Planet5D posted that video interview with Conversation with Michael Schielhlen, Senior Director from Zeiss. There are a couple of info to share:
1) Michael said that Sony is very popular in Germany. In August for the very first time Sony sold more interchangeable cameras than Nikon and Canon!
2) Zeiss is already working on the third Batis lens development
3) For both Batis and Loxia lenses the next interesting focal lengths are super wide and 135 and 200mm focal lengths
4) Zeiss is surprised by the huge demand of Batis lenses
There is no official way to know how popular the Sony E-mount system is in all countries. It would certainly be interesting to know how sales are in Europe, Asia and US. All I do to check the current “popularity” of cameras is to visit the Amazon sales rankings. And you can notice some differences between countries:
Amazon USA (Click here) shows that DSLR cameras are still the big sellers although Sony is doing quite fine with their A6000 and A7sII cameras.
Amazon Germany (Click here) shows a more homogeneous ranking were both Sony mirrrorless and Nikon/Canon DSLR seem to sell equally fine.
But really that’s not e scientific metric to measure success. Maybe the next Sony financial report will give us some more detailed clue about the recent A7rII and A7sII sales.
Back to Zeiss: What is the next Batis lens you would like to get from Zeiss???
Links to all Zeiss made FE Loxia and Batis lenses:
Zeiss Batis 85mm f/1.8 lens in US at Amazon, Adorama, Bhphoto. In Eu at Amazon DE, WexUK. In Asia at Digitalrev.
Zeiss Batis 25mm f/2.0 lens at Amazon, Adorama, Bhphoto. In EU at Amazon DE, WexUK. In Asia at Digitalrev.
Zeiss Loxia 50mm f/2 Planar T* Lens for Sony E Mount at Amazon, BHphoto, Adorama., WexUK, CameraPro.
Zeiss Loxia 35mm f/2 Biogon T* Lens for Sony E Mount at Amazon, BHphoto, Adorama, WexUK, CameraPro.
Zeiss Loxia 21mm f/2.8 FE lens at BHphoto and Adorama. In Europe at WexUK.
190 Responses
What a pleasant rumor for today!
Rumor lol…you did that on purpose didn’t you 😉
Interesting sales rumor, but quite ambiguous.
If a comment like this were to appear on a Canon website it would be vigorously contested.
Nevertheless it is an interesting rumor especially if it indicates the direction of things to come.
Not ambiguous at all.
If true, it is surprising in one way and not surprising in another.
Surprising to see Sony taking the lead.
Unsurprising because it has been widely known that Asia and Europe markets are more receptive to mirrorless than America.
Batis 135mm would be really great!
Finally!!
They gave handling a 5, but it comes with the old crappy sort of electronic MF in all other E lenses.
What I remembered is that during August it was almost impossible to find an A7R2 in Germany, meanwhile people in US, China etc were already showing off their new toys. Made me wonder if Sony really take the German market seriously.
>For both Batis and Loxia lenses the next interesting focal lengths are super wide and 135 and 200mm focal lengths
Sounds good… a 14mm and 200mm would be a welcome addition
Altough current Batis prices are way over the top
I’d like to see a 50mm 1.4 and a 135 2.0 for the next Batis’. (Batii?)
Will be funny if they’ll make a 135 2.8 instead. Just as with other E-mount lens, “half stop slower than everyone is expecting”.
Uhm that would be a full stop.
Troll.
Zeiss hit the nail on the head with the Batis. After the excellent Sony 55/1.8, FE users wanted similar portrait and wide angle lenses. Zeiss delived and how! Hence the Batis lenses are backordered for at least half a year everywhere.
It will actually be great.
Unfortunately that’s probably more likely, if it’s a part of the Batis lineup.
Zeiss is dead for me since they’ve started this “sell budget tamron designs for triple the price” game.
Excellent, one less person on the waiting queue then
Agreed. This put-down is getting old.
Exactly and many of them make the put-down while walking around with an iPhone which are made with workers getting “third world wages while charging 1st world prices”… the hypocrisy…
iPhone at least gives you the user experience you’ve paid for, while Batis 85… well… you can keep convincing it does, while people are running around with 85 1.4s taking shots that are definitely not worse (and mostly better) than oh-so-sharp Batis.
That’s very subjective, there are plenty of problems with the iPhone as is any measure of what is better photographically. But I will agree with your point about Sigma. They need to get in this game ASAP!
I’m afraid with these “red flags” set by Zeiss f/1.4 pricing on E-mount will be even higher. No matter if it’s Sigma or not. And remember, Sigma had to reverse engineer A-mount to make their lens. Probably E-mount is secured better, that’s why they are out of the game.
