The original message from Zeiss on their Facebook page
Back in November 2103 Zeiss promised to launch new Full Frame Lenses for mirrorless systems. Well according to a 100% trustworthy source Zeiss has scheduled a new announcement to announce those lenses. I don’t have the exact announcement date but he said it’s coming damn soon (within the next 20 days). And the trusted source said E-mount owners will love the new stuff. Hands ready on your credit card guys! 🙂
I have no specs of the new lenses yet but Zeiss already made manual focusing lenses for “non-DSLR”. These are the Zeiss “Full Frame” ZM analog camera lenses:
[shoplink 10875 ebay]Distagon T* 2,8/15 ZM (Click here to see price on eBay)[/shoplink].
[shoplink 9803 ebay]Distagon T* 4/18 ZM (Click here to see price on eBay)[/shoplink].
[shoplink 9804 ebay]Biogon T* 2,8/21 ZM (Click here to see price on eBay)[/shoplink].
[shoplink 9804 ebay]C Biogon T* 4,5/21 ZM (Click here to see price on eBay)[/shoplink].
[shoplink 9805 ebay]Biogon T* 2,8/25 ZM (Click here to see price on eBay)[/shoplink].
[shoplink 9806 ebay]Biogon T* 2,8/28 ZM (Click here to see price on eBay)[/shoplink].
[shoplink 9808 ebay]Biogon T* 2/35 ZM (Click here to see price on eBay)[/shoplink].
[shoplink 9808 ebay]C Biogon T* 2,8/35 ZM (Click here to see price on eBay)[/shoplink].
[shoplink 9809 ebay]C Sonnar T* 1,5/50 ZM (Click here to see price on eBay)[/shoplink].
[shoplink 9809 ebay]Planar T* 2/50 ZM (Click here to see price on eBay)[/shoplink].
[shoplink 9810 ebay]Sonnar T* 2/85 ZM (Click here to see price on eBay)[/shoplink].
[shoplink 9810 ebay]Tele-Tessar T* 4/85 ZM (Click here to see price on eBay)[/shoplink].
—
Message to sources: You can send me more info anonymously by using the contact form you see on the very right of your browser. You can also contact me directly at sonyalpharumors@gmail.com.
For readers: Subscribe the RSS feed (Click here) and Twitter (Click here) stream and the Facebook fan page (Click here) in order to not miss any news!
—
Reminder (SR = Sonyrumor):
SR1=probably fake rumor
SR2=rumor from unknown sources
SR3=50% chance it is correct
SR4=rumor from known sources
SR5=almost certainly correct!
0 Responses
Sounds great! Could they convince me to surrender my RX1 for an A7/r? Only if the 35mm lens they bring is f2 or faster and performs as excellently as the RX1 sonnar does at all equivalent apertures…only then.
I’m only interested in M mount when it comes to manual focus lenses. It comes down to the pedigree of choice that’s already out there – Leica, Zeiss ZM, Voigtlander VM, as well as their ability to hold prices.
These proposed manual Zeiss lenses are going to be big in comparison, due to telecentric design necessary to get rays past the thick sony sensor without aberrations.
For me I’ll wait for a real Ricoh fullframe GXR, A7 filter conversion kit, or else stick with a Leica digital, or Ikon film etc.
I really doubt there’s enough commercial opportunity to support more than one mount in this space and M mount is already the standard.
ok
Sorry, Was more riding the top-comment, than responding!
no worries!
A7S seems a big improvement here.
It’s not. I already tried some lenses, seen other lenses perform on the net and they still suck on the A7s. Lenses that smear on A7r still smear on A7s, difference is in color cast, A7s isnt as bad there. Color cast you can correct, smearing you cant.
Above poster is somewhat correct, the only thing he didnt mention is that M mount cameras are not immune to this, lenses are being made more telecentric in order to fight this. Same is true for all wider lenses for E-mount and will be necessary for all future lenses too.
Will not happen 😉
Will they by fully manual or focus by wire? Manual focus with the 50/1.8 on our nex c3 is right up there with water boarding…
Why would Zeiss bother with focus by wire? Focus by wire is only there because MF via the AF motor makes lenses easier to design and small. If a lens is MF only, there is no reason to have focus by wire.
One advantage of focus by wire on the A7 is that the camera displays the exact focus distance to the nearest metre, which is a bit more accurate than using a scale on the lens.
I don’t know whether it is possible for Zeiss to supply a traditional manual focus ring, but feedback electronic distance data to the camera. That would be pretty neat.
Agreed.
E-mount zoom lenses feed focal length info to the cameras, so I’d say it’s definitely possible to measure physical movement and transmit it as data.
I don’t remeber seeing a focus scale. I remember seeing some line that shows “flower-to Mountain” Nothing to indicare distance accurately. Lens scales are more accurate because they show you the parameters of distance that something is in focus. Not whether I am at flower distance or mountain. Maybe somewhere it does show the distance but that doesnt tell you whether you are in focus. And with the a7 and its false focus confirmation and terrible low light focusing (both auto becuase it just hunts and manual because the evf is too grainy) you almost need manual focus.
Seeing this post just annoys me. Why zeiss thinks there is a market for manual focus lenses because people are mounting other lenses on the A series is such stupidity.
How difficult is a full body shot with a 85mm at 1.8 using a manual lens?
Subject is still – EASY!
Subject is moving around predictably – HARDER, BUT DOABLE
Dogs and children – Harder than cold fusion
In the case of Dogs and Children, prefocusing and having an itchy shutter finger are your friend.
Doable. I do a lot with the 135 F2.8 T4.5 STF lens for Sony A-Mount (and 135 is even far worse than 85 for DOF). Which is MF only. But you need to be calm, have a few quiet seconds to set the focus. Focus peaking and liveview zoom will help you a lot with that.
Contrasty lenses are relatively easy to focus, especially on a camera with good focus peaking (my NEX-5n had very bad focus peaking and I didn’t use it at all; my new a6000 has great focus peaking and I rely on it totally). Jupiter 9 that I have (85mm f2.0) is lousy lens when it comes to contrast, and I have a very hard time focusing (even focus peaking on a6000 gets confused). On the other hand, Canon 100mm f2.8 is very easy to focus (and its DOF is very similar to Jupiter’s). Here’s a set completely covered by MF lenses: Nikon 50/1.8, Canon 100/2.8 and Jupiter 135/4.0 (only a few photos are taken with Jupiter, and most of the others are shot wide open): https://www.flickr.com/photos/zorglub76/sets/72157635130564037
Pretty sure the focus peaking is the same on the 2 models you reference. You’re seeing a change in the LCD screens ability to show detail. Not the focus peaking.
Easy on every camera I ever used for target that doesnt move.
If it moves, dont even bother trying to shoot it.
Finally, native E-mount manual focus prime lenses would be amazing.
I don’t even care about the image quality as long as they have compact sizes and true manual controls and can be used without finicky adapters.
What I wonder is: will these basically be M-mount lenses with electronic M->E mount adapters attached to the back or completely new lenses? Will there be f/1.4 lenses or not?
Wider Zeiss M-mount lenses are poor on digital, mate. They’ll have to make new ones from scratch.
Yes, it seems so.
It’s getting hot again…. GAS!
Take two tums.
Short review/assessment: Would need a miracle to make some of these wide lenses work. But I hope for a miracle.
