RJBender
RFF Sponsoring Member
Mazurka said:
Mazurka, did you read Backalley's post the other day?
http://www.rangefinderforum.com/forums/showthread.php?t=14909&page=1
R.J.
RJBender
RFF Sponsoring Member
Mazurka said:
Mazurka,
Click on the EDIT button next to the QUOTE button, then delete it.
R.J.
Last edited:
C
ch1
Guest
RJBender said:
RJ,
Thank you very much for your support both here and via PM.
I think it is time I just left this "thread". I am clearly offending some folks who hold very stongly held "beliefs" about business enterprises.
Since the end result will simply be a matter of fact and not belief (i.e. what a "ZF lens" is and "where it is made" and "who makes it") there is no reason for me to continue to follow this thread into the realm of "ad hominen" attacks.
I am a finance professional (ironically working for a German banking institution) and very knowledgable about modern "global production" arrangements.
Like those here who do not have "emotional attachments" to Zeiss or whatever, I will just wait and see what ZF lenses are all about. Although, truth be told, I'd be quite surprised to hear that any optics company anywhere is about to open a new production line in Germany.
Merry Christmas to all and to all on this thread - Good Night!
George
a.k.a. copake_ham
Bertram2
Gone elsewhere
Huck Finn,Huck Finn said:
that isn't put to bed and I doubt that it will happen soon.
Those who insist on this "rebranded Cossie" Quatsch (=BS) do it with a certain intention, and as you see facts don't count. An old thing btw, these defences, happened when the G model was announced, when the Hexar came not to speak of the Bessa line !
So don't waste energy, no reason to get excited about such kinda provocations . It will turn out soon that Zeiss has created a product on par with Leica or even better, but for half the money. THAT is what counts. MArket will proof it.
Who will care then about those who simply refuse to keep "rebranding" separated from production or assembly outsourcing ?
Maybe those will be happy one day to have still the choice of a Zeiss Ikon, one day when Leica Ms are available as used cameras only? Who knows ?
:angel:
Regards,
bertram
Mazurka
Well-known
Bertram2 said:
Bertram, that's so true. Just don't dignify such Quatsch with the word "defence" because they contain neither fact nor logic.
RJBender
RFF Sponsoring Member
Yeah, it's time to give this thread a rest until Zeiss decides to give us another clue. It's been a fun guessing game so far.
R.J.
R.J.
Huck Finn
Well-known
copake_ham said:
ROTFLMAO
I can't believe that Zeiss hinting at bringing out some lenses for the Nikon F mount can bring about such a fuss. The mount has been around since 1959. Lot's of companies brought out lenses for it. Perkin Elmer made lenses for it. The Nikon lenses are well made, although the Non-AI lenses were heavier made than the AI series and everything else that has followed.
I'm glad that Zeiss is making lenses for my 30 or so Nikon SLR's. I'm even happier to have a 600mm Solid Cat and a Vivitar 135mm F2.3 Series I with floating optics for close-range correction.
Let's see what they bring out, and maybe if Zeiss is reading this thread they'll learn to shut-up until they announce a real product. I had to cancel an order for a $60,000 Zeiss Microscope that was "pre-announced", demo'd, and then pulled from the market. They contracted out software development to a University and then could not get the bugs out. Face it Flounder...
I'm glad that Zeiss is making lenses for my 30 or so Nikon SLR's. I'm even happier to have a 600mm Solid Cat and a Vivitar 135mm F2.3 Series I with floating optics for close-range correction.
Let's see what they bring out, and maybe if Zeiss is reading this thread they'll learn to shut-up until they announce a real product. I had to cancel an order for a $60,000 Zeiss Microscope that was "pre-announced", demo'd, and then pulled from the market. They contracted out software development to a University and then could not get the bugs out. Face it Flounder...
C
ch1
Guest
Huck Finn said:ROTFLMAO
Hi,
I know I said "no more" until we had the Zeiss "final solution" but this is an apparently a mature adult response to one of my posts.
Can anyone tell me what "ROTFLMAO" means?
I am totally unaware of this "shorthand". Is it like "BTW" or "IMHO"?
Regards,
George
halabar
Member
Socke said:
You mean Thailand. But yes, it is a big issue for some idiots there. I'm quite happy with my D200 being made there.
halabar
Member
copake_ham said:
Rolling on the floor laughing my ..... .......
C
ch1
Guest
Brian Sweeney said:
Brian,
Ditto.
Please see my post - #309 here (wow - the numbers have started to recycle!)
What is the lens-equivelent of "vaporware"?