The E-mount specification is open, troll. Stop posting nonsense.
Who let the kids into the discussion?
Getting a license for E-mount specs requires approval by Sony and the signing of NDA.
Irrelevant. Sigma is an official, approved, and signed E-mount manufacturer. They have all the specs they need. Your argument of them having to reverse-engineer E-mount is void. Stop posting nonsense.
Ok, void, whatever.
They have that already:
http://www.sigmaphoto.com/19mm-f28-dn-a
Subjective. What is your problem with the Batis 85? Do you have one and have experience how it renders and behaves? Don’t declare your opinion and believes the holy grail for all of us.
The price.
No, I find it fair for what I get. It is my favourite lens right now. Nikons 24/1.4, 35/1.4, 85/1.4 or the Sony 35/1.4, for example, are priced too high for me.
I can declare whatever I want. Just like as you do now.
Exactly. And I declare you a troll!
Ok.
You are embarrassing yourself. Stop acting like a child.
Troll.
It’s plain stupid to call someone “troll” when you are obviously out of arguments. Just don’t get into discussions you don’t have any clue about.
You are a bit troll-y though, so it was a fair point.
Everyone here is a bit trolly.
Except Barry of course. He is serious.
No, he’s just a self-absorbed narcissistic pr*ck.
http://persephonemagazine.com/wp-content/uploads/2013/01/colbert-popcorn.gif
What arguments? Haven’t seen a single one in the whole thread.
iPhones may be expensive for what we are used to pay for a simple phone, but they are VERY aggressively priced for the technology. The big profit Apple makes is just due to the huge sales volume. Your logic is flawed.
As is yours when you say a company goes to Japan to lower cost – that is absurd and was true 40-60 years ago but not today and not in the last 20 years.
Are you really trying to say, that Zeiss is manufacturing in Japan for the same or similar costs than in Germany? What a joke.
No, of course not. Germany is crazy expensive to manufacture in, the point was that if cost cutting was your objective, Japan isn’t the place to do it. Places like Thailand and Vietnam are much cheaper (a lot of Nikon stuff, including the D810, are made in Thailand). While Japan is somewhat cheaper, it is the lens making expertise and the lens making capacity in Japan that also plays a big role. If Zeiss lenses were made in Germany, you’d be paying Leica prices for them.
I don’t care if Tamron is involved or not. What counts is, that they pay 3rd world wages, but charge 1st world prices. That is the major difference to Leica.
Too bad that Sigma is still not present on the mirrorless market. What Sigma offers is way cooler than Zeiss in my book.
So where did you see a copy of Zeiss’ payroll?
Companies go to China,Taiwan or Japan for dramatically lower production costs. One of the main reasons are lower wages. Do you really need to see Zeiss’ payroll to believe this?
Do you believe Zeiss are paying “3rd world wages” to Cosina employees making Zeiss lenses in Japan? If so, please provide evidence.
Clearly there may be a cost element to it, but 3rd world wages?
Of courseI don’t know what exactly they pay at Cosina, but it is significantly less than in the so called “1st world”. Maybe i used way outdated terms to illustrate my point.
I’m talking about the reasons, why they are going to Cosina or Tamron. And these reasons are well known: SIGNIFICANTLY lower costs.
Yes, but you said “3rd world wages”, which is completely and utterly different. This cannot be applied to a German company that contracts Japanese companies as part of its supply chain.
I doubt anybody is being underpaid here, which was your implication.
In Germany they have to pay wages that puts the empoyee in the position that he can actually afford a Zeiss lens.
Why do they close their facilities in Germany if they have to pay the same in Japan or Taiwan?
Do Zeiss manufacturer in Taiwan?
The whole reason we are have having this apparently complete waste of time of a conversation is because you implied Zeiss were paying third world wages. I think we have already established they really are not, and I think you have implied that’s not really what you meant.
I haven’t disputed it may be for cost reasons (not just wages BTW), but your third world claim was ridiculous.
Here are the so called “first world” nations – note it includes Japan!
http://www.nationsonline.org/oneworld/first_world.htm
what you call Cosina are the Zeiss factories in Japan that probably has higher wages than Germany as net sums…..
Sprry but this stupid comments amount to trolling.
Are you suggesting Japan is NOT a 1st world country?
Sigma did very well going from a so-so-crappy-backfocusing-zoom-maker to top notch primes.
Where do they pay 3rd world wages in Germany or Japan???? The lenses are design in Germany and built in Japan……
Awww……… Kiril!! I don’t answer. You know what I meant. 😉
In Japan they pay their workers with seppukus.