Distagon T* 2,8/15 ZM – One of world’s greatest lenses, but mixed reviews on the A7 / A7r
Distagon T* 4/18 ZM – Own this lens. Really bad smearing in corners at all apertures. Typical “italian flag effect” On positive side, is amazingly detailsed with classic (real) Zeiss contrast
Biogon T* 2,8/21 ZM – Completely awful on A7 / A7r. Doubtful this design will make sense
C Biogon T* 4,5/21 ZM Better than the above, still not good. Doubtful a Biogon design will make it on this system
Biogon T* 2,8/25 ZM No experience
Biogon T* 2,8/28 ZM Still has significant smearing at this focal length
Biogon T* 2/35 ZM (Click here to see price on eBay). Comparable to Leica Summicron 35mm ASPH. It’s a great “in the center” lens, but still has significant smearing in the edges and corners that doesn’t resolve on stopping down. The color “Italian flag” effect is very controllable with this lens. Classic Zeiss look (unlike the fake Sony-designed Zeiss)
C Biogon T* 2,8/35 ZM (Click here to see price on eBay). This lens actually works pretty well. Still has some corner smearing. Sharpness monster.
C Sonnar T* 1,5/50 ZM (Click here to see price on eBay). Jeckyll & Hyde lens. Tons of character, but it’s considered “soft” at wider apertures. It’s just beautiful though. Chart & graph people will hate it
Planar T* 2/50 ZM (Click here to see price on eBay). Amazing lens. Even better would be an iteration of the akro Planar 50mm design from the DSLR range
Sonnar T* 2/85 ZM (Click here to see price on eBay). If they brought this lens back, it would the best on any system. I like it more than the $3500 Leica 90mm APO Summicron f/2
Tele-Tessar T* 4/85 ZM (Click here to see price on eBay). No experience with this lens. f/4 for an 85mm is a little limiting.
I think they are making all lenses from scratch so you are asking for the same ZM performance but with the new designs?
If so, then I wouldn’t want the 35mm f2 ZM to be the benchmark when the RX1’s Sonnar is clearly superior.
I would say the same goes for the 25mm. Sony’s SLR 24mm f2 and the ZF.ZE f2 variant of their 25mm are more consistent performers across the frame than the biogon design. Biogon is nice, for ultra wides (Contax G21 and Contax G16) but the future lies in the more flexible Sonnar and Distagon designs.
Finally, I used to have the 2/35mm Biogon. While “comparable” to the 35mm cron asph, it wasn’t as great anyways. The G35mm Planar was much, much better.
If classic is what you are looking for, then Planar and Tessar offer the best but I doubt Zeiss would want to use those formulas for lenses that, upon their release, will be immediately compared to the Leica M mount lenses and the Cosina Voigtlander lenses (some of which, are very good)
It’s hard to say where they will want to go on any of this. Completely agree that they have to stay away from Biogons.
Overally, I don’t believe Zeiss minds comparisons to Leica. I personally prefer their 35 Biogon f/2 (and own the Summicron – go figure). By the time you get to this place with these RF lenses, it’s mostly emotion and aesthetics that plays into preference. I wouldn’t ever say it’s an objectively better lens.
Nothing can be said against taste. When I bought my 2/35 biogon, I had a month or so practice with a 35mm cron asph. I had my contax g2 at the same time an the g35 (along with another 4 lenses because they were so cheap)
I liked the G35 best because its field curvature was less. So I could focus and reframe and expect a better result near the edges than with the summicron. The summicron was the better lens for me against the ZM 35/2 but I didn’t want to spend that much money on a lens to see, at the time, if I could really work with a proper RF camera (since the common critique was that the Contax was not a real rangefinder)
My view still holds today. The summicron was the better lens (on film) than the ZM but the G35 was better.
In current production and on digital bodies, I would say that the RX1 Sonnar is the better lens simply because the field curvature is almost nil, the lens is ridiculously sharp on the edges and corners wide open, the bokeh is great and subject isolation almost looks like a 1.4 lens. Second place would go to the ZE 2/35mm because it holds many of those characteristics but its nowhere near as good. Third goes to the Summicron because of its excellent distortion control (really, excellent) Sadly enough I have yet to see a proper mount conversion/implementation to really bring the G35 back to its former glory in the digital world.
I used and loved many Contax lenses, both G and C/Y. When I tried the new CV lenses I found them too contrasty. But the same factory makes CV and many of the Zeiss lenses. This makes me wonder if I’d like the new Zeiss ones.
Have you tried the ZE/ZF and ZM lenses? If you did and you like them, then you can have high hopes for the new FE lenses. If you didn’t, then I wouldn’t hold my breath.
I owned and loaned a few ZE lenses (owned 2/35mm and 2/50mm Makro Planar – loaned the 21mm, 2/25mmand the 1.4/85mm) and I think they are excellent. Worth mentioning, seeing that you come from the same Contax history as I do, is that the ZE/ZF 21mm is the modern twin of the C/Y 21mm and that the 2/35 and 2/50 have been really really really good to me. The 50mm Makro Planar would be a joy to see on the FE mount, even with its 1:2 macro.
However, up until I used the RX1 I never found another 35mm that I would like more than the G35.
On the other hand, two wider G lenses are trash on all A7/s/r cameras.
No doubt in my mind they’ll have to make lenses from scratch. If they didnt have to do that, I imagine they’d have lenses ready long time ago.
Thanks for this useful information.
I am a bit wondering. As we heard only recently about the manual assortment to come, I am not sure whether the lenses will be new designs or re-designs of one of the above mentioned.
If they manage to bring a good uwa (max. 20mm) I am in.
The only second lens I would be interested in – a 100mm macro-planar.
It’s hard to believe they would create brand new optical formulas – but also hard to believe they would use some of the rangefinder lenses as they stand. I’m really wondering if they will adapt the DSLR lenses or adjust some of the Distagon (15mm / 18mm) designs to work with the Sony sensor oddities
They’ll have to make new lenses, as ZM lenses are for film and most of them are trash on digital cameras.
Your 100mm Makro Planar can be an existing formula, just take the SLR lens, new mount, empty space on the back and voila.
IMHO Sonnar T* 2/85 ZM is more or less fine as Sonnar T* 2.8/85 C/Y but brighter. In contrary it shows some fingering wide open, especially with huge contrast scenes, which doesn’t exist with front cemented front Sonnar (like 2.8/85 C/Y or 4/180 CF). It’s average performer but not worth it’s price. I had occasion this year to buy this discontinued lens and I stayed back with my Pancolar 1.8/80mm. It’s brighter, sharper wide open, has less chromatic aberrations and it’s cheaper. There is one disadventage, Pancolars were not quality controlled as Oberkochen lenses so there could be some variation between samples.
yeah I’ve heard not so glowing reports of the Zeiss 2/85. In any case it’s not worth the current price.
The Leica M 75/1.4 and R80/1.4 are great.
Have You tried Summarex 85? I am not big fan of Leica but I believe that Summarex 85 has greatest potential between Summilux 75 and 80 🙂
A cheaper and far better option is the 75/2 AA Summicron. Also there are no aperture induced focus shift issues on this lens unlike the ZM Sonnar.
Zeis Tele-Tessar 85ZM + Sony A7 : http://500px.com/photo/72702217 – http://500px.com/photo/72035763
It looks great at f/4 🙂 stunning colours and DoF
i like it a lot! thanks. together with the Leica ZM 2/50 very good on the A7.
The decision to make them MF lens is totally incomprehensible to me. For other systems Zeiss’ excuse has always been that they don’t do AF lens because of licensing issues. But wait! There are no licensing issues when it comes to implementing AF on E-mount. Manual focusing is fine for landscape or studio work, but most people today take AF as granted and lack of it is a show-stopper for certain kinds of photography.
