unlikely but...

[back alley]

does anyone have a side by side shot of the zeiss 21/4.5 and the cv 21?

just curious.

joe

 

[rover]

Comparing the physical size of both lenses?

The CV is the same size as the other classic Skopars and I thought the ZM 25 and 21 were very close in size.

 

[vieri]

Not quite - the Zeiss 4.5/21 is definitely smaller than the 2.8/25. Size, from the manufacturers' specs:

Zeiss 4.5/21: diameter 53mm, length 34mm

Zeiss 2.8/25: diameter 53mm, length 49mm

CV 4/21: diameter 49.6mm, length 24mm (28.5 w/hood)

Hope this helps, even if I haven't a pic side by side for both lenses. 😀

 

[back alley]

vieri, you did the work i was too lazy to do, many thanks.

joe

 

[CameraQuest]

Tom A has both of those lenses ..
along with just about any other lens...

Stephen

 

[noimmunity]

Not quite - the Zeiss 4.5/21 is definitely smaller than the 2.8/25. Size, from the manufacturers' specs:

Zeiss 4.5/21: diameter 53mm, length 34mm

Zeiss 2.8/25: diameter 53mm, length 49mm

CV 4/21: diameter 49.6mm, length 24mm (28.5 w/hood)

Hope this helps, even if I haven't a pic side by side for both lenses. 😀

Isn't it true that the measurement for the CV lenses doesn't include the flange, while that for the ZM lenses does? Once the 21/4.5 is mounted on a T, it protrudes about 27mm. Leaves just the right amount of room for my stubby fingers, yet is eminently pocketable.

You'll have to get it, Joe.

 

[vieri]

Isn't it true that the measurement for the CV lenses doesn't include the flange, while that for the ZM lenses does? Once the 21/4.5 is mounted on a T, it protrudes about 27mm. Leaves just the right amount of room for my stubby fingers, yet is eminently pocketable.

You'll have to get it, Joe.

I already took off the flange 😀 still, is pocketable enough IMHO.

 

[back alley]

thought i'd bump this up in hopes that tom a. sees it.

joe