Finally and official statement by Zeiss on the 85/4

enochRoot said:
the 85/2 sonnar is not 95mm long. if anything, that dimension is for a fully extended lens.
Click to expand...

yup, the 85/2 sonnar is not 95mm, it is 100mm. But as i'd mentioned Zeiss measurements include the flange.

so, the 85/4 is not a huge lens, but not exceptionally compact, either.
 
Platinum RF said:
It looks like an old long lens design, The black late Canon 100/3.5 is about $120 why Zeiss 85/4?
Click to expand...

Why, because it's not a Canon POS. It's 85mm. It's an original Carl Zeiss design, not a ripoff of a Carl Zeiss design. It's multicoated. It should be built to a higher standard. It's new. It won't need to be serviced.

I wouldn't be concerned with performance. These days, Carl Zeiss doesn't make lenses that are dogs.
 
dberger said:
linsenschnitt.jpg


Cheers,

David
Click to expand...

Wow - something old is something new! Very classic, indeed.
 
Andrew Sowerby said:
I love the internet. If people spent as much time shooting as they do complaining about the size and weight of lenses that they've never handled, the world would be a much better place.
Click to expand...

My thought exactly. It's almost as bad as Damien Cox's columns on the Leafs. :D :bang:
 
sorry, but no it's not. at infinity it measures 75mm not counting the flange or 81mm counting the flange. at close focus it is around 92mm w/ the flange. not sure where you got your info, but it seems to be wrong.


noimmunity said:
yup, the 85/2 sonnar is not 95mm, it is 100mm.
Click to expand...
 
enochRoot said:
sorry, but no it's not. at infinity it measures 75mm not counting the flange or 81mm counting the flange. at close focus it is around 92mm w/ the flange. not sure where you got your info, but it seems to be wrong.
Click to expand...

the info is right there on the official zeiss site. under the technical specifications, the length of the 85/2 sonnar is listed as 100mm.

you'd better write a message and tell Zeiss they are wrong.
 
i measured the actual lens, so mine are correct.

mistakes are made on websites all the time, but i don't have the time to email zeiss about it. i have much more important things to do such as reading this forum :p


noimmunity said:
the info is right there on the official zeiss site. under the technical specifications, the length of the 85/2 sonnar is listed as 100mm.

you'd better write a message and tell Zeiss they are wrong.
Click to expand...
 
enochRoot said:
i have much more important things to do such as reading this forum :p
Click to expand...

Ain't that the truth! ;) More power to ya!

Thanks for sharing the info. Would be great to see some photos from the lens, too, but given the climate on RFF lately, I'd advise against it, actually, for the time being, unless you put it in W/NW.

Wonder if that means there are discrepancies in the other measurements, too? Or perhaps Zeiss march to their own beat and measure with their own yardstick?
 
I went and measured a bunch of my ZM lenses and the measurements are indeed all significantly different from what is listed on the Zeiss website. :eek:
 
FYI the ZM lenses I've weighed (25/2.8, 28/2.8, 50/1.5) have all been about 15-20 grams lighter than the weight listed on the Zeiss website.
 
The photo of it does make it look like it will be looking like it's very happy to see your model when it's focused close up. It's a niche that I filled with an old 90/4 Leica lens. That was even smaller and could go in just about any pocket without issues.

B2 (;->
 
I suspect that the zeiss lens photos on their website may not be photos at all. With todays cad programs used with ray tracing software, it is easily possible to create photo realistic images from designs and without the use of a camera.
Look at the filter thread on the enlarged versions of the images. Most of them are just parallel lines. And also many of those images have the lens fron element protuding up into where the filter glass would go.
Yes I should have better things to be doing:)
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top Bottom