Roger Hicks
Veteran
Dear Horea, Dear Michael,
I fear that we are back to the question of what it costs to make a 'really good' lens, and possibly to the question of what 'really good' means. We have already seen that German-built Zeiss lenses (15/2.8, 85/2) are comparable in price with Leica, because that's what it costs to make a 'state of the art' all-glass lens (no 'hybrid aspherics') with hand-lapped focusing mounts.
In other words, I think we are looking at the same problem as I raised in another thread, "And I want it to cost $1000..."
But, of course, none of us is a lens designer or manufacturer, so we could all be mis-reading the situation in our own ways.
Cheers,
R.
I fear that we are back to the question of what it costs to make a 'really good' lens, and possibly to the question of what 'really good' means. We have already seen that German-built Zeiss lenses (15/2.8, 85/2) are comparable in price with Leica, because that's what it costs to make a 'state of the art' all-glass lens (no 'hybrid aspherics') with hand-lapped focusing mounts.
In other words, I think we are looking at the same problem as I raised in another thread, "And I want it to cost $1000..."
But, of course, none of us is a lens designer or manufacturer, so we could all be mis-reading the situation in our own ways.
Cheers,
R.
sanmich
Veteran
Not 1000$
But I think you would agree that the Zeiss offer is priced significantly lower than Leica's while offering 99% (some say 101%) of Leica Optical performance.
Today, with my type of budget, I could never afford a new Leica lens, but I could buy a 50 Planar or Biogon 35 instead of summicrons. The same should hold for 1.4 offerings...
Roger Hicks
Veteran
No, of course not $1000, but you see my point.
On reflection, you may be right about the possibility of a new, fast Japanese-built Zeiss 35 or 50, perhaps (in effect) a Nokton replacement. Commercially, this would explain the discontinuation of the Nokton. On the other hand, I don't think Zeiss would go for a hybrid aspheric design, so it would probably cost a lot more than the Nokton.
As for "99% (some say 101%) of Leica Optical performance", my feeling is that at the highest levels you are looking at differences rather than improvements. I'm not sure there's ANY 50 I'd rather have than my C-Sonnar, even including a Noctilux, because I like what the C-Sonnar does and it's so much smaller than the Noctilux.
The Summilux is nice, but I just can't get that excited about lp/mm and so forth any more, and I prefer the 'look' of the C-Sonnar. Or at least, I think I do: I've never had a Summilux for long enough to get to know it, and I've taken (I think) one shot with the latest Summilux. My own view is that at the high end, preference and skill counts for a lot more than technical specs.
Cheers,
R.
raid
Dad Photographer
I am glad to see lots of GAS among RFF members, but I do not find myself missing any lens that I do not have. Just recently, many people were raving about CV lenses. What has happened to make you dump confidence in CV and move on to Zeiss lenses? Is the economy getting better? Is Zeiss so much better glass?
ferider
Veteran
I'm very happy with my 35/1.4 Nokton and 28/1.9 Ultron; reliable performers - any shot doesn't come out, it's usually due to me not the lens. I had the C-Sonnar once, but like my current fast 50s better (Lux v2, Pentax 50/1.4).
The only two fast lenses that I would be interested in are a 28/1.4 (I won't shell out 10k for the upcoming Leica lens) or a googl'ed 180/2.8. Heck, I would even buy a new camera for the 180
Anybody wondering if KobayashiSan has something new for us at Photokina ?
Roland.
The only two fast lenses that I would be interested in are a 28/1.4 (I won't shell out 10k for the upcoming Leica lens) or a googl'ed 180/2.8. Heck, I would even buy a new camera for the 180
Anybody wondering if KobayashiSan has something new for us at Photokina ?
Roland.
richardhkirkando
Well-known
Right now, I think there are two very high performance, very fast 35s, but both have drawbacks - the Nokton is huge, and Summilux ASPH is out of most people's price range. I think there's a market for a compromise between those two, whether it's Zeiss or CV - I have a CV 1.2 now, but I'd be happy to pay a little more to trade the extra half stop of light for smaller size (but the same characteristics otherwise).
horosu
Well-known
denizg7
Well-known
AN ASSPHERICAL F.85 50 mm COLLAPSABLE LENS WITH BUILT IN COLLAPSABLE HOOD
denizg7
Well-known
i think this guy never heard of the nokton 1.4? you are not even trading an extra half stop and its a much more sharper lens than the cv 1.2 at 1.4 then the nokton 1.4.... AND YOU ARE NOT EVEN TRADING HALF STOP
horosu
Well-known
ferider
Veteran
Dear Roger,
this is not the first time that you are referring to CV aspherical lenses having hybrid elements. Do you have any reference for this ?
Just wondering. Thanks,
Roland.
Roger Hicks
Veteran
Dear Roland,
Phew! Not that I can easily find. Only an (increasingly unreliable) memory of what I as told or read when they came out. I can't think where I'd have got that impression if it were not true.
Ground aspherics are out on the basis of cost. Moulded glass aspherics would be possible (I'm pretty sure even Leica use them, but I'd need to check). Even so I'm reasonably confident I've remembered correctly that these are hybrid aspherics with the aspheric elements moulded onto glass elements. I think Voigtländer themselves would have pulled me up on this if I were wrong, but I'll check at photokina to see what they say.
Cheers,
R.
ferider
Veteran
Please do. One of the aspheric CV lenses (12/5.6) has an exterior aspheric surface, which is why I always thought the CV aspheric elements were molded glass.
KEVIN-XU 愛 forever
所謂的攝影,就&
WoW! What a great News for our Rangefinder fans! I can't wait to see the newest ZM fast lenses release into the market. How I wish Zeiss could produce ZM 50mm f1.1, ZM 35mm f1.4 or even f1.2. : ) Hope my dream will be come true!