Trust me, Japanese wages aren’t good. I’m an immigrant and I make more than most people around me, even though they have good educations.
What’s “good”?
I wonder what it’s like working in a lens manufacturing plant. It’s got to get boring at some point.
Cool! Where can I buy the Tamron versions for 1/3rd the price!?
You can’t. And as you can see Zeiss is still shocked with the number of people who actually fell for this “buy slow overpriced lens as there’s no alternative anyway” thing.
Perhaps you should refrain from commenting about things you don’t know anything about.
The sharpness figures for both Batii are off the charts. Sure Zeiss, Sony, Tamron, Cosina (Voigtländer) are all in bed together. But if this construction enables them to deliver Leica quality at a Sony price, I’m all up for it.
The Batii are *incredible* value for money.
Yeah, yeah, I’ve already heard about megapixels and sharpness from marketing. How much sharpness do you need for portraiture? Macro sharpness? Enjoying pixel peeping dermatology shots?
If you are happy with a soft lens why are you looking at Zeiss? Troll.
I’ve bought my every Zeiss lens before definitely not for sharpness or other marketing bs. Sharpness was actually the last of parameters I’ve looked at for portraiture lens.
“How much sharpness do you need for portraiture?”
“sharpness or other marketing bs”
Exactly the same can be said about lens speed, and some lame stop of difference. How much light do you need with modern sensors? How much subject separation do you need to make an acceptable shot? 🙂
The sharpness figures for Sigma Art lenses are off the charts too. But they are not overpriced.
Sigma lenses are also fantastic value. But I don’t see them producing compact mirrorless lenses like the Batis yet. Hopefully in the future…
I have the ART lenses, too. I like the 35 especially. Nevertheless, I like the contrast and less clinical look better from Zeiss, paired with the great ability to overcome flares and low CAs I experience, better.
What is “clinical look”? If you want a lens that is less perfect optically, you have tons of choices on ebay.
But we are talking about ART and Batis right?
Again, what other than effects of optical aberations does “clinical look” mean? It means less perfect, right?
There are different kinds of aberrations. Depending on what kind of aberrations prevail, the look changes. Coatings make a difference, too, for example.
My Batis is sharper, has more contrast, and transition of in to out of focus areas pleases me better. It provides better flare resistance, which is important as we often shoot our models with the sun behind them.
I understand what you say. However, herein lies the dilemma: compared to what? There are simply no real alternatives. If you ask me, thats why people stay in line, despite the high prices.
BTW: I used Leica lenses (and also one Zeiss) extensively. I loved them, but what I dont buy is, that there is such a thing as “Zeiss mojo” or “Leica mojo” in a lens.
Well, there is a specific rendering of Zeiss lenses, for example. How much it matters to you and whether it is enough to call it a “mojo” is another story though. As an example, I personally see a clear difference between the rendering of my Sony and Voigtlander lenses (consistent through all three CVs I own).
I agree and think, too, that it is difficult to get a certain look across all lenses for Zeiss, for example. That is why I look at each individually to determine whether I like the rendering before buying, since those lenses aren’t cheap. With the Sony 35/1.4 I have a problem, as it is not as sharp as the Sigma below f2.8, strongly so before f2, but the rendering is nice. The 35/1.4 Art is one of our most used lenses for weddings, 95% of the time wide open to f2. So sharpness in that range is important to _us_. I will rent the Sony 35/1.4 nevertheless and try it out.
It means tack sharp wide open with less than stellar bokeh. That’s EXACTLY what it means. The term has been popularized by people like Steve Huff.
Well, I have heard the term often in regard to Sigma Art lenses. Many reviews say the bokeh is less than stellar:
https://cdn.photographylife.com/wp-content/uploads/2013/07/Sigma-35mm-f1.4-Bokeh-Comparison-960×641.jpg
To me, the Sigma and the Rokinon have the most pleasing, perfectly smooth bokeh. The pronounced outer rings of the Nikon and the Zeiss look nasty and distracting to me. I find the Sigmas not clinical at all. The opposite is the case.
I used the Summicron M 35mm/2 (Version IV, non-asph) for many years, which was called the “king of bokeh”. Everyone said it and everyone repeated it. The thing is, that this lens has a rather terrible bokeh. Totally different than the Summilux 50.
Ahhhh, and now we come to Mr. Huff. His site is quite entertaining. I like it. Like SAR. But, this guy is as scientific as the Pope. He is also into paranormal activities:
http://huffparanormal.com/
ehuff…errrm….enuff said.
BTW: These “nice” bokeh rings, which some reviewers love, are in fact effects of positive spherical aberration caused by the brighter edges and darker centers of OOF blur circles.
