Zeiss posted an interesting blog entry to explain what photographers should know about the Sony-Zeiss partnership. They do that because photographers regularly ask what the differences and similarities are between ZEISS and Sony/ZEISS lenses. I repost the most important part of the answer to some of the most frequent questions:
Are lenses from ZEISS or Sony/ZEISS identical?
The lenses of the two lines are different, but optimized for the corresponding system. Because ZEISS’s know-how goes into every lens, both versions are highly sophisticated from a technical standpoint. Differences can be found in the focusing mechanism: for example, whereas Sony/ZEISS lenses always have autofocus, ZEISS offers a mix of autofocus lenses (e.g. ZEISS Batis) and manual focusing lenses (e.g. [shoplink 38831 ebay]ZEISS Loxia[/shoplink]). For the lenses of camera systems from other manufacturers, ZEISS relies mainly on manual focusing (ZE, ZF.2). Lenses that have the same focal length differ in their internal construction.
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.
Who is responsible for customer service?
Owners of ZEISS lenses can rely on an established worldwide service network where they can send their ZEISS lenses for inspection and repairs. ZEISS also offers an online and telephone central support desk. ZEISS places great emphasis on providing customers with a personalized service, delivered by qualified experts in the company. The inspection and repairs of Sony/ZEISS lenses are managed by the Sony Service Centers directly.
Is the quality of both lines identical?
In all its brand partnerships, ZEISS sets the technical and quality standards to which partners, such as Sony, must adhere. ZEISS regularly audits the production process of Sony/ZEISS lenses in Sony’s factories. ZEISS experts examine the production processes, management systems and measuring installations. ZEISS certifies the suppliers and provides all the equipment that is needed to ensure product quality, including the equipment of third-party suppliers.
Who sells the lenses?
Sony/ZEISS lenses are sold exclusively through Sony’s distribution channels. ZEISS lenses are sold exclusively through ZEISS’s own sales channels in all German-speaking regions and internationally. ZEISS also ensures that its local dealers have the required professional qualifications. Dealers who sell the company’s products are regularly trained by ZEISS experts.
Local ZEISS dealers can be found here: www.zeiss.com/photo/dealer
Product strategy
Sony and ZEISS each follow their own product strategies depending on market and quality needs. With their outstanding image quality, fast autofocus and innovative features, the new ZEISS Batis lenses are in a class of their own. The ZEISS Batis 2/25 and ZEISS Batis 1.8/85 are the first full-frame autofocus lenses for Sony’s E-mount cameras. The Batis 2/25 and ZEISS Batis 1.8/85 lenses have an OLED display which shows the distance and depth-of-field range – a true innovation. As a result, a photographer can also compose creative images in the dark. For more information about ZEISS Batis lenses, please visit www.zeiss.com/batis
Freedom of composition in photography was the guiding principle in developing the ZEISS Loxia lenses – a family of manual focus lenses for the E-mount full frame. They are optimized for digital sensors and electronic viewfinders as they are used in Sony’s α 7 mirrorless cameras and feature a mechanical aperture setting and the mechanical deactivation of the click stop (de-click) for ambitious videography.
Various other ZEISS lenses, for example those from the ZEISS Touit family for cameras with APS-C sensor and E-mount, compete with Sony/ZEISS lenses. Both companies will continue to develop their respective product portfolios, and in doing so offer customers even more choice.
This puts photographers in a comfortable position: they can choose their desired lenses from a broad portfolio provided by both brands in order to meet their specific requirements.
–
Many Thanks Zeiss for writing that!
Both Batis lenses are now available for preorder in USA and Europe (UK/Germany)
Zeiss Batis 85mm f/1.8 lens in US at Adorama, Bhphoto. In Eu at Amazon DE, WexUK. In Asia at Digitalrev.
Zeiss Batis 25mm f/2.0 lens at Adorama, Bhphoto. In EU at Amazon DE, WexUK. In Asia at Digitalrev.
In Europe and Asia the Loxias can be found in Stock via [shoplink 36456 ebay]eBay sellers (Click here)[/shoplink] and Digitalrev (Click here).
–
P.s.: Thanks Colin!
118 Responses
This topic is very interesting. Maybe it helps, that the Sony-Zeiss-bashers are stopping to claim these lenses just get the blue badge for nothing….
