Are Sony/Zeiss lenses really Zeiss?

Was looking at some lens reviews on dyxum.com and came across this. Found it

quite interesting. Just wondering what people on here think.

 

(http://www.dyxum.com/dforum/forum_posts.asp?TID=10171&PID=83652#83652)

Hi Richard,

 

Well, I guess some of us visit both forums. I posted a reply to that question. I know that it has been discussed here before. I personally believe they are CZ Designed and manufactured for CZ in Japan. The design is quite different from Minolta designs. Check out Michael Hohner's lens chart and compare the specifications.

 

Robert

Actually, I don't really worry about it. I don't care if Zeiss ruins their reputation or carries Sony to new heights of glory. Will those 5 letters mean extra performance at no added cost but with a surplus of mystique? )r will they bring along an extra zero on the price?

Hasn't Zeiss only designed lenses and contracted out the manufacturing to manufacturers in Japan for many years?

my understanding is that sony has owned the name zeiss for a long time.

While at the Sony booth at CES, I asked the Sony rep in charge of the Alpha display about this and he said they were made in Japan as stated by another poster. So, if you mean Zeiss lenses are only made by Carl Zeiss in Germany, then 'no' they're not 'ZEISS'. The Sony rep was quite open about this point, not like when I asked about whether they were coming out with a full-frame DSLR. I can't remember if he said Contax made them.

 

If any of you have an opportunity to ask the Sony factory reps about something they can talk about (something that is already public knowledge, not about some future product), you'll find that they will honestly answer your questions.

Richard, the line has been blurred for a long time. If you dig deeper, you will find some of your best/favorite equipment are not at all what you imagined. IE. All the late Hassy is really made in Japan, a lot of Canon lens are made in China, Rollei contracted out a lot equip to Singapore... OTOH, I really suggest you to try out CZ 1,8/135mm and 1,4/85mm. Both are rock solid, built like a tank.

"Ollie Zg , jan 14, 2007; 06:51 p.m."

"Richard, the line has been blurred for a long time. If you dig deeper, you will find some of your best/favorite equipment are not at all what you imagined. IE. All the late Hassy is really made in Japan, a lot of Canon lens are made in China, Rollei contracted out a lot equip to Singapore... OTOH, I really suggest you to try out CZ 1,8/135mm and 1,4/85mm. Both are rock solid, built like a tank."

 

Ollie, welcome to the new world economy. I, personally, don't see anything wrong with a Zeiss lens made in Japan, or a Canon lens made in China. In the case of the 'Zeiss' lens, Zeiss in Germany designed it, and set the specifications for it. They are also responsible for quality control. Who says Zeiss can't own a factory in Japan, or China, if they wish, and it makes economical sense for them to do so. The days of one country's manufacturing capability being superior to another is for the most part, history. Only a 'snob' will thumb their nose at a Zeiss lens made in Japan. If Zeiss has on their payroll in Germany, a chinese lens designer, does that make the lens inferior? I think not.

As I understood these Zeiss lenses are produced by Cosina, but under the quality standards given by Zeiss. I'm sorry I can't offer a source.

 

Stefan

Stefan Tjarks , jan 15, 2007; 02:49 a.m.

"As I understood these Zeiss lenses are produced by Cosina, but under the quality standards given by Zeiss. I'm sorry I can't offer a source."

 

Stefan, now that you mention it, I do believe the Sony rep did say Cosina, not Contax. I knew it started with a 'C'. The rep was straight-forward, about who made the lenses, didn't try and hide the fact as to who made them. They're not claiming it as a big secret.

 

You have to excuse my forgetfulness, as I went to the CES convention for 4 days, getting about 4-5 hours of 'sleep' a night, and walking an area of over 3 million square feet several times. Then I went driving around Las Vegas for a couple of days, going to visit the Carroll Shelby factory at the Las Vegas International Speedway, to see the Cobras and Shelby Mustangs being built. Sorry for rambling, I'm still tired.

No need to apologize Robert, I've enjoyed reading about what you found out at the CES convention, and I assume most others have. I understand the 'lens manufacturing location (etc.)' situation a lot more now from everyones input.

The Zeiss lenses for my Contax 139Q were made in Japan, in the 1970's. Zeiss has been contracting out the build work on lenses for decades, why on earth do people still think this is something new? Zeiss sends over some engineers and some quality control people to oversee the production in Japan, but the manufacture is carried out by a third party.

 

The ZF designs are essentially existing Contax lenses (i.e. 35mm film) that have been re-fitted with a Nikon F-Mount. Because they are simply changing the mount, these lenses do not have a provision for autofocus and are not designed for use with digital cameras.

 

The ZA designs, while optically similar to the older Contax designs, are more than just re-mounted and are instead adapted to autofocus. This is a more dollar and time intensive operation and it makes sense that this would be done for Sony (who already has a marketing partnership with Zeiss and who is vastly more likely to bring in sales than Nikon right now) and not for the ZF lenses. Nikon users have had their own high-end lenses for a long time, there's no real reason for them to go to Zeiss.

 

I've heard this said several times, and it's simply a case of a few snobs spouting off without bothering to look into things on their own.

<p>These Zeiss lenses made by Cosina for Nikon, Canon, Pentax, Sony & others are generally awesome. It's a non-issue.</p>