Not completely.
On my NEX7 I woned until spring I was waiting for the Touits to have proper Zeiss’ with AF.
The 32mm was quite ok besides the hunting, loud and slow AF. Here the Sony 35mm was the better choice.
The 12mm was even slower at AF operation, and it was also comparably loud. It produced nicer colors than the Sony 1018, but that wasn’t worth 400 € additional price tag.
So unless Zeiss would be able to design a better AF drive I wouldn’t go for a Zeiss AF lens.
For a lot of street work manual focus is more or less mandatory. You can’t really prefocus an AF lens on demand. The only reason I don’t already own the otherwise excellent 35/2.8 FE is because it doesn’t have a distance scale…
A proper 35mm manual lens is sorely needed. Same for wider manual primes which are generally unsatisfactory when adapted from RF mounts.
FE 35/2.8 kinda does have distance scale, it shows on the screen/evf when focusing manually. It’s still variable speed manual focusing, so not optimal, they should really add linear option in some firmware update.
Interesting. Thanks for the info.
Does it display the focusing distance as a straight number? Also, is the focus distance kept or reset after taking a shot? What about after camera shutdown and a subsequent power-on?
Stays the same shot to shot, not sure about turning off, but pretty sure it stays the same distance. It is a scale up the left side of the screen, not just a number like on say R1. It doesn’t ‘grow’ though as you stop down like Fuji or Ricoh unfortunately, but is still useful. Adapted Canon EF lenses also tap into this so long as they have distance information. A-Mounts do not though, but all FE’s as far as I know do. I would have to check if it resets after power cycle but my gut says that it doesn’t.
I wouldn’t be surprised if the distance resets to infinity like the RX1 does it and the NEX 7 and 5n did before it.
There is a lot of complains about this and it only takes a small firmware update to stop making it do that…unless it is needed to calibrate focus (?) every time you turn the camera on…
Just tested it and definitely does not reset in a power cycle. Tried at min, 1m and infinity and they all kept their settings. Batter went dead during test and with fresh battery still kept the same focus distance. Which inwas pretty certain was the case. Tested on A7S and FE35 and FE55.
Then it’s time for the RX1 to get a few updates on the way…
Come on, Sony! FW updates make you look great in the community! It shows you care.
It may simply not be possible with the RX1, though it would be nice to have. I can’t recall, does the front of the lens move in and out during focussing like a X100 or is it internal focus like the FE primes?
Internal. The front element moves only when you switch to “macro” but the AF is internal completely.
Yeah still don’t know, lens may need to be in a ‘parked’ position while off.
Ha! That’s some serious thinking there. I’d be willing to bet you got the right answer.
Thanks guys, this is good to know.
Not as straightforward and fast as a real distance scale but probably useful nonetheless.
Just beware, with my FE 35/2.8 I’m not entirely convinced the focus distance indicator is accurate. If I focus to the hyperfocal distance on this lens, infinity seems too out of focus. It doesn’t seem to be a problem on my FE 55/1.8.
No idea whether anybody else has observed this or not.
The E-mount isn’t open mount, it’s an Internet myth. You still have to go through Sony to get even the basic specifications.
it may not be an open mount but Zeiss most definitely has the needed specs or they wouldn’t have the Touit line
That’s a good point.
Which has nothing to do with my comment.
The issue is Zeiss having the specs. Zeiss have the specs regardless of whether your statement is true or not. Case closed.
That is irrelevant to my comment which if you bothered to read the thread was in reply to “There are no licensing issues when it comes to implementing AF on E-mount”. There are licensing issues as it is not an open mount, it is a MYTH going around the Internet.
That is the one and only point I made and anything else that people wish to read into my comment is irrelevant.
Nice to meet someone who understands it!
Yes it isn’t an open standard, but I don’t believe there are any royalties / licensing fees associated with implementation.
As I understand it, even then you don’t get the specification…
We know very little, everything is under NDA. Maybe Sony also restrict which licensees may produce (if it interferes with Sony’s lineup). Sony doesn’t even have to share anything, they’ll give nothing if they don’t like you.
You can choose to believe what you wish! The FACT though is that E-mount is not an open mount.
Still better than m4/3. I see EF to E-mount adaptors with electrical contact, I do not see EF to m4/3 mount adaptors with electrical contact
But there are adapters with electronic contact for EF to M-mount, not EF to m4/3 mount, so the E-mount is more readily available to the manufacturers, right?
You can apply to Sony for the BASIC specification for E-mount. You can apply to any company for their mount specification too. 😉 If Sony aren’t your friend then you ain’t going to get approved, if you don’t get approved you don’t get the basic specifications.
E-mount is not open like people think it is.
But Zeiss already built AF lens for E-mount (check Touit 50/2.8 macro), so for them the licensing issues seem to be no problem.
It’s a mass production issue, to manufacture fast & cheap. They are not going to make new lenses, more rather replace tails on already produced ZM lenses. I doubt they ever will fine-tune air gaps between elements to account for E-mount thicker (than Leica’s) sensor cover glass.
Don’t forget street photography, MF is perfect for that too! What type of photography are you doing? Could it be a case of just having the wrong camera?
I do various kinds, for some of them I don’t need AF (portraiture, landscape, some street photos), for others AF is rather a must (concert, street action). And for all of this I use several different cameras, ranging from medium format Mamiya RZ67, through Sony A99, A6000 to russian Zorkij-4 film rangefinder. For action shooting I use primarily A99 or A6000 but I’d gladly try A7s provided there are appropriate lens.
I’d rather have them ZM conversions than manual Touits.
Such a shame Schneider jumped on the m43 wagon, at least it insists on Made in Germany.
Slight inaccuracy in FB message – “We cannot provide any additional infos right now”. If they are really expected to be in stores by end 2014, they mean “we are not prepared to give any info right now.
That FB message was posted by Zeiss on their page over a year ago.
What are the chances these manual lenses will be more compact than their autofocus counterparts? How about with cinema lens gears on the barrels? These additions would be amazing to have.
Carl Zeiss Oberkochen doesnt have any AF lenses.
That’s what I was thinking… maybe he means A-Mount which are not Zeiss lenses.
I suspect these will cover all the common focal lengths and there will be something for everyone. Also suspect a surprise.
Please provide a fast UWA prime! The a7r has been begging for it since its release.
I just hope they have distance encoders so will work with the auto focus magnifier function as well as the electronic distance scale.
THIS!
it better happen mind…
solipsism?
“the view or theory that the self is all that can be known to exist.”
-per this search: http://goo.gl/gVI3MC
And everything around one is created by one’s mind – also the way his comment sounds like.
With our luck, they’ll announce a 32 f/2.8 and a 50 f/1.8 for 2014 and an 85 f/1.8, and two surprises similar to sony lenses by 2015.
I can’t be the only one who feels down after reading this :(.
No love from me, but an easy pass. Have been dabbling with manual focus, but it is not my thing. I do not know how mucher bigger and expensive these FE lenses would be compared to having a dedicated APS-C version, but that could be another issue as well for me.
I couldn’t see myself going all in with nothing by MF lenses. But, grabbing one or two could provide a unique and satifying user experience. No doubt the focusing actuation is usually much superior to AF lenses.
“Infos.” Those Germans, making everything countable.
No 135mm F4?
The above list is ZM, rangefinder lenses. Teles and rangefinders dont go together
Until you use the 135 f/4. Woah!