Until yesterday I thought that Zeiss lenses are entirely produced in GER.
The “manufactured in Japan” on my Batis 25 made me wonder. And I asked to the support.
Answer is pending, but reading this article I understand now. 🙂
Since the introduction of Batis, Zeiss had always stated that they are made in Japan.
Same thing for the Loxia and Touit when they were introduces.
It’s well known that Zeiss’ lenses are made in Japan by Cosina. The only interrogation was for the Otus: now we know.
By the way the commecial brand of Cosina is Voigtlander which explain their qualities.
Admitedly I only read about the features and specs at that time of the introduction. (in the same manner I read over the fact that the Batis 85 will have IS)…
Guess I need to order some new reading glasses… 🙂
Probably the wow effect of the unexpected annoucement of the Batis made you focus on the only interesting points to you.
I actually don’t care where it’s produced, the important part is where and who designed it.
Who can believe that Japanese workers are less qualified than German’s one? They are also probalby better paid than the german’s workers.
Basically I don’t care where something is manufatured, too.
By saying that I wondered that stills lenses are not manufactured in GER I did not intend to imply a quality concern. I am working for a Japanese telecoms company here in GER so I can confirm that Japanese workers/engineers are at least equally educated than Germans.
No country lacks educated staff, everything is about how modern facilities are and the cost of labour. Japan had cheap labour in 60s and 70s, and thats when zeiss moved the majority of production there. Same thing happens with china today. In 20 years, chinese products will be as good as eu or japan ones. But the prices will follow. Some people think this form of capitalism is exploiting cheap labour, i think it is the necessary step in technological development of a country. Cheap labour brings big investors, investors bring money, tech and experience, and those three eventually turn cheap labour country into new investors.
So Zeiss is basically a design compagny…
Sony manufactures Sony/Zeiss
Cosina manufactures Zeiss
Zeiss Germ manufactures Zeiss cine
So only Zeiss ciné are true Zeiss lenses
But we don’t care because batis are stellar, Sony/ Zeiss are stellar, Otus are stellar.
Am I right?
Design & testing. Also, there is an insane amount of knowledge required for that design. Knowledge that the manufacturer does not have by themselves.
By the same token, Apple is only a design token, because Foxconn does the manufacturing. Same with right about all electronics companies. Even big ones like nVidia.
I was thinking of ARM
According to Brandon Dube of LensRentals “they are made in the same place by the same people”
I’d hope so! They are known for making good lenses. It would suck it they got some random Germans who didn’t know how to make lenses make the Otus for culture reasons.
But does he really know this for certain or just lika many believe they are made by Cosina just because they make other manual Zeiss lenses?
I think ‘production facility’ means just what it says, and Cosina certainly does not have the only optical production facility in Japan. Konica-Minolta still has one, Topcon, Pentax, Nikon… Zeiss can place their order anywhere they want.
Both Canon and Nikon also use Cosina and Tamron to manufacture some low end lenses. Cosina has their own brand but largely does work for hire, and they’ll do it for whatever specification you provide. If Leica asked them to make a lens identical to the APO Summicron, they could do it. This is true across the spectrum for manufacturing. You’ll have to just get used to the idea that the tools we use come from many different places these days.
This is interesting in fact since we get just a better Sony lens for a double price. Sony should start thinking about doing some affordable glass with manual operation only. As I stated long time ago, bodies for small pub prices and lenses for luxury bitch bar pricing. When does Sony enters the APS-C market again and make lenses for us too that anyone can pay.
Even all of the ZE and ZF.2 lenses are and have been manufactured by Cosina in Japan. This is not new – it’s been that way for quite some time.
If you want German made Zeiss lenses the C/Y versions AEG are all made in Germany. They have some CA wide open but clean up nicely at 4.0 +. Or you can spend $20k up on Cine lenses.
Contax-yashica lenses were made by kyocera in japan also.
Not for nothing, for money. It is entirely for marketing/brand purposes. Nevertheless, Sony (or Minolta) is entirely able to design and manufacture first class lenses themselves, they just feel it enhances their standing compared to Canon or Nikon. The Sony/Zeiss 135mm f/1.8 as well as the Zeiss APO 135mm f/2.0 are both excellent lenses in their own right. But Zeiss is not the only one having the optical know how. For God sakes, even Samyang can nowadays do a superb 135mm lens! Who’s Mitakon. They can stand up to a Noctilux as well..
