Zeiss 55mm 1.4 Distagon

[yaya]

Yowza! I'm surprised to see this "35mm sensors only use the centre of the lens" myth coming from you, Yair.
This is a common misconception. The sensor uses the entire lens. It only uses the center of the image circle.

If I wrote ""35mm sensors only use the centre of the image circle" would that make you sleep better Ray??

Either way an image from a smaller sensor is less likely to show issues such as soft edges, CA and vignetting because it uses the "better" part of the IMAGE CICRLE....

[drevil]

i want one with contax645 mount 

[TMARK]

Maybe they can do a Leica S mount and get a wide 1.4 on the Leica, at a savings over wide Leica lenses.

[peterv]

Hi, I just found some more info about this lens:

"Who’s it for?
I asked Dr Pollmann precisely that question. He told me Zeiss is aiming at medium-format shooters migrating to the new breed of high-pixel-count 135-format SLRs"

http://chromaticabrasion.com/blog/2012/9/27/new-zeiss-distagon-t-star-1-4-55-at-photokina-2012

http://chromaticabrasion.com/blog/2012/10/thoughts-zeiss-distagon-t-star-1-4-55-at-photokina-2012

[FredBGG]

"Who’s it for?
I asked Dr Pollmann precisely that question. He told me Zeiss is aiming at medium-format shooters migrating to the new breed of high-pixel-count 135-format SLRs"

Very smart move. Personally I think they will have a larger market than most would expect. As the high end enthusiast camera and pro camera become more and more
the same camera lenses will be more of the distiction. The electronics get better and better while being very affordable there is more of a budget for stellar lenses.
There is also a perception among photographers that cameras are short term investments while "glass" you keep for years and years.

However I think that another segment of the market are people with high-pixel-count 135-format SLRs that may have been considering MFD or have already ditched MFD and
want to make the very most of their cameras.

I think this is particularly relevant as it is a very different approach to where Hasselblad is going.

Hasselblad is making new lenses that are lighter, but sacraficing distortion and vignetting to then correct for this in post.

Carl Zeiss on the other hand is taking advantage of the lightness of for example the D800 letting them still have a reasonable overall camera/lens weight despite making large lens designs.
Their large lens designs let them reach new heights in lens quality.

This announcement by Carl Zeiss is probably the smartest move in the high MP count high quality pro camera areana of Photokina.

Zeiss that used to be the lead player in MF lenses has moved on and seems to be making a lot of right choices.

Their motion picture primes are selling very very well.

The Carl Zeiss group is doing very well indeed.

From 2009 to 2011 Carl Zeiss doubled it's revenues that are now 4.24 billion Euros.

[Stefan.Steib]

Fred

as you said. Zeiss has committed completely to full format 35mm and Video, dropping MF as a whole .
It  is only logical they use the best technology available on their side as they do not build (Digital)cameras and chips.
I believe they are right, the market numbers show their growth and  this will be the new "professional class" of equipment which will substitue
larger systems, whatever names they were called.

I am sceptical about the move of both Hasselblad and Phase/LeafMamiya to invest in new lenses for their Mf Body portfolios as long as they cannot support
a functioning lifeview. But then if they could they would not need  the longer flange focal distance which makes the lenses extraordinary expensive (especially wideangles).
So you can just guess if this is strategy by will or just out of necessity because they know there will be no change to that situation in the next time.
The problem is, that when the user base scales down even more (with maybe a Canon High pixel body) the number of the sold MF lenses will go down even further and thus
become even more expensive.........and so on.

It will be interesting to see who is right in the end. But I have a favourite..........

Regards
Stefan

[BernardLanguillier]

I am sceptical about the move of both Hasselblad and Phase/LeafMamiya to invest in new lenses for their Mf Body portfolios as long as they cannot support
a functioning lifeview.

And that won't happen as long as some MF users keep blindly accepting the current limitations of their backs... as some posters here seem to.

Cheers,
Bernard

[EricWHiss]

So Schneider went for the MF lenses and Zeiss went 135?  Seems to me the Schneider lenses I've used are better than the Zeiss MF lenses anyhow.  Less distortion and nicer bokeh.

[Graham Welland]

Personally I'm pleased to see that Zeiss are committed to the 35mm form factor (although truthfully I'd love to see new Zeiss options for my DF system!). Ultimately with 35mm we're pretty much done with the cameras at this point and the smart money is investing in the glass for image quality improvements. I'll buy glass vs bodies now every time as a route to better image quality.

[ErikKaffehr]

Hi,

Zeiss usually worked with a partner, like Hasselblad. I don't think that Zeiss were in large format. No Zeiss works with Cosina who manufacture most ZF and ZE lenses in Japan.