Finally. What drives me insane is missing my Zeiss f/2.8 21mm from my Canon setup when I made the transition from Canon to the Sony FE setup. I do landscapes exclusively, and the Sony A7 is a nice platform, but it has 0 lenses worth their salt w/o a stupid adapter to put in front of it. – namely my MF Nikon glass and Sony Zeiss AF 16-35mm which is slow as balls on the *4 adapter. Thank GOD for focus peaking, all around on the Sony line or I would be f00000cked. Anyway … bring it, a-holes.
Yes it is slow as balls… oh wait, no it isn’t.
Noooo Zeiss already damaged my pocket book enough
!!
it’s going to be an F5 lens. You know to save weight…
and reduce size! 😀
The thing I like about manual focus is it slows me down. This is great if I’m just putzing around while hiking. I try this with my auto focus lenses and what I find is most of my pictures suck. So, I don’t take the shot since focusing gives me enough time to rationalize the worth of my composition. Also, the focusing actuation is fantastic on manual lenses- smooth as butter straight from the utter. I can get down with that.
Keep shooting, it will stop slowing you down. After some time, you’ll rarely miss a shot, and operate just as quickly as those who need AF as a crutch. I’d prefer, maybe, to say that it makes you more of an active participant in the act of image making. The link between camera and photographer becomes more organic, intimate when you focus manually. After time, it happens without any conscious thought. It’s worth the wait!
Manual Focus?!!! Is this a joke?! This is the 21st century…! No wonder people can’t take Sony seriously when they can’t sort out their lenses and the 3rd party ones are manual focus!!
Unless they are $100- 300, offering a budget high quality option then I agree….
Sounds like they are after the Leica snobs or “I need an excuse to slow down my shooting” crowd
Using autophocus is like a lottery. You may only get what You want with proper manual focus. Even with Distagon 2/24 ZA SSM, I shot only with MF.
I don’t know if Zeiss has ever sold a lens for $100 – $300…
Maybe the Jena 50mm 2.8, but I’ve never seen their original asking price.
A Zeiss lens for $100? This thread has all the idiots coming out of the woodwork.
Yeah – nobody in the world would know how to operate a lens properly, and certainly would never pay actual money for a lens without autofocus.
Because, you know, the best lenses on Earth certainly don’t include the Otus 55mm, Summilux 35, Zeiss 15, Vario-Elmarit-R 28-90mm f/2.8-4.5 28-90/2.8-4.5.
Seriously, the adults are trying to have a conversation here.
Autofocus was invented for a reason…but i guess you still shoot black and white film???!!
Make auto-focus lenses that are up to the job…and if i want to manual-focus, i still have that choice.
If Sony want people to sell up their stuff from Nikon and Canon…then they need to sort out their lenses. They seem to give with one hand…but take back with another. Everything they produce or is produced for them has a big drawback!
“E-mount owners will love it”…I would try to refrain from using such bold and presumptuous statements if I was you…
Do you realize that this is not a sony produced item like the Sony-Zeiss lenses. These manual lenses are made purely by Zeiss. Now take that for what you will but at least leave the sony bashing out of this as they have no part, say, or profit in this Zeiss line.
‘Focus-by-wire’ is often very aggravating to use. Most (if not all) *Sony* E-mount lenses use this system.
Besides, Zeiss has lineups of manual focus lenses for Canon EF and Nikon F mounts. These manufacturers provide predominantly AF lenses, but the manual focus Zeiss lenses still sell.
Here, I’ll fix the presumptuous statement:
*Some* “E-mount owners will love the new stuff”.
Auto mode and Art filters were also invented for a reason. And people do convert to B&W. Anyway, not sure what are these huge drawbacks in every Sony product, but the lenses we are talking about here are Zeiss-made.
I do shoot and print black and white film. It’s a wonderful skill to have and also results in prints with a substantially wider tonal range than anything an inkjet or screen could produce. It’s okay to be a photographic philistine, but don’t advertise it it public.
I suppose you still use a mangle to get the water out of your clothes after handwashing them in a bucket and have a coal fire to keep you warm at night too? :/
Using dated techniques in a modern world does not make you superior… makes you quite the opposite
You are stretching that list , the Otus a truly monstrous yet excellent lens is a world leader by a tiny fraction over a Sigma summilux I also like . The rest of your list are hardly world beaters outside the little deluded world of Leica users.
Do you realize how stupid you sound? I guess not.
Thankfully your I-Phone has auto-focus, so even an idiot like you can take a snap shot.
Try a Zeiss manual focus lens and you will learn a different way of photography. Some like it, I do very much, eg it is slowing down what leads to better or another kind of pictures, Zeiss lenses render in a very pleasing and very natural way (unreached by CaNikon IMHO), the quality of the built of these lenses is outstanding. While af is quick and confortable it does not grant for a hit every time while mf certainly needs a longer learning curve and has a lower hit rate with eg moving kids (I catch my moving kids with mf). I would not be into photography without my Zeiss glass.
Why the heck would this be exciting? What a piss off. Oh – manual focus lenses?! WHY when I have close to a century of lenses to select from already? It is 2014. Back in the 1980’s we figured we would be space travelling by this time. We’re not, but even my phone can auto-focus.
There is not a chance I am spending one dime on manual focus e-mount. If I want premium manual focus Leica is already there and EFIX to cam? WHO CARES… aperature on the lens is better.
Come on Sigma. You are already exceeding the Zeiss optics. Please fill the gap with some solid atuo-focus fast glass.
If you think Sigma is exceeding zeiss optics run to the nearest exit.
They are in certain charts&graphs style photography. If that’s your thing, of course.
No doubt. I’m a contrast kind of guy. Critical sharpness isn’t at the top of my list. Sigma has always been a mixed bag for me.
You are as ignorant about space travel as you are about photography, are you hoping for beginners luck? If not, find something less technical like needle point.
RealRAP…The rest of the world is auto-focusing…just because you are stuck with manual focus lens offerings from a 3rd party lens manufacturer because your chosen camera company cannot make decent lenses….does not make other people ignorant.
Lol, stuck. We choose our cameras for a reason, you arrogant non-Sony user.
There is already enough leica, voigtländer and zeiss glass for Leica M out there, why should I care? I want SSM primes and a 70-200 F4 for A-Mount!
Well, having a native lens with all EXIF can be interesting for some.
If they are at least 2 of the following: cheaper, faster, or smaller – then I’m looking forward to this.
I like this metric.
I do not understand why Sony does not produce new lenses on the basis of patents buy when buying Minolta …
they do for the A-mount system. The design of those Minolta lenses won’t work with a different flange distance especially when it’s shorter.
If E-mount had had a longer flange distance than A-mount it would be easy to adapt by ading a tube a the rear end of the lens to compensate but since E-mount is way shorter than A-mount (1.8cm VS more than 4cm) it need to be completely redesign.
They can’t, because KM didn’t sold all lens designs, sadly.
I hate this thread. Sony – Zeiss relationship is so haphazard. On the one hand you have Sony putting “Smile-shutter” in pro bodies and on the other you have their leading lens partner making manual focus glass when there is a need for solid AF, anti-shake lenses. A7 series is ok for manual focusing but not great. The focus peaking is unreliable and if you shoot moving subjects zooming in to focus is useless.
So what is the best way to shoot “moving subject” manually that other companies do better than Sony?
Other companies have auto-focus lenses…for camera’s that have excellent auto-focusing systems…
Manual focus should be a personal choice or last resort…not an ONLY choice!!