This is very interesting, but I can’t help feeling that at the same time it is a very clever and sophisticated way of claiming all the plaudits for any of the lenses, yet leaving a way to point the finger in the case of any criticism for partner’s lenses.
This is most obvious relating to customer service, where Sony does not have a good reputation.
I can only say that no other camera manufacturer gave me ever a better service than Sony. I bought NEX-7 with 3 year full warranty. After more than 2 years, my screen was blurred and scratched. I brought it to a small local Sony Center for replacement. 3 days later my camera had made thousand km trip back and forth, was repaired and given back to me cleaned and in new state and not one cent to pay. That is what I calls ervice. I brought my ancient TRV camera to another Sony Center for checkup and cleaning, 4 days later I could pick it up in perfect state and the price I paid was ridiculously low.
Ya, you’re not going to get that kind of service on Sony equipment currently in the U.S.
I think it’s not the first time that SAR says that Zeiss are made in Jap/Ger and that Sony/Zeiss lens are manufactured by Sony (in Taiwan mostly) but reviewed by Zeiss and designed with them so it can have the Zeiss Logo and certification.
No matter where or who, reviews tells if the lens are good or not and in any case lens are really neat right now all over the world.
Cool!
So the blue badge isn’t glued on. Interesting.
Yes. As it turns out she did have parents… interesting.
It’s all about marketing and branding.
got lens envy?
Lens envy, sensor envy, camera body envy etc. It’s a powerful thing, causes insecure people to troll message boards and make fools of themselves.
I have 20+ zeiss lenses including both Otus. Read my blog silly girl.
LOL! Your blog must be the most pathetic hater site on the whole interent. Does Nikon at least sponsor it with 50 cent per month?
Get some psychologic help dude
You just finally realized all of your photos are 11+7 bit crap ?
Sorry baby.
My house, my boat, my car….
Maybe you have the lenses, maybe you have the money, but you are lacking fairness to other brand’s users by offending them. On top of that you think your mental org@sms are the wisdom of photography and people are lacking intelligence if they didn’t read them?
This is, as the url apparently indicates, a site for sony companions.
Why is somebody, sorry – something like you wasting its time to offend people liking something you apparently do not like?
did you read one word of this post?!
grow up, dude
Those PR photos were shot with Canon 5D/28mm lens, Nikon D700/50mm lens…
One of the two shots inside Sony factory were shot with a7R with 28-70 kit lens. The other Sony factory shot had tags removed.
_________
I just shot a Canon Rebel ad with a Sony a99/ZA135/1.8. Early spring so the campaign is over now. But it did happen.
I just saw the product shot of a7R and Batis lenses was made with Nikon D3S and 100/2… probably the Zeiss Macro.
Two of three product shots inside Sony factory are untagged. Those two have different color balance than one other Sony factory shot tagged with a7R and kit lens.
The other shots are mix of Nikon and Canon cameras… probably using Zeiss primes… one being 50/2… probably the Zeiss macro for the D700.
thanks Admin! before reading the blog, i was told SONY/ZEISS only got the ZEISS support on test/quality-approval. Now zeiss (claim they also) supports optical design & process control, prototy-approval. it’s a good news for those gabbers.
Zeiss has always said that they had to approve the design for co-branded lenses. Approving a design and supporting the design process can be seen as two different ways to describe the same thing.
yeah, I’m wondering why they “approved” the FE 24-70/4… :/
Lol. And now you know what you pay for…
Well, Zeiss is just a marketing whore. And before Sony is allowed to bring out a new “Zeiss” labeled lens, of course they have to get back to Zeiss to get the approval not to embarras them..
“ZEISS lenses are developed exclusively by ZEISS”
Err yeah… and yet it’s somehow Tamron that filed the patent for the Batis 90 2.8. Zeiss exclusively develops the lenses and then Tamron gets the blueprint because Zeiss couldn’t patent those themselves. Makes a lot of sense.
Don’t care who makes the lenses but a little bit of honesty wouldn’t hurt. Or maybe it would.
This is awesome as it clarifies a lot of what’s been talked about directly from the source – instead of interweb speculation. Great post.
This will clear things up.
Opinion from a repair technician who never designed or manufactured a lens. Worthless speculation that clears up nothing.