George
C
ch1
Guest
halabar said:
Wow - thanks for the HU - now I know what a mature response I received from HuckFinn. His continuing march to maturity will be an enjoyable spectable.
I guess I got a RFF "flame" w/o consequences.
W
wlewisiii
Guest
Brian Sweeney said:
That is seriously bad ju-ju. OTOH, it doesn't surprise me as Zeiss has a history of that kind of amazingly bad decision making. Thier SLR's in the 50's were utterly amazing examples of engineering but not so pleasant to use as, say, the F...
All I really know is that a person has to decide which companies least offends them and deal with the good and the bad and, all too often, the really ugly. I've tended towards Zeiss, Canon & Kodak films over the years in photography. I'm looking at alternatives for film but I see no real need to look for alternatives to the other two: especially since the EOS line is designed to lend itself well to adaptors
In the end, we'll see what they offer. Untill then the intellectual mast******** continues :bang: :angel:
William
C
ch1
Guest
I was going to add something more. Something about the high quality of Nikkor glass.
But given the ancient narrow mindedness here, why bother?
Truth be told ... the only Zeiss "equipment" I currently own are their lens cleaners - you know - those alcohol-based "handi-wipes" that come in foil packages for cleaning your eyeglasses! Picked up a big box of them on eBay. I think you can also find them in "drug stores".
From the ardor here, I guess their lenses have a good reputation. So I hope they figure out a way to sell them. Because, except for these kinds of threads, I haven't seen them mentioned anywhere in the popular photo press for a couple of decades.
HMACDOTHOAP?*
*How may angels can dance on the head of a pin?"
Google it!
But given the ancient narrow mindedness here, why bother?
Truth be told ... the only Zeiss "equipment" I currently own are their lens cleaners - you know - those alcohol-based "handi-wipes" that come in foil packages for cleaning your eyeglasses! Picked up a big box of them on eBay. I think you can also find them in "drug stores".
From the ardor here, I guess their lenses have a good reputation. So I hope they figure out a way to sell them. Because, except for these kinds of threads, I haven't seen them mentioned anywhere in the popular photo press for a couple of decades.
HMACDOTHOAP?*
*How may angels can dance on the head of a pin?"
Google it!
leafy
Established
To take what 'rebrand' means from www.thesaurus.com
Main Entry: rebrand
Part of Speech: verb
Definition: to take an improved product, rename it and market it as new
So "rebranding CV lenses as ZM/ZF" will literally mean a) The said lens already exist in a former brand name, hereby Cosina, or Voigtlander. b) improve it, rename it and market it as new.
The ZM line of lenses clearly did not exist in the current CV line of lenses, nor do they overlap to date. I would not call that an 'improvement' either, being very different on the design. Does this still quality as 'rebranding'? Or is it just a mix-up idea between ODM and OEM?
I really do NOT have any problem with Cosina making lenses/bodies for Zeiss, actually I think it is a good thing and appreciate the fact that it keeps prices within reach (just look at how expensive the 85 and 15 are, being self-manufactured at Zeiss in Germany). But I really wouldn't call ZM line 'Cosina product' or 'Zeiss product' other than the 2 lenses made by Zeiss themselves. While there are people who acknowledge the fact that current CV lenese are Cosina-Voigtlander lense, why can we not also acknowledge that ZM/ZF are Zeiss-Consina products instead of calling them "rebranded"?
Main Entry: rebrand
Part of Speech: verb
Definition: to take an improved product, rename it and market it as new
So "rebranding CV lenses as ZM/ZF" will literally mean a) The said lens already exist in a former brand name, hereby Cosina, or Voigtlander. b) improve it, rename it and market it as new.
The ZM line of lenses clearly did not exist in the current CV line of lenses, nor do they overlap to date. I would not call that an 'improvement' either, being very different on the design. Does this still quality as 'rebranding'? Or is it just a mix-up idea between ODM and OEM?
I really do NOT have any problem with Cosina making lenses/bodies for Zeiss, actually I think it is a good thing and appreciate the fact that it keeps prices within reach (just look at how expensive the 85 and 15 are, being self-manufactured at Zeiss in Germany). But I really wouldn't call ZM line 'Cosina product' or 'Zeiss product' other than the 2 lenses made by Zeiss themselves. While there are people who acknowledge the fact that current CV lenese are Cosina-Voigtlander lense, why can we not also acknowledge that ZM/ZF are Zeiss-Consina products instead of calling them "rebranded"?
C
ch1
Guest
Leafy,
Baton is passed. Now it's your turn to deal with the "Zeiss" crowd.