Whatever you like, but the smooth blur circles (without the bright edges) of the Sigma look everything but clinical.
That’s interesting to hear and I have been quite impressed from what I’ve seen online- 50 and 35 Art. I might pick up that 35mm. That’s what I need right now- a 35 for wedding work since the Tamron 35mm 1.8 isn’t available in A mount yet.
I always asked myself a similar question and don’t know until today:
“What exactly is this Zeiss rendering?”
Which Sigma Art full frame mirrorless lenses are you referring to?
You wanna tease me, right? 😛
He is obviously likes to provocate. So better to ignore.
Fair point.
So who is provoking who, given I’ve not even talked to this Mike person before he started teaching me and calling me a troll. Funny guys you are though.
Brands sell to other brands optical formula, and/or make their lens in other brands factories, etc. There is nothing new here, no imposture. It works like that since decades. Between an optical formula and the result of a final product, there is a lot of things : nano-coating, manufacturing tolerances, so copy to copy variation, build quality, durability, speed and accuracy of the AF, etc… Seeing a “Tamron design” sold in a “Zeiss lens” is by far not enough to make a scene…
Well, Tamron has a story of making slower-than-standart primes with a so-so rendering and good sharpness. Exactly what I see in Batis today. And I don’t like where it’s going.
I’m surprised you are able to see anything today through all of that bitterness.
Finally! A positive comment from you.
f/1.8 for a 85, especially for a mirrorless lens, is not what I’d called a “slower than standard” prime. Neither “so-so rendering”. The fresh released tamron 35 and 45 1.8 have good sharpness, but uncertain AF performance. This is tamron-like. On my mind, the Batis are not.
Indeed.
So far the Batis lenses have my favorite rendering of all FE lenses. AF is as good as Sony glass in my opinion.
In 2015, “standard fast” prime is 50 1.4. Doesn’t matter if it’s mirrorless lens or not.
Batis makes use of CDAF? Probably that’s why it’s better than the rest of Tamrons.
“In 2015, “standard fast” prime is 50 1.4. Doesn’t matter if it’s mirrorless lens or not.”
No it isn’t. Google “fast lens”. How many of the articles say that a fast lens has to be f/1.4 or faster?
You probably are not familiar with term “standard fast”. That’s a specific lens, 50 1.4
No. Standard refers generally to lenses around 50mm, of course. But they do not have to be f/1.4.
Canon disagrees with you too:
http://www.canon.co.uk/for_home/product_finder/cameras/ef_lenses/standard_and_medium_telephoto/ef_50mm_f1.8_ii/
“Standard fast”, if it means something, is absolutely not 1.4. It’s more 1.8-2. It has always been. There is just around 50mm that 1.4 could be considered as “standard”, but still : considerably more 50 f/1.8 than f/1.4.
With other focal length, (wide angle or tele), 1.4 or more has always been for high end products in the DSLR world. Dont expect the high end products to be all in 1.4 with camera of the A7 size. The quality of a lense is not only related to its aperture.
“In 2015, “standard fast” prime is 50 1.4″. Yes and no. The 50 to 55mm lenses are the easier to design fast. 85 and 25 are not. And yes, it matters if it’s mirrorless or not. With A7 sized cameras, you should get used to have high end lenses with 1/2 f stop less otherwise you will be disappointed all the time.
You think with DSLR of the mid 2000 in mind : 1.8 is the cheap line, 1.4 is the high end. It just doesn’t work like that anymore, and it doesn’t work like that at all for high end lenses manufacturers.
–> Today, the lenses have to resolve, 30, 40 and even more mpx, which implies that they are getting bigger (and they have VR even for primes). They are far better wide open than before. 2 decades ago, the 1.4 aperture was barely usable itself, it was just used in extreme lighting conditions where you couldn’t stop down your lens. f/1.2 lenses were even common too for a 50mm. In the main time, you have far better high isos capabilities than before and no need for this “just in case” aperture for a lot of use. So high end 1.8 products is totally what you can expect on Sony A7, it’s just obvious, deal with it.
And past or present, Zeiss, like other high end brands, has always had expensive primes with f/1.8 f/2 capabilities. Just look at the milvus, there is a 50 1.4 but the f/2 cost 1300$. Look at the price of a Leica summicron (f/2)…
A7 size is not a problem for 35 1.4Z somehow.
This is the only try from Sony in 1.4 and the returns are very mixed about the size and usability. (and copy to copy variation btw, but this is another story)
Is this not a new trend… as in, just the past few months? Outside of the 35mm and 45mm they offer a fairly standard selection of zooms and primes.