There was a time when part of being a photographer was the ability to focus a camera, BTW no company makes an auto-focus system that works with a manual lens. Hence the term “manual”. If you need auto-focus to overcome your handicap that’s unfortunate, you’re missing out on a lot of great lenses.
There was a time when people wore heavy hand-stitched hob-nailed boots to climb the worlds highest mountains…
They wore them because that’s all their was available at that time.
Times are different now…and i am pretty sure there isn’t a mountaineer on this planet that chooses hob-nailed boots over modern lightweight alternatives…
People are excited about some manual focus lenses…because that’s all Sony users have available…
Times are different…but not for Sony users anyway…
The thing about manual focus is that it puts the photographer in control of the exact focus point, something you apparently don’t understand.
‘The thing about’ my camera is that…I can choose “the exact focus point” very easily… I am in control of it… If i decide to switch to manual focus for whatever reason…i can do that too…
Unfortunately you suckers can’t!!
“Unfortunately you suckers can’t!!”
So, apparently you came here to tell us that. Congratulations!
Really – please share how you pre-focus or zone focus with your baby-coddling focus-by-wire lenses?
I don’t need them…because the camera system i use is not stuck in the 70’s with manual focus lenses and a “workaround” like pre-focus and zone focus…
Supporting manual focus and having all those tools to assist manual focus is just a solution to a problem that none of the other manufacturers have…because they have enough auto-focusing lenses in their catalogue that people don’t have to turn to 3rd party lens manufacturers and using adapters…
come on, these are not Sony’s products. These are Zeiss’s ideas. If they want to release some MF lens, that’s fine. Why are you against it. You don’t like MF, but someone else does, let them be. Sony is still releasing AF lens, not slow at all.
Apparently you don’t get around much, I’ve seen many Nikon and Cannon owners using manual focus lenses. But these are serious photographers, unlike you.
OMG…i am not a “serious photographer” because i have a camera that has autofocus lenses!!! Dammitt…i am so ashamed of myself that i am inferior to you!!!
So all the many many professionals that use auto-focus on their Nikon and Canon cameras, because they have lenses that support it…are not “serious photographers”?
You sir…are an imbecile!!
yeah 🙂 I agree. OP thinks that focus peaking is bad and I just don’t know how it can be improved…
Did you buy all the E-mount lenses Sony/Zeiss has? Talking shit! Sony has some of the best auto-focusing lenses in the market. Go get a life trolls…
If you can’t focus using the focusing aids on an A7 you need to find a different hobby or study braille.
Any news sony 28-135 f4 ???
Yeah…it will be manual focus… apparently auto-focus is out of fashion…
You realize the lenses Zeiss makes for Canon/Nikon are all manual focus, right?
Yeah…but Canikon have a massive choice of auto-focus lenses already, so those lenses are fine as an ALTERNATIVE or personal choice.
Sony doesn’t have that luxury…so why on earth does someone think that E-mount owners will love this?..
So, let me get that straight – because Sony doesn’t have the “luxury” of a full lineup of AF lenses, then it makes no sense for Zeiss to create these MF lenses?
OK, so just rephrase it to “e-mount owners who love Zeiss lenses”. They’ll love it. 🙂
Have you ever tried using a good quality manual focus lens? I doubt you have because you would not be making such ridicules statements.
Have you ever used auto-focus? I doubt you have, otherwise you would realise that having such limited lens options from a camera company in the 21st century is embarrassing!!
“Any news sony 28-135 f4 ???”
So huge and so expensive, nobody but a few filmmaking organizations will buy one.
Sony should just stick to making sensor’s for companies that know that cameras AND lenses are equally important as part of a system…
If some of you guys are excited about this…then you have been going without for too long
Gegarip should stick to sucking Cannokon’s balls and spare us the stupid comments.
And you should just admit that you bought into a camera system that is letting you down…cut your losses and go to a proper camera company…
You should admit you bought into a camera system that does not facilitate manual focusing, which is essential for macro and landscape photography. I would hate being so limited.
Lol what? Please explain to me how Nikon or Canon do not “facilitate manual focusing”?
Last time I looked it was quite easy to switch to manual focusing!!
Have you even looked at a camera from another camera brand before…ever?! Or did you buy your first camera because some guy at the bus stop said Sony were the best?!!! Hahaha
Of course, they don’t. Everyone I know using Canikon and requiring critical focus suffers through the fixed LCD screen on their camera. OVFs are dreadful for anything but FF cameras, where, as far as I know, Canon and Nikon do not produce split-prism focusing screens. Now, you tell us where they do support MF.
That is a very interesting point because I have no problem manual-focusing with my Canon 6D and Zeiss glass. I found some vids on youtube that explain how to mf with a Sony A7 and I also tried with my omd e-m10 (magnification mode), but I do not see that big of an advantage, honestly, as it is said to be in reviews. I still find the 6D’s OVF more relaxing to mf and the magnification mode in the omd evf a bit flimsy, and talking composition in the omd’s magnification mode is a real issue. Latter seems to be solved with the dual screen provided by the Fuji XT1. Advice appreciated, thanks!
The DOF preview at large apertures is not accurate with your 6D due to the ground glass, which makes close up/macro photography with critical DOF more of a guessing game.
With enlargement enabled, you can also get pixel level accacy at large apertures (especially critical at longer FL’s in combination with portraits) using an EVF, which again even with the best of the current OVF’s, is a bit of a luck game. You can see a lot, but not down to pixel level of the sensor.
At small apertures, the DOF preview gets dim in the OVF, which again gives benefit to an EVF for MF.
Then again, not everyone cares about small shifts in DOF or depth of DOF, so in that case, I can understand some people not seeing the benefits.
Thanks, very much appreciated! Since the DOF of my omd is larger at large apertures due to small sensor this effect was not so obvious in comparison with my 6D. I need to check this out with an A7. But so far I was quite happy with Canon’s focus confirmation which seems to be quite accurate on short distances at f1.4. Thanks again and maybe the A7 focusing aids will show as much better in practice than the 6D what could be a bit of a danger for my 6D’s life span…
The point was whether Canikon support MF and they don’t. The fact that you can nail focus most of the time with your FF doesn’t change that.
Supporting manual focus and having all those tools to assist manual focus is just a solution to a problem that none of the other manufacturers have…because they have enough auto-focusing lenses in their catalogue.
it’s a bit like if a TV manufacturer gives you a free 2 metre long stick to press the channel button on your TV because they don’t know how to make remotes….
Auto-focus is better than manual focus…don’t kid yourself that Sony have a preferential focusing system because they solved a problem that only Sony users have…LACK OF LENSES!!
Lol, MF is a solution by Sony to their lack of AF lenses?? You are mixing up two entirely separate issues and trying to make a lose-lose situation for Sony – they lack lenses and because of that, their better MF is worthless. Can’t have it both ways.
There are quite a few lenses in a-mount with AF, more than 20 lenses covering APS-C in e-mount and only 5 FF in e-mount, because the system launched less than 10 months ago.
In the end though, it is not about Sony, but rather EVF vs OVF and fixed vs swivable screen. It is about, repeating myself yet again, whether Canon and Nikon support MF and they don’t – I already mentioned why.
And auto-focus is not better than manual focus. That’s a faulty generalization.
Thank you for your concern.
You are right on the money mate! Canikon sucks! Sony if the life…
Canikon doesn’t suck, you suck.
**
Yeah…but Canikon have a massive choice of auto-focus lenses already, so those lenses are fine as an ALTERNATIVE or personal choice.
Sony doesn’t have that luxury…so why on earth does someone think that E-mount owners will love this?
