28mm/2.0 ZM Zeiss Germany - Open Letter

[35mmdelux]

Esteemed Zeiss gentlemen and ladies:

Thank you kindly for all the lastest ZM offerings and the excellent quality.

We would like to request and believe there is a viable market for a new fast 28mm f/2.0 lens. Your present offering tops out at f/2.8 and only matches what is already available. We believe you have the ability and technology to make this happen and we urge you to do so.

Respectfully,

Paul
28mm/2.8 Biogon and 50mm/1.5 C-Sonnar owner

 

[ddimaria]

They just put one out in Nikon mount. It's on their site.

 

[Roger Hicks]

Indeed they do have the capabilities to make a 28/2. But (a) they have higher ambitions for clever lenses -- why just play catch-up? -- and (b) the REALLY impressive lenses (like the 15/2.8) will be made in Germany and therefore terrifyingly expensive.

Cheers,

R.

 

[Roger Hicks]

They just put one out in Nikon mount. It's on their site.

Well, yes. But it's F, not S. I have one. I don't think the same lens would sell in M-mount.

Cheers,

R.

 

[proenca]

Simple : just put out a 28mm 1.4 or 1.2. It would sell like hotcakes : just make it trigger the 28mm lines and I'll buy one !

 

[visiondr]

The elusive small size and larger aperture issue is the heart of the problem here. Leica ONLY manages to produce the 28/2 in such a small package because it has aspheric element(s). Zeiss, to my knowledge, hasn't used aspheric elements in their wide angle designs for M mount. It's not that they don't have the knowledge or facilities. It's just that the Biogon design doesn't need aspheric elements to produce a small highly corrected lens... up to f/2.8. Their Distagon design (retrofocus wides) are another issue. I would love to see a Zeiss competitor to the Leica but, only if: same size or smaller (very tall order) and cheaper (also very tall order).

 

[ferider]

The ZM 15/2.8 has one aspheric element.

Maybe Zeiss does not want to compete with other offerings of their
lens manufacturer, Cosina Voigtlander, who offers multiple aspheric
lenses ?

The Ultron is a killer lens. Just a different brand name.


I would love to see a ZM 85/2.8 and 35/1.4, BTW. And a 50/1.4 Planar (or faster).

 

[loneranger]

I dont know why they insist on building lenses that weigh a ton or more. What happened to elegance and portability. I guess in an effort to satisfy the digital mania with the emphasis on macro etc, they have to, but I long for an SLR lens that weighs less than 200gms.

 

[Bryce]

Surely a 28 1.4 is possible with aspheric elements readily available.
With the rangefinder market seemingly willing to swallow any pricetag, and the 28mm length becoming "normal" on the M8 and RD-1, marketability is likely not a problem.
Zeiss already has lenses in its lineup that compete with the CV line, so that is evidently not a major consideration.
To me (obviously not an optical engineer or a marketing specialist), building a lens in this category seems like a natural progression and likely doable.
Perhaps we'll find out soon?

 

[Bryce]

I'll add- the Voigtlander 28mm Ultron has been discontinued for some reason, adding incentive to Zeiss to market a fast 28mm lens.

 

[ferider]

Zeiss already has lenses in its lineup that compete with the CV line, so that is evidently not a major consideration.

Not really if you exclude the C-Sonnar and 50/2 Heliar from the comparison
as speciality lenses (classic redesigns).

 

[Turtle]

A 35 1.4 would be interesting to me, but then again I was smiling away when the 21 4.5 came out due to performance and size...now just got to find the money to buy one! A 28 f2 I can live without! A 28 f1.4 might be interesting....

To me the beauty is in their cosina made ones, not the madly expensive 15 and 85mm lenses that come at Leica prices. The cosina ones deliver a performance that astounds me and leaves me wanting nothing more to be honest. The rest of the 'delivery' really is up to me!

 

[rxmd]

Am I the only one who thinks that the Zeiss lineup is fine as it is?

Choice is nice, but too much choice can kill your market. Give people too much choice and they will have trouble choosing. This can spoil your brand. Look at Zeiss 50s: the Sonnar is a very interesting specialty lens, but already the choice between two Zeiss 50s is too much for the gearheads, and people who don't have the lens complain about non-issues like focus shift all the time. A Zeiss 28/2 or 28/1.4 or 35/1.4 will be a BIG lens, so people would complain about size ("I can buy a used Leica lens for that kind of money"). It's not worth it. Just because you spend twice as much on developing two different lenses, people won't buy both of them.

Zeiss is positioning themselves rather well as a manufacturer of excellent products at a reasonable pricetag. In that position you need a clear lineup. Having two lenses at any focal length will only lead to Zeiss competing against themselves.

Philipp

 

[jjovin]

I, sort of, like the Zeiss ZM line up as it is.
However, I think they need to produce an affordable 85mm lens.
I have a hard time accepting prices for range finder lenses
over 1.5K$ and refuse to pay for such lenses.

 

[jbf]

Personally the only lens I realy wish they would make is a Planar f/1.4 (or 1.5). Heck, if it was an f/1.2 I'd be happy too.

 

[mfogiel]

I would also love to see Zeiss produce some faster lenses in their ZM line, and I think it will likely happen.
However, Zeiss likes to stay truthful to their design philosophy which distinguishes their products from the competition by some overall consistent imaging characteristics, in which perfect sharpness is not so much the driving goal, but the result of a generally balanced imagery. You will find some more competent comments on this in Erwin Put's essays.
Beyond this, there are other constraints, like the pricing and marketing strategy. I am sure that Zeiss could produce the most optically stunning lenses one might want, as they already do in other fields (cinematography, military and industrial), but the price is an important limitation.

However, occasionally Zeiss comes out with some iconic products at higher price tags, so it might be the case in the ZM line too.

On my wish list , there would be a 35/1.4 and a 50/1.4 lens of not excessive size, and with the typical Zeiss balance between good contrast, great 3d, good bokeh and sharpness.

I have taken a quick look into my cupboard, and between the Hasselblad, ZF and ZM line I use 22 outstanding Zeiss lenses, and I'm sure there would be some more room for excellent ZM glass, so Mr Zeiss, please count me up.

 

[Captain]

Your present offering tops out at f/2.8 and only matches what is already available.

But thats all a 28 f2 would do as well?

 

[35mmdelux]

I would pony up for a 28/1.4, 35/1.4 zeiss lenses. Given their pricing structure I would imagine $1500/per would be a good target. Leicas run $3300+ and VC does not quite have the panache in the imagery.

 

[aoresteen]

I have the Ultron 28mm 1.9 and would not buy a ZM 28mm. What I do want is an 85mm f/2 Sonnar that sells for $1200.

Canon ought to jump into the fray and introduce M versions of the 50mm f/0.95 and the 19mm.

I bought the 50mm Planar and think it is great. Best money I've spent lately.

 

[visiondr]

The ZM 15/2.8 has one aspheric element.

I humbly stand corrected.