Mini RED.

If i remember correctly, the Bourne Ultimatum crew had Cooke (? or was it another company) to re-house the 28-70 and 80-200 Nikons.
 
The ZF lenses have been extensively evaluated and they're first class optics. Are they worth the premium? That's debatable. Rockwell is an extremely opinionated reviewer who's been known to review gear he's never used. Sometimes he writes solid reviews and other times it's uninformed ranting. Cosina built the FM-10 for Nikon to hit a certain price point and they did a damn nice job--I own one. Not to say it compares with my pro Nikon bodies, but it's a nice simple lightweight camera.

Cosina also manufactures the highly respected Voightlander Leica-mount rangefinder lenses, so they are more than capable of first-rate optical design. You think the Leica Dicomars on the DVX and HVX come from Solms, Germany? They're also made under contract in a "third party" lens factory. It's not widely known, but even major lens manufacturers like Nikon contract out the production of some consumer SLR lenses.
 
Barry, you mean some of the Nikon lenses that are made in China and some of the higher end Nikons that are still made in Japan right ? The Nikon D200 and probably the upcoming D300 SLRs are made in Thailand instead of Japan.
 
The production facility in Thailand is a Nikon factory. Nikon farms out the production of some of it's consumer lenses to other manufacturers--could be anywhere in Asia. The lenses are Nikon-designed and the QA/QC and final product are up to Nikon specs, but it's contract manufacturing.
 
Barry_S said:
You think the Leica Dicomars on the DVX and HVX come from Solms, Germany? They're also made under contract in a "third party" lens factory.
Click to expand...

wow, you mean there not made by Leica, but spec by Leica. Who actually makes the lens?
 
As a longtime Nikon user (bought my first Nikon when I was 12, I am now 44, carry the 3, minus the..okay 32 years), I have known this all along that Nikon manufactures certain lenses through third party contractors.

IMHO, while I love the results from the D series lenses, most of them and all of the DX lenses have a much cheaper feel than any of the older AIS or AI lenses ever did. My 18-200 DX lens is really loose and cheap feeling with a lot of creeping of the zoom mechanism. Not sure if all of these D and DX series lenses are contract manufactured but they certainly have lost that classic Nikon feel. The results are still pretty decent but I recently bought a 50mm 1.4 AIS and an 85mm 1.8 AIS used and these lenses are, without doubt, better constructed and finished than any of my Nikon lens purchases of the past 8 years.

As far as the Zeiss Nikon mount lenses, hmm...probably the law of diminishing returns is at work here. Perhaps better than the Nikon equivalents optically but perhaps just a tiny bit better for a whole lot more $$$. It sure would be cool to get a hold of a set of Zeiss and do a shootout with the equivalent Nikons. That, I guess, would be the only way to get a definitive answer to this question.

I agree with the Barrys, I don't really care which factory something is made in as long as the end product meets the manufacturers goals and reputation. Outsourcing is a fact of life in mass produced products nowdays. My Sachtler was built in Costa Rica, not Germany, but I have experienced nothing that makes it any better or worse than my old Video 20 that was built in Germany. As long as the end product is good and offers good value, who cares where it was built?

Dan
 
Last edited:
I'm pretty far from being even remotely the whiff of a friend of a friend's cat who know's a fish who's best friends with a guy who knows a great lens from a good lens, but of the Nikon lenses I have, my only Zeiss Nikon fit [a 50mm] is the best lens I have.

Its a great build, great image quality and it seems sharper than my other Nikons. My others are second hand, but they are in great condition.

Is it worth the money? To me it is. Am I a sucker? Maybe.

But that's only my pennies worth.

Richard
 
I love to buy used high end glass from the 60s and 70s.
Almost every lens I own is a m42 socket.
I have adaptor rings for my Sigma digital still cam and for the Nikon bajonet so I can use them on 35mm adaptors.

I got super fast lenses (1.4/1.2) from Zeiss (DDR/Germany)that go for $80 on Ebay. Compared to the modern lenses I tryed, they WAY better.

Frank
 
I have some Contax Zeiss lenses with a eos adapter -28mm, 2.8/50mm, 1.4/85mm, 1.4 and the famous 35/70mm, 3,4 Makro vario sonnar- on my Extreme. Excelent glasses. I bought them for about 950 euro's. And one piece of glass, a new Zeiss ZF Planar T* 1.4/85mm will cost 1100 euro's!
But... my 28mm is vignetting so I have to zoom in to much so it's not that wide anymore. I don't no the reason why.

I have a Nikkor E 50mm 1.8 (and Zeiss Planar 50mm, 1.7 and will do some test later on.

Arno
 
Last edited:
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top