I like your trolling!!!
Sony is launching some serious professional A-Mount, and E-Mount products, prior during, and after Photokina. It’s going to really steal its competition’s thunder.
400mm f/4, 24-105mm, 35mm Zeiss, 6x revised Zeiss lenses for the A-Mount, and a 36mp 12fps SLT camera.
The E-Mount is getting the entire catalogue of Zeiss lenses, and hopefully a faster model.
I’d really hate to be a Pro Nikon, or Canon right about now.
Steal the competition’s thunder? All Sony is doing is playing catch-up to Nikon and Canon…
You guys feel like you’ve won the lottery because Sony is bringing out a few lenses?
The E-mount is getting an entire catalogue of manual focus lenses…hardly got Nikon or Canon quivering in their boots!
People here are strange. Sony release lens at a fairly acceptable rate (5 lens since October 2013) and everyone loses their mind, while nobody bats an eye on how quick Canikon deliver. Then Zeiss wants to release some MF lens and people still bash Sony for no reason at all. Damn it Zeiss, why can’t your lens play mp3 !!!!
It’s the usual.
It’s not too bad, but it has mostly been small updates to existing lenses.
Would be nice to see some new pro stuff like 200mm macro, 400mm, 600mm, 800mm.
New and updated Zeiss AF lenses, that many seems to ask about.
Also more good cameras, A99II A88 etc and Pro service in most parts of the world.
If the Pro’s accept the brand, the masses will follow.
Sony needs to bring that Z-axis movement of sensor finally instead of mimicking DSLRs.
As someone say… this is an alternative (that i personally dislike).
At this point i can already use good old manal lenses. No need for more….
The only advantage would be a new manual lenses ONLY in presence of good optical qualitiy at the RIGHT price.
But Zaiss tends to overprice his shi*…. so…. to me no reasons to be happy till now.
My sony a7 deserve something else
What’s so overpriced about Zeiss?
You r right.
My mistake …. those lenses are cheap: Distagon T* 2,8/15 ZM is only 3,400.000 dollars.
We could buy a samyang 2,8/14 for just 299 dollars…. but with a lens that costs TEN times more we can finally make photos TEN times better.
The more u pay for the lens, the more your photos are good, original, creative, interesting and cool.
Indeed
You do realize there’s always a ceiling in performance…and as you get closer to that ceiling, it becomes much more difficult to squeeze out improvements. The samyang may be a good value, but it’s pretty universally agreed the Distagon is better. Is it worth 10x? That’s debatable but it really doesn’t need to be 10 times better to justify the price.
wow… ya pick up one of the only specialized lenses in the lineup… the lens is that expensive due to it´s very complicated lens designs which makes it necesarry to let it produce in Germany. Of ocurse it is more expensive…. take the 50m planar on the other side which easily matches the Performance of iits Leica Counterpart…. guess its always the Point of view and preferences…
Zeiss 15/2.8 vs. Samyang 14/2.8 (move mouse back and forth and observe arrow to see which you are looking at) You be the judge 😉
http://www.the-digital-picture.com/Reviews/ISO-12233-Sample-Crops.aspx?Lens=794&Camera=453&Sample=0&FLI=0&API=0&LensComp=769&CameraComp=0&FLIComp=0&APIComp=0
Yeah no doubt, that samyang is nasty as helll. I’d pay 4 times the price to not have to deal with that.
I do not trust too much that test site, if you look all Zeiss glass on it and compare it to just any other glass on their list, only Zeiss lenses are sharp and all others are blurred. Do you not think that there is something fishy there? Many Zeiss lenses are a bit sharper, but there are also some that are worse. And, does this match your camera, also here you can’t generalize. A lens can do good on a low pixel sensor and bad on a high pixeled one. You need to find out yourself and adjust your focus manually on your own camera.
There’s cheap, there’s expensive and then there’s overpriced. Is that 15mm Zeiss not delivering outstanding quality? As to your multiplication, that’s just ridiculous, not to mention impossible to actually calculate.
By your logic, why even bother with the overpriced Samyang and not buy some compact camera; certainly, your photos won’t get less creative, right?
Your example doesn’t fit… and u know.
Why u compare a compact camera with a ff? Those r different things.
And for sure the zaiss i mentioned is better than samyang. But not 10x. Really.
I would never spend 3500 dollars for a lens. It’s totally crazy to me.
And i think that many super famous photograpers (if u listen to some interview) are not either interested in that
Btw if u can afford it…. good for you.
But it’s just for prestige…not for photography. It’s like a woman that shows her diamonds…
Btw i don’t want to convince u about my opinion.
It’s just my personal point of view
the 15mm 2.8 from Zeiss is far from being the best they have, it’s not worth the 3400$ you pay for it.
Listen, the Canon 14mm is 2360$, while the Zeiss currently sells at 2950$. Even if we say it is not worth it, it is still one single lens of their lineup.
Sony should partner with Voigtlander like they did with Zeiss, and port some of their outstanding wide angle lenses to the Full Frame A and E Mounts like the 21 mm f/1.8, 15mm f/4.5, and 12mm f/5.6.
Call the SAL12F56V or SEL12F56V
I agree. Sony should licence more third party manual designs like they did with Zeiss, and just add the modern features like weather sealed housings, Autofocusing (SSM), and OSS for the FE models.
I’d take their 35mm f/1.2. A SAL35F12V would really make my day.
Except for landscape, anything lower than 35 mm is not useful on a FF system. Lenses between 12 and 20 are ok on APSC. The Zeiss 35-1.2 is the must on a FF system, and for normal use the 35-2.8. Both are amazing lenses.
24mm is the new 35.
You forgot the Zeiss 24mm f/2. I actually bought it for the A77 originally (as a quasi 35mm effective focal length), but I’ve really been using it heavily on the A99 lately. Its a odd focal length I would have never have dreamed of using regularly, but it kinda of grows on you.
except for that the Samyang (which is a very nice lens) will not get you Zeiss colors, Zeiss micro-contrast or that pop that Zeiss is famous for… but otherwise sure, if you ignore the stuff that you can’t get with the Samyang then Zeiss is a total rip off. Of course if you don’t care about any of those things then save some money and buy the Samyang, just don’t act the expert and say that they’re equivalent (or that the qualities of the Zeiss aren’t wanted/needed by some).
I shot i raw… and I think u do thensame.
With a little of photoshop results like this are more than enought to me….
http://www.juzaphoto.com/m_recensione.php?l=it&page=&o=&t=samyang_14&marca=&show=&id=
If you measure the Zeiss colorspectrum with an analyzer software and record the profile on your computer, you can reproduce this colors quiet easy. It is the same with Fuji’s unique colors. I reproduce that colors without any problem by loading that color profile. If one has to pay astonishing prices to get a certain color spectrum, anyone can do it. I look at sharpness all over, corners and CA, which makes my choice in a lens. Working on RAW, I can get any color layout I want. If some day a camera came that makes perfect jpegs, I would possibly look for such a lens color profile. But the perfect jpeg camera is not born yet, even if Sony’s RX1 is quite close to it.
I don’t really find Zeiss to be all that overpriced- depends on the lens and system your talking about. They are nowhere near Leica cost for very similar and in some cases preferable performance (contrast vs. clinical sharpness).
some people can’t tell the difference between an old canon nifty fifty and a leica noctilux so that is most likely where that opinion comes from.