Reality is, that company hasn't developed anything new in a dog's age. It may be living off its reputation with a few but certainly not on it's innovation with the rest of us.
Now. don't get me wrong, their "handi-wipes" are okay. Although they do tend to dry out faster than most but, well, they're okay.
I guess Zeiss is not what one would call a "leading edge" company. But let's keep in mind that they did just "discover" the Nikon F-mount. Give them a few more decades and they will "invent" the digital image sensor too.
Time to move on.
Have fun,
George
Baton is passed. Now it's your turn to deal with the "Zeiss" crowd.
Reality is, that company hasn't developed anything new in a dog's age. It may be living off its reputation with a few but certainly not on it's innovation with the rest of us.
Now. don't get me wrong, their "handi-wipes" are okay. Although they do tend to dry out faster than most but, well, they're okay.
I guess Zeiss is not what one would call a "leading edge" company. But let's keep in mind that they did just "discover" the Nikon F-mount. Give them a few more decades and they will "invent" the digital image sensor too.
Time to move on.
Have fun,
George
S
Socke
Guest
copake_ham said:
In the still camera segment they didn't do much until recently, that's correct. The Arri lenses are two years old now, that's pretty recent, too.
Most of Zeiss R&D is spent for laser scanning microscopes, space telescopes, optics in cars like head up displays and infrared cameras for colision warning systems. Then they have electron microscopes, nano imprint, products for chip production and things like this.
I don't think they'll implement the improvements for TEM lenses into those for still cameras. But that could be fun, a resolution of 0.24 nm is still an order of magnitude bigger than the wavelength of an electron but good enough to get sharp pictures of a single molecule
S
Socke
Guest
copake_ham said:
Easy, buy a Carl Zeiss Transmition Electron Microscope, make a picture of the pins head and count the angels. While you're at it, make a picture of the sharpp side and look how many angels dance there :angel:
Last edited by a moderator:
bobofish
Two-fisted Atom Smasher
Rascism??????
I can't honestly remember anybody in this thread, much less on this forum, in several months of reading it nearly compulsively, EVER saying ANYTHING against Nikkor lenses, Nikon as a company, or Japanese people in general.
Ham, you really perplex me...you are clearly well educated, you make a significantly better living than me, but you're willing to argue a point that is logically flawed, until the end of time. That some people should have refrained from ad hominem attacks is certain, but your unwillingness to even quite qualify your statements is vexing to say the least.
As has been said, a rebranded product is, shortly, taking an existing product, slapping a new brand or lable on it, and selling it as a new product.
A simple example is: my neighbor raises chickens (not really); I don't raise chickens, but I have a very good name in agriculture...they call me the Chicken Man. I take my neighbor's chickens, put my Chicken Man label on them, instead of his "Bob's Tasty Chickens" label, and sell them as my own.
An example of contracting out services would be: me genetically engineering a chicken to have 4 legs, since so many people like drumsticks. I provide the specs for the four legged chicken to Bob and his tasty chicken factory, and he builds those to spec, with 4 legs. He previously sold 2 legged chickens, and did not possess the technology to add 2 extra legs. The 4 legged chickens are my product, outsourced to Bob.
Another example of rebranding: Mazda trucks being stamped with a Ford label. The trucks are identical to Mazda trucks, and the serial numbers and manufacturers labels show this, however in the interests of marketing, the truck says Ford instead of Mazda. This is rebranding.
Or also with the Suzuki Tracker, becoming a Chevy product (can't remember the name of that crappy, crappy car); that is rebranding.
An example of production outsourcing: Apple having their computers made in Asia by factories that also build other companies' computers. Nobody can successfully argue that those particular asian companies are building their own products, which Apple, Dell, IBM, HP, etc. "rebrand." Apple develops Apple products. IBM develops IBM products. Somebody builds it to their specs. End of story. This is not rebranding. This is not rebranding...repeat after me.
No, it's not a particularly savory way of doing things in my opinion, but it is factually, and logically not rebranding.
I have the feeling that you've got a chip on your shoulder about Zeiss, Ham. Zeiss is not a company that I have particular loyalty to, I have no loyalty to any company, I buy the best products I can buy, whatever the name says. However, Zeiss is a company that has a very good name because it produces very good products.
I AM NOT A RASCIST. I HAVE NOTHING AGAINST JAPANESE PEOPLE.
I like Nikon lenses as well. There is nothing wrong with them. Can I be more clear? I don't for one moment believe that anybody on this thread has ANYTHING against Nikon products. How many people on this forum use Bronica, Mamiya, Canon, Pentax, etc. etc. ad infinitum? It is FOOLISH for you to say that somebody is being rascist.
