Switch to English Language Passer en langue française Omschakelen naar Nederlandse Taal Wechseln Sie zu deutschen Sprache Passa alla lingua italiana
Members: 68,686   Posts: 1,482,315   Online: 952
      
Page 5 of 5 FirstFirst 12345
Results 41 to 48 of 48
  1. #41

    Join Date
    Jan 2006
    Shooter
    35mm
    Posts
    252
    Quote Originally Posted by Mongo
    In the interview section of their newsletter they stress the industrial applications of the lenses, and perhaps that is their true target market. There are a lot of industrial machines out there that use F-mount lenses for optical inspection. Having Zeiss-quality glass available for such purposes might sell a bunch of glass.

    Be well.
    Dave
    Hmm? I'm certainly not saying Zeiss is evil for not making the lens be AI-P - it is simply part of the technical spec of the lens really and affects on what camera models you can use the built-in meter. Hopefuly they will reconsider at some point because it will quite considerably extend the usefulness of the lens and certainly doesn't make them unsuitable for the other applications. If not - well, the lens are still usefull for many types of photography.

  2. #42

    Join Date
    Dec 2004
    Location
    Milwaukee, Wi
    Shooter
    35mm
    Posts
    3,242
    I like Nikon cameras. I have a Contax rtsIII with 8 Zeiss and 1 schneider made for an R Leica. I am not considering a change.
    Claire (Ms Anne Thrope is in the darkroom)

  3. #43

    Join Date
    Sep 2004
    Shooter
    Multi Format
    Posts
    343
    Quote Originally Posted by Claire Senft
    Different pokes for different folks. For what I do I like my gear to be manual focus but I like to photograph static subjects and use any flash manually.

    If I wanted to change what I photograph I might quickly change my mind. I guess that however we photograph that we should each continue to poke in a way that seems to suit us best.

    I am guessing that Cosina and Zeiss will come out with a manual focus body for Nikon lenses that will be interesting.
    I think that perhaps the fm10 is made by Cosina so this has already come to pass. I'm sure that such a collaboration (Cosina and Zeiss) could bring forth a beautiful camera, it is just very difficult to imagine that they could make a "pro" quality manual focus camera that would be competitive against the resale market. The "ZI" (1.3-1.4K on cameraquest) seems a relative bargain vis-a-vis M6 + M7 prices. I wonder what combination of build quality and feature set would constitute a saleable new manual focus SLR camera even at the (much lower) price point of the FM3a. I would certainly applaud such an effort on their part.
    Celac.
    Last edited by pelerin; 01-26-2006 at 01:09 AM. Click to view previous post history. Reason: edit for clarity

  4. #44
    Mongo's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2004
    Location
    Pittsburgh, PA
    Shooter
    Multi Format
    Posts
    960
    Quote Originally Posted by sanderx1
    Hmm? I'm certainly not saying Zeiss is evil for not making the lens be AI-P - it is simply part of the technical spec of the lens really and affects on what camera models you can use the built-in meter. Hopefuly they will reconsider at some point because it will quite considerably extend the usefulness of the lens and certainly doesn't make them unsuitable for the other applications. If not - well, the lens are still usefull for many types of photography.
    In my previous message I said that I read those statements on other forums...I can't imagine finding such rhetoric on APUG. If you want to see absolute childishness related to the Zeiss lenses, go check out any forum that caters to the "latest-and-greatest" crowd. Seriously, there are people out there who are taking Zeiss' lens announcements as a personal insult because Zeiss didn't cater to their every whim.

    I'm sure that making the lenses Ai-S rather than Ai-P was a carefully considered decision by Zeiss. I doubt that they wanted to pay Nikon for the Ai-P technology given their past business relationship, and reverse-engineering the lens interface would leave them open to the kind of problems that Sigma has when Nikon or Canon bring out a new camera. I doubt that Zeiss wants to be seen in that same light. Ai-S isn't as useful as a more modern specification for the lenses, but I'm sure Zeiss considered this limitation carefully in their market research.

    Be well.
    Dave
    Film is cheap. Opportunities are priceless.

  5. #45

    Join Date
    Sep 2004
    Shooter
    Multi Format
    Posts
    343
    The emphasis added is mine and not the authors

    Quote Originally Posted by Mongo
    In my previous message I said that I read those statements on other forums...I can't imagine finding such rhetoric on APUG. If you want to see absolute childishness related to the Zeiss lenses, go check out any forum that caters to the "latest-and-greatest" crowd. Seriously, there are people out there who are taking Zeiss' lens announcements as a personal insult because Zeiss didn't cater to their every whim.

    I'm sure that making the lenses Ai-S rather than Ai-P was a carefully considered decision by Zeiss. I doubt that they wanted to pay Nikon for the Ai-P technology given their past business relationship, and reverse-engineering the lens interface would leave them open to the kind of problems that Sigma has when Nikon or Canon bring out a new camera. I doubt that Zeiss wants to be seen in that same light. [COLOR=DarkRed]Ai-S isn't as useful as a more modern specification[/COLOR] for the lenses, but I'm sure Zeiss considered this limitation carefully in their market research.

    Be well.
    Dave
    I think you are right about market research. Zeiss probably considered the market and immediately saw two potential buyers for this lens: hardcore manual focus, prime lens only types and (nooooo... don't shoot) folks using digital capture solutions (e.g., sinar and horseman) that utilize f mount lenses. In fact such a camera is included in the promo photos on the Zeiss site. Given the cost involved in one of these rigs this is exactly the customer segment that might not quibble over the cost difference between Zeiss and Nikon glass.