Like having a garage mechanic tell you there is no difference between a Mercedes and a Kia.
Indeed, despite the fact that Kia make more cars, they will be more reliable than a Mercedes.
I always wondered how certain manufacturers achieved such an image when the reality often contradicted!
wait… more is better?
No, but one would expect that if you produce fewer cars, each at greater cost, then they should be better. In reality, they are worse.
Obviously automotive knowledge is not your forte.
http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/business-32332210
Truth seems to elude you!
And you gained all your photographic knowledge from reading financial pages? Not likely.
I have no idea what that is supposed to mean.
It turns up time and time again, all over the world, that Mercedes are nothing special. If you want to go around with rose-tinted glasses thinking otherwise, be my guest, but it won’t alter the facts.
If you park a Mercedes or BMW next to a Kia and don’t see a difference in quality then you’re beyond hope.
I see a difference in aesthetics and I know there’s a difference in ‘luxury’, but that wasn’t the point I was making, which was all about function.
And how do you define function? Performance (acceleration and braking), interior comfort, handling, quality of interior materials. If that’s the criteria the differences are very obviously in favor of the BMW or Mercedes.
I wasn’t talking about any of those things and neither were you.
Please, go back and look at the original comment to which you replied. The technician stated that he repaired Otus as often as any other and I agreed with him that make is not necessarily any guide to reliability.
I don’t have any problem with accepting that an Otus is a better performing lens, but I think you’re a fool if you blindly believe that it must be more reliable and the same is true of a Mercedes versus other cars.
The simplest most basic car, lens, camera etc. will be more reliable due to the simple fact that there is less to go wrong. That much we can agree on, but who wants just the basic car, lens, camera etc.? And can they really be compared by a simple statistic that does not take into account the complexity of the item?
Ask the person standing by the side of the road, waiting for the AA, as the ‘simple’ car drives past, or the photographer who misses the shot of a lifetime because his $5000 lens let him down, while the ‘happy-snapper’ with his P&S on auto earns millions…
Of course, I do understand pleasure and that satisfaction is not an easily quantified factor, but that has absolutely nothing with the original point that you took so much delight in trying to slap me down.
As to the ‘repair technician’, given that he works for Lens Rentals who ably demonstrate their skill, I’m happy to give him the benefit of his expertise.
OK Peter, you are one thick headed individual that would likely argue that the sky is not blue. Have a great day.
A wonderfully formed argument! Have you never looked out of the window on a grey day? But of course, you’re infallible…
But… The sky is not blue, is it? 🙁
Really going off on a tangent now.
A tangent? Sorry to disagree, but that is entirely related to the post Emph wrote and the point in general.
You seem to have lost the plot.
So are you still using a Argus C3, keep it simple and reliable so you don’t end up on the side of the road. Funny!
And you accuse me of going off on a tangent!
I have no idea what an Argus C3 is and no desire to find out.
It happens to be a very simple and reliable film camera, goes along with your mantra. Keep It Simple Stupid.
I’ve never said it was my ‘mantra’.
All I pointed out, quite correctly, in response to the idea that Mercedes are inherently more reliable was that such an idea was largely a myth.
As in:
http://www.autoguide.com/auto-news/2012/05/are-german-cars-reliable-myth-german-engineering.html
If you and others want to blindly believe otherwise then that is up to you.
I shan’t bother responding again.
No you shan’t.
My original point was that a repair technician is not necessarily a valid source of information on lenses based on his vague unsupported comment.
If a repair technician is testing a large enough sample of lenses, he or she can make a valid comment about sample variation and susceptibility to things getting out of whack.
What “it” means is a financial page edited by an MBA is not a valid source of automotive technology. That should be self evident.
Drugs are bad Peter Kelly.
Edna Bambrick or CindyBin ? You’ve been missed.
Mercedes used to make very good cars in the 80s but buying one nowadays should come with a glovebox full of aspirin.
you’re talking about mercedes and I’ll get a mercedes add in the upper right corner. Haha, those intelligent add-systems are ehm… riduculous?
If your finances only allow you to purchase a Kia that’s nothing to be ashamed of. But trying to compare it to a German made sedan is just ridicules and makes you look foolish.
You’re just hatin on my Ferrari. Chicks dig it though….
But Kia is better than Ferrari, ask Peter Kelly. LOL
You should do a few neutral drops in that thang….open er up.