Well, their macro primes are good too.
So your first statement was false. Good to know.
“3) For both Batis and Loxia lenses the next interesting focal lengths are super wide and 135 and 200mm focal lengths”
YES!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!
“Amazon Germany (Click here) shows a more homogeneous ranking were both Sony mirrrorless and Nikon/Canon DSLR seem to sell equally fine.”
False. Even on Amazon Germany Canon and Nikon DSLRs are firmly in the lead, first Sony ILC being just a58 – not even mirrorless – at #21 (Nikon D3300 being #4 and Canon taking both #15 and #18).
Of course there is a way to see .. real figures and not feelings
http://www.cipa.jp/stats/dc_e.html
and of course amazon best sellers are a good way to see real market shares..
mirrorless is not really a big performer around the world .. more or less 22 to 25% of the market for a quite long time now. Many photgraphers like I am .. came back to DSLR after less than 2 years using mirrorless ..(unacceptable battery life, lack of Lenses, colours, often compressed dynamic from 14EV to 8 jpg’s EV leads to whashed greys and fluo colours, AF unable to shoot action/sport, etc .. )
Online shopping is not so big in Germany as it is in the US or UK. Germans have a preference to see the items before they buy, so brick and mortar shops are still solid in Germany and do move a lot of inventory even if the size of the store itself doesn’t appear to imply that.
While there is an Amazon.de, their rankings may not be representative of the German market as a whole.
Also, CIPA only shows shipment, but not region or country specific volumes. Don’t confuse yourself.
Cipa shows the production and shipment of all cameras made in Japan and it breaks it down into regions and is thus the best and most comprehensive indicator of market penetration by mirrorless compared to DSLR.
http://www.cipa.jp/stats/documents/e/d-201509_e.pdf
Using the current CIPA data the entirety of mirrorless shipments accounts for only 26% of the overall interchangeable lens market. Given that Olympus seems to have the leading mirrorless seller . I am not sure that I would take such claims very seriously.
135/1.8(2) protrait machine would be nice, Batis or Sony or Zony, I don’t care.
Zony the Chinese Ripoff
Might prefer Zony: I think the AF Meyer be better…
Here is a portrait machine for you 😉 😀
http://www.videoamusement.com/wp-content/uploads/2014/09/neverland.jpg
IT HAS SONY GUTS!
ROFLMAO – I love that movie!
I don’t think the. Interview said 200 was on the cards soon, in fact when asked about 180-200 Michael said you’ll be waiting a while, our customers are more interested in ultra wide, in 100 in 135 and other things
People hear what they want to hear.
Does Zeiss have any 200mm prime designs since the old Sonnars?
I love it when the specialist market analysts at SAR come out to challenge a director from a photographic company.
Haha, yes.
Quite honestly I could not care less which brand sells more, as long as Zeiss keeps investing in Loxia and Batis.
If you google phrase “Sony was surprised by” it’ll drop out a long list of things, including the PS4 popularity, many PS4 games popularity, some Sony films popularity, E-mount popularity, etc. This is how Sony marketing works – they throw something out of the door and then they are surprised it became popular. 😉 And that’s much like Zeiss was surprised by Batis 85 popularity.
I still feel that this is just a story Zeiss is telling the public to cover some manufacturing issue which creates shortages in parts or quality problems. I have no way to know/prove of course, just pure speculation…
Guess a long term relationship does make Zeiss pick up some Sony habit @_@
I would like a 135mm F2.8 to F4 : keep it small and light even at the cost of slower max aperture !
Does anybody have a direct link to the interview?
You mean one like the video interview directly below the headline? 😉
Ah, sorry, the video itself was not loaded on my computer.
Ok, this Zeiss stuff was discussed good, give me more SR1 A99II rumors now.
To be fair, that 135 nod was sort of fished-out and not volunteered. Much as I’d love an FE 135 with Zeiss branding, I’d take it with a grain of salt. And there was nothing said about a 200 other than “it could be a while.”
I’d personally really love to see Zeiss make a 85mm f1.8 Batis lens. . . . . .
I heard there was one coming, but so far all we’ve seen is “Coming Soon” and “Backordered” statuses on all the most popular seller’s sites.
… and a 25mm f/2 would be great too 😉
Tamron should jump in the holes this leaves in the E-mount line and start selling a Tamron 85 f/1.8 for $1200 and a Tamron 25 f/2 for $1300… there would be no shortage on those as nobody in their right mind would fork out that cash on a slowish Tamron prime 😀
Observations from the amazon lists: Sony A58 surprisingly high up (in Germany)? Personally I thought the A mounts really are all hogs (in this light the A68 is maybe not that stupid). Both Germany and USA has Sony A7ii and A7s as the first full frame camera listed. Not bad for Sony, very worrying for the big boys. USA doesn’t seem to have compacts included in the lists (or still only Germans like them)…
I believe in what he says. The sony Full Frame sales is excellent, and native E-mount Full frame lens sales is excellent too.