Well, than never look at Leitz glass if you think overpriced. Zeiss and Voigtlaender glass are still quiet acceptable if you use M-mount versions. One needs to seek out of the bunch what fits and makes best shots. With a A7S you can forget super fast expensive glass, you wont need it for normal use. If you stay within F4 and higher range lenses, they are quiet acceptable in pricing and some do stunning results.
On the other side, if you take printed shots and show them to people, who will find out of one or the other is taken by this or that glass. You have to take the same shot on a tripod with different lenses to find out yourself what is better or fits you most. I buy sometimes lots of ancient lenses on e-bay and try what is best. And guess, my preferred lenses park contains only on Zeiss lens, all others are very old amazingly good glass from different brands. My standard lens I use every day is a Minolta 24-2.8 AF, a 12 year old lens that make stunning shots in my point of view.
Every few month a company has “the worlds fastest af system” implemented and people rave about mf lenses! Great!
Yeah, would prefer AF lenses
AF lenses don’t come out of thin air. They take years to design, develop, test and manufacture. Zeiss has 3 lines of lenses for Sony E mount – Sony Zeiss lenses made by Sony, Zeiss Touit lenses made by Cosina and these Zeiss MF lenses also probably made by Cosina.
The Zeiss Touit AF lenses I doubt sold terribly well as they were heavily discounted some time back. So they are probably going slow on launching new AF lenses for Sony E mount.
last nail on the coffin for leica camera bodies. Zeiss manual hmm… your looking at. Pricey, fast, small. If it is a 50mm 1.4 at 1/3 the price of summilux I am going to lose my mind.
Btw, FF e mount is too young for you to be Bching about lens selection. face it, if 10 FFE lenses where released today you are still stuck with your canikon gear and will just find something else to complain about. be happy with your dslr.
Let the sales decide people. If they offer something worthwile then customers will buy.
yep, people talked trash about the ZF line when it first came out, and then they started seeing what those lenses could do. Suddenly those lenses started selling very well and the line started to expand. People love to criticize things they have no idea about
Meh… Not buying until they say “Carl” on them again.
I fully agree, Carl Zeiss lenses are better than only ZEISS 🙂 Other hand, only Zeiss…
Who gives a crap about overpriced mf lenses? We want affordable bright sharp stabilized lenses
I guess all the photos taken before stabilization must be crap then. Have you ever used film?
I doubt it. Most of the photography community are self proclaimed pros with no formal training what-so-ever.
Because “formal training” means everything!! Idiot.
Also, i have yet to see ANY formal training that ‘focuses’ on manual focusing in any part of the course…
I guess you are another old-timer that still thinks shooting black and white film is what real photography is?!
Wow “Truth” you just outed another poser-troll. Wannabe hate is the worst hate of all.
LMAO…………
The “TRUTH LIES” probably thinks if he buys a scalpel at the corner store he’s now a Surgeon, or if he goes to home depot he’s now a contractor.
Don’t buy him a wrench, because he might start believing he’s a Porsche mechanic.
But his mommy told him that his NEX 3 makes him look like a pro. Maybe when he grows up he can go to University, and become a real photographer.
Yeah cos all the best photographers went to University…oh wait, quite the opposite so stfu!
“My mama never said nothing about no book learning”
Lies is a tool
Don’t get him a model airplane cause he will start thinking he’s a pilot.
Lies is a TOPGUN
Don’t buy him a model rocket, cause he’ll think he’s a rocket scientist.
Are you freakin retarded?
This is the year 2014!
Samyang and rokinon already make lots of mf lenses and you can use a mount and legacy glass via an adapter.
We don’t need what we already have, we need to fill in all the gaps.
Why would you even bring up that point?
Best reply.
are you, as you put it “retarded”? Have you seen shots taken with the Zeiss 35/1.4, the 21/2.8 or the 100/2 makro-planar. Yea, you can keep playing with your electronic toys but some of us actually appreciate nice optics. Just because it’s not something that interests you doesn’t mean it’s not interesting.
The real photographer that makes street and landscape shots will for ever focus manually. Except for fast sports actions, I would never leave my camera do the shot in my place. 90% of all the shots I made in my life have been made by me, not by the camera. When first digital dslr’s appeared I had no choice, in my D200 and Fuji S5 I just changed the matte to a split prism and fresnel layout to focus manually. Only the NEX-7 made my dreams become true, and 99.9% of all shots I do with that camera are in MF only. I do not even think in my dreams about AF.
”
(SR5) Huge Zeiss announcement coming soon! E-mount owners will love it :)”
Nothing HUGE about manual focus Zeiss lenses except their size and price. And no, they will not love it, there are plenty manual focus lenses available to adapt with cheap adapters already.
EXIF on E-mount is pretty useless also because there is no IBIS which requires FL to be set.
as a former canon shooter I can tell you that the zeiss ZE and ZF lenses are phenomenal. If zeiss makes smaller versions of those for FE mount, I’m excited … and no you can’t compare those lenses to old pentax/nikon/ Canon FD glass – very different. If you don’t like it, then don’t buy it, just don’t knock if you don’t understand it
+1 For those of us that own ture CARL ZEISS lenses.
I have seen Zeiss MTFs, they mostly suck compared to Sigma Art for example.
Right. Charts aren’t everything. I personally don’t like the rendering of Sigma Art 50mm and their 85mm lenses. Too clinical for my liking and I don’t care for the color.
Most of the Zeiss lenses I tried are not the sharpest of the lot but there is a reason people pay extra over AF OEM lenses to get Zeiss lenses. There is something in the way they render images that is beautiful. There are a few duds out there (duds = good lenses but not worth the asking price) but most of them are all stellar optics.
There is a reason – marketing. Color can be any these days, it is not film.
I agree over hyped and overpriced the only stand out feature is the nice build quality.
Yes, because comparing measured MTF with theoretical MTF makes so much sense.
Comparing MTFs between brands is mostly a futile exercise. Everyone has his own rules. But yes, if you want good looking MTFs just for bragging rights, I’d just buy those Art lenses.
Most Zeiss are not as sharp measured. The exception is Otus, although it is also not as sharp in the center.
Wish they would put autofokus into 15 mm f.2,8
Why not just set it to focus at about 9 feet even at F2.8 that should give you huge DOF ? There are lots of areas where AF is very useful UWA is not one of them
This makes absolutely no sense to me. The depth of field is so large, you almost don’t have to focus, you could just play with the appeture ring..lol. Put auto focus on the long lenses, ultra wides just plain don’t need it.
Just what is needed expensive MF prime lenses , its not as if we have access to any MF lenses lol .
This better be a joke. I was hoping to hear that either an 85 mm AF Zeiss for my newly acquired A7.
Most of the A-Mount community bought our original Sony cameras, in order to use auto-focusing Zeiss lenses. I doubt you’ll see many by the A7 because of this.
I’m really not impressed but this rumour.
Yes Greg it was a joke hence the lol at the end. I have all the MF lenses I need and there are a selection of MF lenses numbering in the 100,s that can be used with adapters. This looks like a higher end version of the Rokinon strategy of designing one lens and basically building adapters inside the lens,
Seriously, you could buy tons of amazing old MF glass pretty cheaply (much cheaper than any new zeiss offerings anyway).
I use my NEX in MF only with adapters, have glass in a range from 12 to 300mm and the most expensive one was 650$. My last acquired lens, the Minolta 24-2.8 AF lens I use with the EA1 adapter was 190$ in brand new state with sunshade, box, and leather container. This lens is a delight to use, a bit tricky in focusing, but once you know how to adjust it, it gives stunning shots, and, no a single bit of CA with the NEX-7 sensor. So, why should I buy expensive Zeiss glass. I just think to get a Voigtlaender 21-1.8 lens soon. I only wait to see if a compact FF will appear in the NEX-7 body style and size with EVF. That could make me rethink my choice and make me think about a faster 35mm for FF.