Not just my opinion. See my reply to Emph:
http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/business-32332210
and it has been that way for some time.
It’s true and not true. I’d give the nod to VW- but that’s about it. Premium materials don’t necessarily mean premium build quality.
With that said, I still want a diesel 1989 Volvo 240 wagon in forest green. I know it’s absolutely ugly as heck, but it’s got that swedish brick thing going on. I always wanted to drop an LSX in one- total sleeper.
How about a Kia vs NoKia? http://i3.asn.im/Kia-and-Nokia-_t3nh.jpg
Agreed. I was being sarcastic. The guy doesn’t know this for certain. Even a tour of the factory wouldn’t reveal all of the processes behind the operations and manufacturing.
Clarifies? This?
American? Your (WASP) culture has highly adaptive definition of truth, which is far from logical one.
Don’t see the purpose for an ad hominem attack on a comment about lens manufacturing, you know nothing about me. Pathetic.
That “clarification” is not acceptable at all. I meant it. Just a cheap set of pointless words.
Who cares. What a douchebag.
You’re behind a few decades there bud. WASP culture? Have you checked out statistics lately? In two more decades that’ll be a distant memory for sure.
Always wondered why my 35/2.8 has a “Made in Japan” on the lens barrel, while any other lens including 35/1.4 have a “Made in Thailand” hidden on the mount plate.
some Sony Zeiss lenses are made in Japan, some in Thailand
A lot of people think made in japan equals to high quality and Thailand doesnt, its a shame but it is like that for many.
Even Sony hides the Thailand sticker.
I couldnt care less though as long as they deliver high quality.
yes sure, but if you work as a pro, you might not want to have a big sign “made in china” or similar on your lens 🙂 I know it doesnt matter to you, but the customer might be a bit meh! if he notices
I haven’t yet come across a customer who has even noticed the model of camera, let alone where they are made, and they don’t care one jot.
If you provide good images every tme they are delighted and have no thoughts about anything else.
Poppycock.
I think the reason for that is that those are the locations where the lenses are made. It’s a complicated system but I think it works once you figure it out.
I think you might be right 🙂
Why are some labeled Carl-Zeiss and some just Zeiss?
they explained that in the same blog 2 years ago 🙂
http://blogs.zeiss.com/photo/en/?p=4150
The Decisive Moment.
haters gonna hate little boy
and people without sense of humor will have no sense of humor 🙂
Actually according to Zeiss:
Become Carl makes some of the lenses himself – these get the full “Carl Zeiss” branding. Others are made by his brother Steve and since nobody knows who Steve is, they get the generic “Zeiss” branding.
They also have a ‘special’ brother Ira Zeiss they keep in the closet that makes lenses from doodoo and coke bottles.
In 2013 they, Carl Zeiss AG, changed their branding strategy. http://www.imaging-resource.com/news/2013/06/28/zeiss-rethinks-its-branding-removes-carl-from-the-picture
Sorry for the useful answer!
i am reading challenged , a talking video of this would be nice, the smartest guy i ever knew likes to crunch everything by price, basically saying that price, and supply and demand, say everything, sorry 🙂 over simplification sure, but for me a nice starting point
This is one sexy affair~
Your comments are quite epic. I do enjoy reading them. Cheers:)
This is nothing really new we didn’t know about before. Unlike the high end Contax/Zeiss lenses that were both designed and made in Germany before production moved to Kyocera’s own plants (also making the glass elements) in Japan Sony/Zeiss lenses are both designed and made by Sony. Zeiss’s involvement in the process is merely being available for assistance know-how support and giving the quality approval of the design and process.
The claim that Zeiss lenses are exclusivly developed by Zeiss must however be scrutinized. What do Zeiss actually mean? Since Zeiss doesn’t produce these lenses themselves surely some input should come also from the companies who actually make the Zeiss lenses? Maybe Zeiss want to say that they are alone in charge deciding about the internal and exterior design, unlike the Sony/Zeiss lenses where Sony is the actual boss?
