Great to see you here. Join our insightful photographic forum today and start tapping into a huge wealth of photographic knowledge. Completing our simple registration process will allow you to gain access to exclusive content, add your own topics and posts, share your work and connect with other members through your own private inbox! And don’t forget to say hi!
Well I'm glad that Zeiss is stepping up to the plate and making lenses that are up to the demands of the latest sensors. (...)
The price of a lens is not only determined by the time you need to design the lens, but a lot more how expensive it is to produce.I looked at the video Jorgen linked and the other links.
3,000 Euros for a lens that only took just one day to design and to actually make a working prototype (according to the youtube video) is a bit too much, IMO.
...
HiUnlike you, 4711, I am actually interested in buying one to use with a Speed Booster to get an effective 39mm f/1 lens on APS-C NEX (well, I am also interested in acquiring a 55/1.2 Planar). Yes, a full frame covering lens is needed for that. I would like to see some tech details of this lens first instead of some youtube blahblah (there are no details as to if the materials costs are sky high like you claim- may be you have some inside knowledge?). You know why medium format is not a volume seller?
Vivek,I looked at the video Jorgen linked and the other links.
3,000 Euros for a lens that only took just one day to design and to actually make a working prototype (according to the youtube video) is a bit too much, IMO.
Zeiss may be misled by the going prices for the discontinued 55/1.2 Contax Planar lenses?
OTOH, it looks like the APO Sonnar 135/2 is a bargain.
Good point!Without knowing much about lens design, I would assume that it's faster to design a good lens when there are few restrictions with regards to size and cost as in this case. At least, that is the case in most other industries.
Yes, that German accent can be trickyPoor audio, I guess, Jorgen. One year sounded like 1 day.
It is amusing how people write their judgements about a comparioson without knowing what kind of lens was used.
So how do you know that the comparison photo is a very old lens. Why do you think that it is not the current Nikon 50/1.4 (just as an example).
I would hesitate to bash on something without knowing the facts. Makes the criticism even more worthless
And it is understandable that Zeiss does not disclose the name of the other lens. First, it is in some countries forbidden to make those comparisons, as soon as you name the other lens, second you can bet that the lawyers of the other company will try to stop this comparsison asap with all kind of tricks.
So just wait and see until the first real users will show their own comparisons with their "old" 50/1.4 lenses. Than you can start bashing if you want to and if there are any arguments for bashing at all...
The Compact Primes are their bargain line of lenses based on their current line of Nikon or Canon mount still lenses rehoused for cinema use. Their Master Primes are their top of the line cine lenses where the 50mm T1.3 costs a whopping $21000! Which is similar to Leica and Cooke cine lenses.Vivek,
I don't know where you got one day from. In the video, he says that the lens took very little time to develop due to their extensive experience and that the development time was only one year.
Without knowing much about lens design, I would assume that it's faster to design a good lens when there are few restrictions with regards to size and cost as in this case. At least, that is the case in most other industries.
As for the price, a Zeiss Compact Prime 50mm T2.1 retails for $3,990 and a Canon CN-E 50mm T1.3 L F Cine Lens for $4,950. The price of the 55mm seems to harmonize well with those prices. Lenses that are produced in small quantities with strict quality control will always be considerably more expensive than a mass market product, and most of us have a choice what to buy.
I had that lens and sold it because of one of the worst bokehs I have seen. Truly I don't fret over that but it was too much for me. Sharpness-wise great.Actually from this test I prefer the Nikkor 1.4/50G far better than all the rest!
I am already since a while considering to buy a 50mm prime and given the performance of the 1.4/50G and the relatively moderate price, this seem to become my favorite. Hard to believe that it can produce such results for that price