My theory is: this is why Sony allowed the A7ii to have Unlocked PDAF to 3rd party adapted lenses. Because Sony has seen the sales data bot Batis, Loxia, Sony Zeiss, and they conclude that non-native Canon lenses can never be a threat to their sales. So they allowed both A7Rii and A7ii to have unlocked PDAF.
It fits together with the high sales data.
if you see a review about A7Rii AF on native and adapted lenses, there is always a “but not this xyz-mode” with the adapted. And it is only a software issue that Sony controls.
I would like to see a Batis 2/50 makro planar. I will dump my Sony 55 1.8 mini Otus for something like that.
Was thinking along this line as well, but then i realised i prefer the 35-85 combo and seldom touched the 55mm field of view :/
Alright, but I want something that focuses closer and isn’t as huge as a 100mm macro. The 35 and 85 doesn’t provide that.
Y don’t you like the 55 1.8? It’s one of the best E-mount lenses. 5mm shouldn’t change much of view… 🙂
I love it. It’s like a diamond in the sky. But I love macro too. That’s why I suggest Zeiss combines both in one gem of a lens. Otus-like sharpness, but a much wider focus range.
It’s time for an E-mount extension tube set with full electronic control.
The problem is that you compromise the infinity focus.
Of coarse.
For “only sometimes macro shooters” like me, extension tubes are the better option because:
a) i can use it on every lens
b) macro lenses are typically bigger – I want small lenses
Yes, I shoot macro often, that’s why I choose B) but I want it small. The market for that seems small though.
135mm 2.5 Batis please.
Not saying there is no need for shorter fl, A7 FE series already have enough from MF to AF lenses.
Sony FE shooters are thirsty for Batis 135f2. I would suggest Zeiss save their R&D resources on shorter fl lenses and focus more 135f2 and 200f2.8. At same time they need to improve either their Batis manufacture processes or maybe expand Batis manufacture lines to meet the today demand. I love my Batis lenses, but have to wait for 5-6months is little silly.
+1
If the 135 f/2 is going to be same superb as the current 135 f/2 APO and feature AF as well – that would be so awesome. Hope the price won’t be like Otus though 🙂
Geez…everybody has hipster glasses these days.
And this is all from happy accidents rather than a system designed from the ground up to be professional grade.
http://www.inc.com/ilan-mochari/minolta-innovation-myths.html
Article:
February 20 happens to be the 30th birthday of when the Minolta 7000–the first autofocus (AF), single-lens reflex (SLR) camera–debuted on the market.
How significant was this development? So significant that Canon–a competitor to Minolta back then–has memorialized the moment on its company timeline:
In February 1985, two months prior to the release of the “T80” camera, an event that rocked the camera industry occurred. Minolta introduced a true AF 35mm SLR camera, “Minolta a-7000,” followed by the “Minolta a-9000” in September, while Nikon released “Nikon F-501” camera in April 1986. These SLR cameras were an immediate hit upon release and in addition to the already high domestic demand, high demand was generated in the North American market as well. The 35mm SLR camera leapt to stardom overnight.
It’s not everyday that a technology company admits its competitor “rocked” the industry.
And boy, did Minolta rock it. The Minolta 7000 “opened a whole new market of consumers who wanted the sharpness of 35mm photographs without having to master complex focus controls,” recounts a Harvard Business Review story from May, 1990. “And by 1986, with 36 percent of the market, Minolta eclipsed Canon as the 35mm market leader.”
You’ve Seen This Film Before
You can guess how the story ends: Despite its first-mover advantage, Minolta was unable to sustain its edge. Canon danced through the door Minolta had kicked open, and regained the lead. The HBR story notes:
Canon’s camera division retaliated by introducing two products that exploited a breakthrough in lens technology: sonically driven motors mounted in the lens to allow 50 percent faster focusing. By the end of 1986, Canon had pulled even with Minolta, and over the next 15 months it battled to remain at the top by hammering out three other models that covered additional segments.
There’s one large innovation lesson to learn here. It’s a lesson that, by this point, is more like a reminder, because it often recurs around introductions of pioneering consumer products: It’s often wiser to be a smart follower than it is to be a first mover.