We already know that the manual SLR (like ZE and ZF series for Canon and Nikon) and Leica M (ZM) lenses are made by Cosina. While many of the lenses use old Zeiss optical designs that have been just lightly tweaked (The SLR 21/2.8, 28/2.0, 50/1.4 and 85/1.4 are as an exemple very similar to the older Contax/Zeiss lenses.) one can wonder if Cosina had some influence on new designs. Cosina after all, and already before their partnership with Zeiss, have constructed some pretty good lenses themselves under the Voigtländer brand name. Also, while Zeiss certainly decided about the exterior design, who decided about the internal mechanics? While a bit different in look, especially the lenses for Leica, are not that much different in feel. Not surpricing as they are made in the same factory.
While the Loxia lenses like their close ZM couisines should be made by Cosina there are more question marks for the other bird-lines of lenses, Touit, Otus and Batis.
They have similar design. But one line, Otus, is manual only while the other two have AF. Are they all made in the same place or the AF lenses made somewhere else than Otus?
Cosina made some AF lenses with lower build quality in the past. But their production plant is really as far as I know mainly geared for manufacturing manual lenses, not modern AF lenses. Therefore it is doubtful those are being made by Cosina. Otus on the other hand, while manual, look very different to anything made by Cosina. Not that it needs to mean anything. But it raises question marks.
Otus being a prestige design should definitely be designed by Zeiss own optical designers. Also the exterior design language shared with Touit and Batis should be Zeiss, although it would be interesting to know the actual person responsible for the design, like we know who designed the optics of some Leica and Nikon lenses. As to where they are made Cosina should still be the first bet. But some early speculations said Sigma. Maybe because they are the only other company known for producing a big range of full frame prime lenses. On the other hand it would be a bit strange by Zeiss using a partner who is a direct competitor.
With Batis we seriously must question about the exclusive development claim. As reported here the optical design was actually patented by Tamron!: http://www.sonyalpharumors.com/did-tamron-design-the-zeiss-batis-85mm-lens/
As Zeiss is not known for optical image stabilisation. But Tamron’s Vibration Control for lenses can challenge Nikon’s VR and Canon’s IS systems and are sometimes even claimed to be the most effective for full frame lenses. So it seams Zeiss is mostly responsible for the external design and OLED display and quality control, at least for the Batis 85/1.8. If the lens is actually designed by Tamron they propably also manufacture it in their own plant. We also could suspect the 25/2 Batis lens having a lot of Tamron DNA inside.
Touit is a bit of mystery. Before Batis people would speculate about them being made by Sigma. Though after the Batis patent revelation Tamron seem even more propable. But there are a lot of less known optical companies who could also manufacture them. And Zeiss are talking about several partners in Japan. Although some of them only provide glass elements and other parts Zeiss lenses are likely produced in two or even more places.
An intriguing thing is that Zeiss are still the only non Fujinon AF lenses available for Fujifilms X-system and are presented by Fujifilm themselves. Could Fujifilm be involved somehow?
Another question is how come Zeiss can make their own lenses for E-mount but cannot produce their manual SLR lenses in A-mount?
It would be interesting to know the anwer of these questions. Zeiss obviusly don’t want to provide answers for these questions themselves.
If someone actually have som inside information or actually seen where the Otus, Touit and Batis lenses are being made it would be nice if that someone could inform us.
Touit is made by fujifilm… That’s a good thought. It would also explain why someone went to the trouble of designing a third-party lens not only with different mounts and AF electronics but also with physical differences on the barrel.
is the AF better on Fuji bodies than on Sony?
They’re all made in the same place by the same people using the same equipment.
I don’t take Brandons word for gospel. And this is only about Otus lenses, which I concluded most propably are made by Cosina as they are manual focus. But I still would like more reliable confirmation. And what about the Zeiss AF lenses?
hmm, that article cleared up squat.
On the contrary, it shows clearly that 5 people have looked at your lens before you buy it!
Oh really. Isn’t zeiss now known for “we can’t make any more technological advance lenses or camera anymore”. I’ve seen Zeiss lenses that’s definitely made by Tamron, Sigma, Cosina, etc made. A rebadge!
“ZEISS regularly audits the production process of Sony/ZEISS lenses in Sony’s factories.” Obviously they usually forget to check the room where the 16-70 F4 and 24-70 F4 FE’s are being slaughtered in a regular basis… The most important lenses in the game are absolutely disappointing.
I always wanted to know if FE lenses were composed of mineral glass material lenses exclusively or if there were also some organic glass material lenses. Does anyone knows ? I favor mineral glass for its optical qualities stability vs time.