Distagon design for a 55/1.4 ZF.2 lens? A Zeiss prototype.

[jose_angel]

<p>Alex, very interesting. I was not aware of this.</p>

[ShunCheung]

<p>Alex, Jose, I am not sure I totally buy into that argument. Nikon is certainly producing AF Nikon F mount lenses in both Thailand and China, and Zeiss ZF lenses are actually made by Cosina in Japan. If such regulation indeed exists, it should not be all that difficult to set up some Zeiss Japan company to work around such restriction.</p>

[Two23]

<p>Hmmm. That might possibly explain why Samyang, a Korean company, is the other maker that doesn't have AF. Tokina, Tamron, Sigma all do. It does seem that they could either team up with a Tokina etc. or create a Japanese office or something.<br>

Kent in SD</p>

[alex_zepeda]

<p>Shun, it is Nikon of Japan who produces lenses in Thailand and China. I don't think it's too much of a stretch to believe that a company would need to be headquartered in Japan in order to license Pentax, Nikon, or Canon autofocus technology. OTOH, it could simply be posturing by Zeiss.</p>

<p>The only part that doesn't sit right with me is this: if one can license the technology needed to properly implement F and EOS mount lenses , why have companies like Sigma done such a comparatively poor job?</p>

[jose_angel]

<p>This is what I was thinking about after reading your post. Looks like the "license" is only for making "lower level" lenses. I have never seen a third party lens better than the Nikon ones, and if so, it has been almost impossible to find, and astronomically priced. Certain ZF lenses looks to be on pair or with better specs than the Nikon ones, but they are MF. They are quite expensive, but people like to buy them even being MF. Nobody will question the capacity of Zeiss for making very good lenses, specially if they can sell at a higher price than Nikon.<br /> Imagine Zeiss making their ZF lenses in an AFS equivalent version. It`d be an enormous problem for Nikon.</p>

[ShunCheung]

<blockquote>

<p>The only part that doesn't sit right with me is this: if one can license the technology needed to properly implement F and EOS mount lenses , why have companies like Sigma done such a comparatively poor job?</p>

</blockquote>

<p>Alex, if "license the technology" means Sigma, Tokina, Tamron, etc. are getting the cooperation from Canon and Nikon to produce lenses for their mounts, I can assure you that Canon and Nikon are not helping those 3rd-party lens manufacturers to compete against Canon and Nikon lenses. Sigma, Tamron, Tokina, etc. reverse-engineer those mount designs (including the electronic protocol) and that is why they sometimes have protocol issues. For example, when Nikon's first FX DSLR the D3 was introduced, some full-frame Sigma lenses would trigger the auto DX crop on the D3 while some Sigma DX lenses wouldn't.</p>

<p>What Zeiss is doing with their ZF lens line for the Nikon F mount (and ZE for Canon EOS) is re-introducing AI-S type lenses from 3 decades ago. Recall that the first-generation ZF lenses did not even include a CPU, which Nikon started adding to their manual-focus lenses as early as 1990 (e.g. the 500mm/f4 P). That is why there is now the newer ZF.2 lens with CPU:</p>

<ul>

<li>ZE and ZF lenses all have fixed focal lengths; there is no ZE or ZF zoom lens. Zooms domonate modern Canon, Nikon, Pentax and Sony lenses.</li>

<li>There are no EF-S or DX type ZE and ZF lenses. Today, a lot of DSLR lenses sold are designed for APS-C sensors.</li>

<li>Focal lengths for ZE and ZF are restricted from 15mm to 135mm. 15mm was not very popular 30 years ago, but today, we have lots of 55-200mm, 70-300mm zooms.</li>

</ul>

<p>To me, ZF lenses are very 1980's. Optically and mechanically those lenses are very good, but they only serve a small niche market that is willing to pay a high price for quality (with a lot of limitations) and the Zeiss brand name.</p>

<blockquote>

<p>Imagine Zeiss making their ZF lenses in an AFS equivalent version. It`d be an enormous problem for Nikon.</p>

</blockquote>

<p>I think the bigger competition for Nikon lenses come from Sigma, Tokina, and Tamron. They make popular lenses such as a lot of zooms, DX type lenses, etc. at affordable prices that are frequently cheaper than their Nikon equivalent. I have tested a few of those lenses and some of them are very good nowadays.</p>

[alex_zepeda]

<p>Dunno about cooperation, but perhaps there are patents involved that neither Nikon nor Canon want to license to non-Japanese companies.</p>

<p>Honestly, I don't think the competition is an issue at all. There are Canon lenses (like the 85L) that I'm sure some Nikon folks would love to have use of, and some Nikon lenses (like the 14-24) that are popular with some Canon folks. Even if there were a standard lens mount (hey, look at the 4/3 cameras…), there is still enough differentiation that I doubt market share would change much. At the very least, I'd expect Zeiss glass to carry a hefty premium over even top-shelf Nikon glass.</p>