“You don’t have to look far for cases of second and third movers that let pioneers beat a path, only to come in and blow them away,” notes Inc contributor Adam Bluestein. The examples are numerous: Nintendo vs. Atari. Amazon vs. Book.com. Google vs. Yahoo.
Then there’s Rocket Internet, an incubator based in Berlin. As Mark Scott points out in a New York Times profile of the company, Rocket Internet’s entire premise is borrowing business models that have already proven effective.
“Rocket Internet has turned the usual business model for technology companies on its head, compiling a team of high-flying finance and management specialists and arming them with the money they need to mimic already successful Internet companies–applying these proven ideas in other countries, often in emerging markets,” he writes.
But wait, there’s more.
Apple did not invent MP3s or the MP3 player; but their products were the ones consumers liked best. Amazon did not invent the e-reader; but theirs is the most popular. Like the Beastie Boys, they sampled the originals, picked the best parts to please customers, and put the proper sheen on them.
They figured out how to move the crowd. And today, they are more widely known (and they have sold more records) than most of the artists they’ve sampled.
Protect Your Intellectual Property
While the Minolta 7000 story is a classic first-mover parable, there’s more to it than that. There are ironies galore.
For example: Though Minolta was indeed the first mover, it was not, strictly speaking, the inventor. In fact, it was the Leica camera company that invented the autofocus lens, back in the 1970s. But Leica “sold the patent to Japanese rival Minolta, reasoning that its customers knew how to focus,” notes the Wall Street Journal in a 2008 Leica profile.
And while Minolta was wise to acquire Leica’s autofocus intellectual property, years later Minolta lost a major lawsuit to Honeywell over–you guessed it–autofocus intellectual property.
“In 1991, Minolta was ordered to pay Honeywell $127.5 million after a court ruled it had infringed on the latter’s autofocus camera patent,” explains an HBR story from 2000 called “Discovering New Value in Intellectual Property.” The lawsuit severely weakened the company.
Years later, Minolta missed a chance to recover. Instead of innovating around the advent of digital photography, it “bet the farm” on something called the “Advanced Photo System,” observes Herbert Keppler in a Popular Photography requiem for Minolta. “I don’t believe Minolta has ever recovered financially,” Keppler writes.
In 2003, a reeling Minolta merged with Konica to form thecombined Konica Minolta company. In 2006, the company stopped making cameras all together–providing Popular Photography with the occasion for its requiem.
Consider all this, especially if you’re a founder at work on a game-changing innovation.
Your product may rock your industry. But the goal is to be a consistent hit-maker. There’s money–and history–at stake on it.
Why nobody asks about STF, I wonder? I know Zeiss 1.8/135 won over Minolta eventually but modern cameras don’t need that much light anymore… There’s always adapted route of course.
While I haven’t tried the STF, I’ve looked at dozens and dozens of pictures including reviews. I just don’t get the hype and I am a bokeh nut. Yes, the bokeh is very smooth but I’m not sure it’s that much better than a 9 bladed aperature. Not to my eyes at least…and it’s still expensive with no AF.
I own a STF 135mm lens…
Perfect lens.
I own 14 A-Mount lenses btw.
I’ve owned well over 40 lenses in just three years. I’ll buy this one if it really is that worthy. Have you shot the 135mm 1.8 and if so- would you grab the STF over this one?
I only have STF, never shot with 135/1.8. It’s worth buying because it’s so special and very good optically(very sharp, no distortion, no vignetting, perfect bokeh). I got my copy from Amazon at $998. Only downsides are the CA control is really bad wide open which is at F2.8/T4.5 and at T4.5 it’s not a lens for night shooting, not for me at least.
That was my impression too, although STF pages on Flickr are simply laughable – it is amazing what people can do with this jewel!
I’m a bokeh nut and I would love the STF. I’m just afraid that I won’t use it much if I actually buy it. It’s not only the (manual stepless! or automatic) aperture which is special, the main differentiator is of course the apodization element. That is the main cause of the perfect blur fall-off of out of focus highlights.
The main issue is that Sony has the amazing Zeiss 135 f1.8, with AF and over 2 stops more light transmission. I bet that that lens sells 10 times better than the MF STF which has better bokeh but lower practicality.
I asked about STF two months ago and got 7 likes. If this doesn’t tell Sony something, then nothing will…
It’s a manual-only lens. Little sense releasing it for FE, it can be used on FE perfectly fine the way it is now.
Alright, Zeiss and Sony, listen, you are no longer allowed to say that you didn’t expect your cameras and lenses to be so popular. You can use that excuse once, maaaybe twice. But by now it just sounds like you’re lying. Assume the lenses will be popular from the start!
