New ZF SLR Lenses the sharpest SLR lenses Zeiss has ever tested

Stephen,

Have you seen any actual images yet (or comparisons)? Some initial images posted on p-net from Asia were inconclusive, yet I know I can tell the difference between a 4x6 from my Nikon SLR 50 1.8 versus my Contax G Planar 45.

Would love to have the same kind of optics on my SLR. I'd sell my rangefinders in a heartbe....{punch}{gasp}{kick}

voice-over: "Please stand by, we are experiencing technical difficulties. There is nothing wrong with your forum..."
 
Note - the link takes you one page past the article. You must back up and read "resolving power record" previous page. :)
 
Apperently not only their new ZF are as sharp as it gets, but the ZMs are not bad either. The Biogon T* 2,8/25 ZM, they say, got 400lpm @f4, when used with a special test film. At least they add at the end that this purely scientifically, and does not really apply to normal photography. BTW does anybody what the maximum resolution of normal film is? (like PanF, or something in that direction)

Here's the link, I'm afraid it's in German though (toolazy to find the English version)
http://www.zeiss.de/c12567a8003b0478/contents-frame/d366ef465fba5e31c125711d0019b0e8
 
Any idea how many line pairs a Nilkon F 50mm 1.8, or a 50 Summicron, or a Contax G Planar 45 will do, just to throw up some other numbers?

"There are lies, damn lies, and statistics". :D
 
Sorry if this is some sort of common knowledge that I don't know about, but when do these lenses come out (or are they already out)?
 
I hope we're not moving back into the era when photographers are snowed into thinking that "line pairs per millimeter" is the best predictor of a lens' photographic quality!

Zeiss knows durn well that it isn't; they're on record as saying there's no single "figure of merit" that can quantify the overall performance of a lens!
 
jlw said:
I hope we're not moving back into the era when photographers are snowed into thinking that "line pairs per millimeter" is the best predictor of a lens' photographic quality!

Zeiss knows durn well that it isn't; they're on record as saying there's no single "figure of merit" that can quantify the overall performance of a lens!
Click to expand...

that's what they said at the end of their "400lpm-howgreat" announcement. It's simply a great technical and optical achievement, but it does not really effect photographers, in any way.
 
Agreed. Line pairs are not the only judge of a lens, and sharp does not make a good photo. Just curious how this "accomplishement" rates against other lenses.
 
Will Zeiss adapt the 50/2 Planar ZM to F mount?

Will Zeiss adapt the 50/2 Planar ZM to F mount?

Hi Stephen G. et al,

Any indication if Zeiss will produce a 50mm/2 for F-mount? Could Zeiss and Cosina not just adapt the superb 50mm/2 ZM rangefinder lens, mounting that optical design in an F type SLR barrel? Or is the F-mount too deep? It seems like a 50mm/2 could be a nice entry point ZF lens, if they could cut the purchase price to about US $250. It would probably be even better optically than the 50mm/1.4 Planar ZF, if less versatile.

Personally, I'm hoping Zeiss makes a 28mm/2 or 25mm/2.8 Distagon ZF lens available in the fall.
 
a.black said:
that's what they said at the end of their "400lpm-howgreat" announcement. It's simply a great technical and optical achievement, but it does not really effect photographers, in any way.
Click to expand...

How true. Question is why do they talk about it anyway if , in their own understanding, it is not or only partly relevant for the photographical results ?

Fact is all these things which" do not really effect photographers, in any way" as you said, are very popular issues among photogs, for many they are even more interesting than those which do have an effect.
Reason enuff for Zeiss to speak about this result, it's part of their image building efforts for the Zeiss Ikon RF camera. They adress those potential clients who keep even a theorethical performance at least as a proof of technical competence if not as a decisive reason to buy anything.
That's not a minority I think, rather an important part of the future ZI RF market.

Admitting the result is not "really" relevant they neutralize all possible objections in advance.

One could assume these Zeiss folks don't know what they do, publishing test results which they do not keep as really relevant, as they say ? These guys are not nuts, they simply know their clients and their market.

As somebody who has spent 15 years in sales and marketing I have to say "well done !" :) Still a long way to go for them tho.

bertram
 
Somebody here got it completely wrong. Theoretical means that it is impossible to build a higher resolution lens, because diffraction prevents it. Here Zeiss is completely right. And, besides, sharper means more liveness and presence in an image. Thus it is one parameter of image quality of paramount importance.
Regards to everybody
Pistach
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top Bottom