Zeiss strategy seems to make a lot of sense.

Best regards
Erik

So Schneider went for the MF lenses and Zeiss went 135?  Seems to me the Schneider lenses I've used are better than the Zeiss MF lenses anyhow.  Less distortion and nicer bokeh.

[ErikKaffehr]

Hi,

A system like the Hartblei or the Alpa makes more sense to me than an MF SLR. It's more like equipment for precision work.

On the other hand there is nothing wrong with MF SLRs as long as the users are happy, it's their $$$ and if they feel those $$$ were well spent, it is quite OK.

Best regards
Erik

And that won't happen as long as some MF users keep blindly accepting the current limitations of their backs... as some posters here seem to.

Cheers,
Bernard

[MrSmith]

Personally I'm pleased to see that Zeiss are committed to the 35mm form factor (although truthfully I'd love to see new Zeiss options for my DF system!). Ultimately with 35mm we're pretty much done with the cameras at this point and the smart money is investing in the glass for image quality improvements. I'll buy glass vs bodies now every time as a route to better image quality.

Same here, I'm slowly changing my lens line up and ditching those below par (24-70mk1, 40T-se) and investing in lenses that will be up to future high mp 35mm bodies like the 135f2 and a 50mm f2 macro Zeiss.
High quality lenses are usually in the £1-2k bracket but seem good value compared to a lot of MF lenses.

[Stefan.Steib]

I have thought about this for a long time - in 2005 when I started the Hartblei -Optics by Carl Zeiss project.
Hartblei has just been a bit early. It was difficult back then to explain to people why they should pay 10000$ for a set of 3 lenses for 35mm.
but now it shows my Idea was absolutely right. Schneider has copied our lenses, Zeiss is investing again in new 35mm Constructions,
even Canon and Nikon have now recognized that the key factor to further devellopment are the lenses.
They normally represent the largest single investement in a photographers portfolio (with the exception of MF Backs!) and of course
the mainstream producers have now identified that the better margin of the highend market is also welcome for them, they can
even reach broader  markets if they supply cheaper "base" bodies (like a D800E or a future Canon High res 35mm), but earn most of their money
with the lenses. MF on the other side probably has a half half strategy, lenses AND Backs with bodies as a replaceable lesser item.
The problem is: the CCD backs limit the further devellopment of more competitive Bodies and lenses.

It´s again a hen and egg situation. There has to be a strict cut to break that scheme and this is what I demand since several years.
But none of the MF Makers with the exception of Leica (+HCam-B1 and now ALPA with the FPS ) has read the writings on the wall correctly I think.

regards
Stefan

[ondebanks]

Hi,

Zeiss usually worked with a partner, like Hasselblad. I don't think that Zeiss were in large format.

Hi Erik,

Zeiss made some large format lenses (e.g. 135/3.5 Planar, 75mm Biogon aerial camera lens), but were never a major player.

Of course in large format, you don't need a partner - lenses and camera bodies are completely separate entities, and all you need for compatibility is to fit your lens design into a standard leaf shutter size like #0, #1, #3...

If it were only so simple in smaller formats!

Ray

[ondebanks]

If I wrote ""35mm sensors only use the centre of the image circle" would that make you sleep better Ray??

Either way an image from a smaller sensor is less likely to show issues such as soft edges, CA and vignetting because it uses the "better" part of the IMAGE CICRLE....

I already sleep like a baby, Yair...but knowing that you are no longer saying the wrong thing would make my dreams even sweeter! 

Ray

[S@W]

I had the opportunity to make a few pictures during a few seconds with it on my D800 during photokina.
An incredible lens - had to check the metadatas 3 times to believe the result at f1.4.
Incredible clarity, wonderfull bokeh.

[hasselbladfan]

Agree. I saw the demo pictures. If they are "untouched" as Zeiss claims, this is the first 1.4 that delivers such results. 

[FredBGG]

I had the opportunity to make a few pictures during a few seconds with it on my D800 during photokina.
An incredible lens - had to check the metadatas 3 times to believe the result at f1.4.
Incredible clarity, wonderfull bokeh.

Would love to see your test snaps..... Can you post one or two

[FredBGG]

Who would like to have a leaf shutter in this lens?

Carl Zeiss has made leaf shutter lenses so they should have the capability to do this.

Two versions would be nice. One with LF and one without.

[yaya]

Prontor made the shutters and barrels for the V lenses for Zeiss

Also you need the electronic coupling/ protocol to control a leaf shutter, so Canon/ Nikon will also have to invest in it...