I would happily take a 135mm 2.8.
Zeiss is surprised at the popularity of Batis lenses? Did they learn nothing from the release of Loxia?
The Batis is probably in much greater demand, as it has AF and doesn’t replicate previously available focal lengths. Loxia demand probably didn’t tell Zeiss anything. Zeiss probably knew demand was going to be higher, but who knows whether demand was 2x, 3x, 4x higher than it forecast?
Yep.
I would assume the demand 10 times higher.
My pro retailer said he has never experienced such a pre order run than with the Batis lenses and the A7RII. AT the day of the release of the A7RII he received a delivery of 80 units – didn’t serve the overall pre order list…
For the Batis 85 he is still waiting for his backorder of around 70pcs, until now he just received one bunch with 10pcs. At least the 25mm is now available he said.
Yes, Batis is ‘probably’ in greater demand. Doesn’t negate the fact they were taken by surprise a second time. Not sure why you would think Loxia demand wouldn’t tell them anything. It’s pretty normal for a company to factor previous demand when making projections, and I’m sure they could come to the same conclusions as you when considering AF and focal lengths.
Maybe they did, but demand was even greater than best-case forecasts. There is no way to know for sure until the pre-orders start flooding in.
Loxia is not sold/ordered as often as Batis
I didn’t say it was. It was however in short supply when first released.
Let alone that it is the only AF lens of many people’s optimum portrait focal length for the A7 series.
I would have thought that, with the evident relative success of these cameras and what you rightly say about the Loxia, Zeiss would have been heavily geared up for this lens.
Then again, what do I know…?
Hi Pete. At last, we agree on something!
But seriously, glad we are on friendly terms. 😉
I do try to be a decent bloke, as life is way too short!
Maybe Zeiss hasn’t the production capability to fulfil the demands of the market at all.
And nobody of Zeiss will say:
“Don’t release any FE-lenses, because we can not produce enough of them”
Of course they wouldn’t say that, and yes, please Zeiss, release more lenses.
My point was it was foolish to say they were surprised, again. Best to say demand is very high, and keep it at that.
Exactly
Even if these are exceptional lenses, they have their downsides (price, size). I’m pretty sure Zeiss is well aware of these and that’s why they probably expected lesser sales than actually happened. Just my theory. Their astonishment makes sense to me.
Same. F/2.8 is plenty fast at 135mm, and depth of field is still quite shallow, but the size would be dramatically reduced from an f/2.
Those who really want a fast 135 can get the excellent A mount 135/1.8 with an LA-EA4.
I find the LAEA4 too limiting. AF performance is not that great for the 135/1.8, esp. in backlight and dim light, AF-points are limited, and I often had issues with contacts when humidity is high. f2 would be great, since would like to have a stop more light for weddings.
Amazon no longer seems to list bestsellers but their charts
seem to be about “featured ” so not a very reliable measure. Though looking at B&H Sony are still doing well though the D750 tops the FF list
200mm? Nikon’s 200mm f/2 VRII or Canon’s 200mm f/2L IS would be hard to beat… If those lenses go for $5700, wondering how much the Zeiss will cost 🙂
“What is the next Batis lens you would like to get from Zeiss???” At least the 85mm if it’s available by 2020… 🙂
I got mine 😛
Lucky you 🙂
Patience indeed some luck.
Hopefully, it will be like Canon 200mm f/2.8. Lightweight and supreme quality
I would say the inventor of mirrorless have been pana and oly with m43. Samsung, Sony and Fuji are the followers, with Sony most successful amongst them.
But Canon did very wise copy 18mm flange distance for its EF-M mount. So literally EVERY Zeiss lens can easily adopted to Canon-mount if Canon does a Big-Bang FF EOS-M. That would make Canon the follower of the most successful follower.
I’d like a 135 f2 for portraiture in Zony or Batis
And then something slower than 2.8; maybe 135 f3.5 Loxia for a super sharp backpacking tele landscape lens…
Sony has gotten ahead by slaughtering the holy cow DSLR, something that Canon and Nikon dare not do as they are too heavily invested and had been too successful selling this now obsolete design. To wedded to the old ways and thus prone to suffering creative destruction. Their lenses, however, are still superior. This used to be a strong selling point also for their cameras but with the new Sony cameras adapting and focusing these lenses fast, this is no longer so.
… is what we’ve been hearing for the last 7 years or so.
But definitely it will happen next year for sure. Or maybe the year after.
Next year is just around the corner. Patience! It is inevitable. Or do you know a good reason for having a mirror inside of your camera? I know photographers who ditched their Canon DSLR for a Sony but hung on to their Canon lenses.