What about FE lenses beyond 200mm? i.e. 70-400mm like on A-mount.
70-400mm are clearly the domain of SLT cameras.
And by huge they mean all lenses with constant aperture of f/4 which is Sony”s magical number 🙂
Maybe this time for a change they will make 85mm f/5.6, who needs shallow depth of field anyway.
And no OSS, because that would lessen the image quality 😉
already got Voigtländer 35mm F1.2 Ver.II what should i expect more.. go make some auto focus super wide angel lens for both FE and A mount … like the mighty 15mm prime
No Autofuckus! What a load.
Is there any chance that they are optimising the lens for the specific sensor of the sony’s or are they just merely adding built in e mount to their existing line? I was hoping for built from scratch like the fe 55, just without the bulk of af.
They are already building the Touit lenses for E mount. Those are their AF designs of lenses build from scratch. These MF lenses however will be existing designs adapted to E mount so they can launch many of them with little R&D.
I’m invested into A-Mount. The only reason i’m thinking of an E-Mount is so that I could have something compact, and autofocusing. A7 with 35/2.8 and 85/2.8 primes, both with OSS, would have been perfect. F2 primes with OSS would have been better, but the size would be similar to 55/1.8, so that no longer makes it compact.
These MF abominations are useless for the most part. There is already a huge market of MF lenses, including Zeiss lenses that Admin has listed from other mounts, which can be adapted. A set of 2.8 primes similar in size to SEL35F28Z, would have been perfect. OSS would have been a nice addition.
‘There is already a huge market of MF lenses, including Zeiss lenses that
Admin has listed from other mounts, which can be adapted.’
obviously there must be reasons to build new ones and from a consumer perspective i think its better to have more options. there are enough people out there that will buy them…
More is obviously better but given limited resources people would prefer more mainstream lenses first.
It kinda makes sense really (in a twisted sort of way). The A7 series is a solid choice (technical revolution) for those running away from Canon or Nikon products.
The A7 series AF system is slow as molasses, and they’ll never be speed demons like the A77II/A99II, but for those of us that don’t need the speed or AF of a modern SLT a A7 series, and Zeiss manual focus lens makes total sense. I’ll probably pick-up the 35mm f/2 for my A7.
Us A-Mount users generally don’t get whole FE crazy only because we’ve had a solid Zeiss Lens selection for our full frames for over six years, and EVFs for five.
I think the Sony’s FF mirrorless will catch up AF speed-wise. It’s only a matter of time before they have A6000-like performance. Maybe even the A7II?
Once the A7 reaches A77II speed I’ll become a very usable platform. I currently use the A99, A77 and a A7. I’d like to toss the A77 at some point and just stick to a single SLT (A99 Series), a CSC (A7 Series).
Have you tried the A6000 ? I have in a store and it locks on very fast to anything even in the less than stellar lighting in the store. The other Sony offerings struggled a bit to lock on.
I bet these will be the ZF for ZE optical designs with a built-in extender with CPU contacts. No new optical design. That’s fine for many. The Zeiss glass for the most part is worlds better than most of the legacy adapted glass anyways if you are willing to spend the money and lug the weight.
I use my 135/2 ZF.2 on my A7R and it’s fantastic, though an E-mount specific design would then preclude using it on my d800, but then again I’d get EXIF info which is nice. It would also be nice to have a smart adapter to m43 so that the EXIF info would in fact be passed on to the camera instead of having to manually enter it. Wonder what the price is going to be . . .
Or… They could be designs based on their Leica M mount lenses. These were rangefinder lenses so much smaller. Unfortunately not terribly fast.
Very happy about this!
They once said “very fast”, hope that idea didnt get lost in the process.
If they are as I suspect based on existing designs then they must be derivatives of their Zeiss Icon lens designs. Those designs were unfortunately rather slow at f2.8.
Reading through the comments, the main trolling is basically:
“Buys fastest auto focus camera in the world.
Tells people they’re stupid for wanting auto-focus lenses”
I think it’s just that the people who need manual focus lenses are not served by auto focus offerings, so it’s good that Zeiss is catering to that (smaller but important) market segment.
Can’t most auto focus lenses be used as manual focus? It seems I’m missing something.
The “focus-by-wire” system used by most, prohibits the ability to rely on hard stop mechanical actions, thus makes for poor muscle memory and doesn’t allow use by cinema follow focus systems, because you can’t repeatedly pull reliable focus marks. It’s also the difference between auto transmission and manual… auto is better for the majority of the population, and although technology has made auto almost equal to or better than manual in terms of performance and efficiency, but there is still a time and place for the good old fashioned stick shift.
Thanks for the info!
Zeiss …… what are you thinking on ?
A7 A7R A7S already have a ton of MF lenses. they can use ZF ZE ZM CY G M42 ……
Why you do MF lens ???
if u do AF lens u will sell that lens a lot of tons why … Zeiss Why
If they sell MF lens expensive people buy Leica Voiglander
if they sell MF lens cheap people buy Voiglander
i don’t understand zeiss marketing ???
This one has got EXIF.
they offer large aperture in small size lens
Autofocus lenses will take lots of time to design and manufacture. MF lenses based on existing designs are far easier to manufacture by simply changing the mount and maybe improving the coatings.
As a Sony APS-C and Full Frame “E-mounter,” I am more than happy to have the opportunity to choose a native-mount CARL Zeiss lens. Give me native mount options, as opposed to limitless adaptable options with all the tradeoffs and I am a really happy camper, MF and /or AF.
hahaha…I knew it! tons of E-mount lenses and just 1 for A-mount in Photokina…
If you are fine with expensive manual focus lenses based on existing old designs then yes there are tons of these for the E mount. Me, I want AF lenses.
So a 24, 35, 50 and 90 are in the works for manual focus? I hope these are totally new MF lenses and not reworked ZM lenses with mirrorless mounts (although, that’s a possibilty). Given the great reviews the new Sony FF Zeiss lenses have received, esp the 55mm 1.8, I’m not sure why they’re also making manual versions. Can’t wait to see what awaits at Photokina!
If they will launch so many new lenses at once I firmly believe they are based on existing designs with maybe newer coatings. I seriously doubt they can launch several new designs so quickly unless they are simply redoing existing designs.
Leica S announced many lenses altogether, so it’s possible here as well, if they want to announce a new lineup of lenses.
Thats for their own in house system so they were probably working on it for years. Carl Zeiss only recently announced they are working on MF lenses for Sony.
If they are new designs ill be most happy to be proven wrong but I am pretty sure they will be older designs.
The 135mm f/2 e-mount would be nice to have. Will trade my Sony-Zeiss 135mm f/1.8 for it.
I would rather believe in 18mm, 50mm (or 40-45mm), 100mm. I believe also in posibility of 28mm, I would be very pleased with 75mm, but there is really small chance for that 🙁
So will this be a huge number of lenses or a number of huge lenses? 😉
Wish something like Zeiss 100mm f/2 APO… stabilized… AF )
Yay, more way-overpriced consumer-grade lenses for people with more money than brains o/ Good thing that we have Samyang and Sigma !
How about AF lenses? Some people aren’t looking to MF every lens … also Sony are you listening? Please update your A& firmware to get more acceptable AF speeds like a6000? What a joke!