And incidentally, to slightly contradict your statements of how Zeiss has produced no new innovations in several decades, several years of winning back to back Technical Oscars for their cinema lenses would tend to contradict you. As would the numerous designs for Hasselblad, Alpa, and most recently, Sinar. If you've never heard of Zeiss, it's not because they are an insignificant company that will need help from good ol' Cosina, but rather because you have not read, seen or heard of them. It's quite simple.....Zeiss is one of the oldest names in optics, period. Older than Leica, older than Nikkor, older than Kodak.
I don't know why I've written so much for so little reason, but holy moley. The problem in my eyes is not that you believe that future rumored ZF lenses will be "rebranded," but that you won't even quite qualify what that "rebranding" means...if it is simple production to Zeiss spec (this is what Cosina does, and has done for many many years, they are a factory to produce products to spec, only recently have they started to make their own products in any serious quantity) then it is not rebranding.
I can't honestly remember anybody in this thread, much less on this forum, in several months of reading it nearly compulsively, EVER saying ANYTHING against Nikkor lenses, Nikon as a company, or Japanese people in general.
Ham, you really perplex me...you are clearly well educated, you make a significantly better living than me, but you're willing to argue a point that is logically flawed, until the end of time. That some people should have refrained from ad hominem attacks is certain, but your unwillingness to even quite qualify your statements is vexing to say the least.
As has been said, a rebranded product is, shortly, taking an existing product, slapping a new brand or lable on it, and selling it as a new product.
A simple example is: my neighbor raises chickens (not really); I don't raise chickens, but I have a very good name in agriculture...they call me the Chicken Man. I take my neighbor's chickens, put my Chicken Man label on them, instead of his "Bob's Tasty Chickens" label, and sell them as my own.
An example of contracting out services would be: me genetically engineering a chicken to have 4 legs, since so many people like drumsticks. I provide the specs for the four legged chicken to Bob and his tasty chicken factory, and he builds those to spec, with 4 legs. He previously sold 2 legged chickens, and did not possess the technology to add 2 extra legs. The 4 legged chickens are my product, outsourced to Bob.
Another example of rebranding: Mazda trucks being stamped with a Ford label. The trucks are identical to Mazda trucks, and the serial numbers and manufacturers labels show this, however in the interests of marketing, the truck says Ford instead of Mazda. This is rebranding.
Or also with the Suzuki Tracker, becoming a Chevy product (can't remember the name of that crappy, crappy car); that is rebranding.
An example of production outsourcing: Apple having their computers made in Asia by factories that also build other companies' computers. Nobody can successfully argue that those particular asian companies are building their own products, which Apple, Dell, IBM, HP, etc. "rebrand." Apple develops Apple products. IBM develops IBM products. Somebody builds it to their specs. End of story. This is not rebranding. This is not rebranding...repeat after me.
No, it's not a particularly savory way of doing things in my opinion, but it is factually, and logically not rebranding.
I have the feeling that you've got a chip on your shoulder about Zeiss, Ham. Zeiss is not a company that I have particular loyalty to, I have no loyalty to any company, I buy the best products I can buy, whatever the name says. However, Zeiss is a company that has a very good name because it produces very good products.
I AM NOT A RASCIST. I HAVE NOTHING AGAINST JAPANESE PEOPLE.
I like Nikon lenses as well. There is nothing wrong with them. Can I be more clear? I don't for one moment believe that anybody on this thread has ANYTHING against Nikon products. How many people on this forum use Bronica, Mamiya, Canon, Pentax, etc. etc. ad infinitum? It is FOOLISH for you to say that somebody is being rascist.
And incidentally, to slightly contradict your statements of how Zeiss has produced no new innovations in several decades, several years of winning back to back Technical Oscars for their cinema lenses would tend to contradict you. As would the numerous designs for Hasselblad, Alpa, and most recently, Sinar. If you've never heard of Zeiss, it's not because they are an insignificant company that will need help from good ol' Cosina, but rather because you have not read, seen or heard of them. It's quite simple.....Zeiss is one of the oldest names in optics, period. Older than Leica, older than Nikkor, older than Kodak.
I don't know why I've written so much for so little reason, but holy moley. The problem in my eyes is not that you believe that future rumored ZF lenses will be "rebranded," but that you won't even quite qualify what that "rebranding" means...if it is simple production to Zeiss spec (this is what Cosina does, and has done for many many years, they are a factory to produce products to spec, only recently have they started to make their own products in any serious quantity) then it is not rebranding.