    [COLOR=DarkRed]Ai-S isn't as useful as a more modern specification[/COLOR]
    Why is this so? How does enabling polymorphic triexpanding whatsis modality on certain SLR's make the lens any better or more useful? It seems to me that not chipping the lens has no effect on the characteristics that make the lens perform well, only on making it compatible with part of the feature set of a range of now discontinued products. I don't mean to imply that these cameras don't work well or produce good results. In fact the last remaining mechanical "Nikon", the FM10, definitely seems a backward step in build quality. However, that does not make AF SLR owners a likely prospect for the sale of a manual focus prime lens. I welcome being proven wrong in this case (I am a confirmed anti-zoom luddite). Let's see a show of hands... how many of N80 owners here open up their camera bags and rummage around through a battery of manual focus primes to find the right focal length?
    Celac.
    Last edited by pelerin; 01-27-2006 at 01:04 PM. Click to view previous post history.

  6. #46
    Mongo's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2004
    Location
    Pittsburgh, PA
    Shooter
    Multi Format
    Posts
    960
    Had Zeiss chipped the lenses, they would have been able to communicate with some Nikon bodies. This allowed certain bodies to meter with the lenses (since they had no actual physical link to the lenses, and therefore couldn't determine the maximum aperture or focal length of the lenses). The N80 is, I believe, a camera that works this way.

    Some bodies (F6 and D200 come to mind) allow the user to enter data about the lens (largest aperture and focal length) into an on-board list, so that the user can tell the camera which lens is mounted. Once that data's been entered, the camera can display the aperture set on the lens in the viewfinder. (I don't know if the electronic rangefinder/focus confirmation light requires the lens data to be entered, but I believe it does.)

    Regardless, a significant number of the current Nikon bodies work well with Ai-S lenses. Both of the film bodies that will remain (F6 and FM10) do, as do the D200, D2X, and D2Hs. Only the low-end digital bodies won't meter with the manual lenses.

    I'm an old-school, prime lens and manual focus guy, so the Zeiss lenses aren't limited for me. I like the idea of the Zeiss lenses, although the cost will likely be more than I'm willing to pay for now.

    As to chipping the lenses...I can understand why some people would want that, just as I can understand why some would have preferred that they come in Canon EOS mount. People around here are expressing their desire that the lenses could have been more useful to them...certainly understandable. But on some other forums I've seen people who have gone far beyond expressing their disappointment...people who are actually furious that Zeiss didn't give them what they wanted. As I said earlier, I'm sure Zeiss has their reasons for their decision, and I hope that it works out for them. My reasons, I admit freely, are completely selfish.

    Be well.
    Dave
    Film is cheap. Opportunities are priceless.

  7. #47

    Join Date
    Jul 2005
    Location
    Toronto, ON
    Shooter
    Medium Format
    Posts
    279
    The interesting things is that they would have had to be chipped to work in EOS mount. As it is, they'll work fine on EOS bodies with adaptors (I currently have a Sigma 24mm f2.8 in F mount sitting on my EOS 3, I also have the M42 adaptor) and that's how I intend on using them. I'm currently planning to buy the 50/1.4 and possibly the 85 and a wide, probably in a mix of M42 and F mount to fill gaps in my collection.

  8. #48

    Join Date
    Sep 2004
    Shooter
    Multi Format
    Posts
    343
    Quote Originally Posted by Mongo
    <SNIP>

    Regardless, a significant number of the current Nikon bodies work well with Ai-S lenses. Both of the film bodies that will remain (F6 and FM10) do, as do the D200, D2X, and D2Hs. Only the low-end digital bodies won't meter with the manual lenses.
    ...and the low end film SLRs on which they are based. I obviously do not have access to Nikon's sales data but I would be willing to bet all my beer money that the sale of AF prime lenses to the owners of these cameras is close to zilch. Even if they provided full meter coupling the sales projections for new manual focus lenses would have to be small fraction of that already small market.

    Quote Originally Posted by Mongo
    I'm an old-school, prime lens and manual focus guy, so the Zeiss lenses aren't limited for me. I like the idea of the Zeiss lenses, although the cost will likely be more than I'm willing to pay for now.
    Me too and... me too. I own many nice Nikon lenses. It seems to me a greater likelihood that I end up with one of the new ZI lenses but, if what they offer in the 20-35mm range is a significant upgrade over the lenses I already own I could probably justify replacing some of the higher mileage items. I can't imagine replacing the 85 I already own but a fast 100-105mm would be very tempting.

    Quote Originally Posted by Mongo
    As to chipping the lenses...I can understand why some people would want that, just as I can understand why some would have preferred that they come in Canon EOS mount. People around here are expressing their desire that the lenses could have been more useful to them...certainly understandable. But on some other forums I've seen people who have gone far beyond expressing their disappointment...people who are actually furious that Zeiss didn't give them what they wanted. As I said earlier, I'm sure Zeiss has their reasons for their decision, and I hope that it works out for them. My reasons, I admit freely, are completely selfish.

    Be well.
    Dave
    I think two things are in play here: I believe that the patent on the f mount ran out (similar to the m mount) which makes it an attractive from a cost standpoint and secondly, while some may gripe loudly across the net, that doesn't mean that they would actually line up and pay to put manual focus prime lenses on their auto-gizmos. Anyway, the price of excellent Nikon bodies is so cheap in the secondhand market that anyone who can afford this glass can certainly afford a manual focus camera as an accessory for their manual focus lens. I'm sorry if my post above sounded combative and I meant no question as to the validity of your reasoning.
    Celac.

    As a postscript... it seems pretty cool to me that both the F & M mounts have not only seen continuous service longer than anything else in their segments but are being engineered into new products half a century after their intitial design.

Page 5 of 5 FirstFirst 12345


 

APUG PARTNERS EQUALLY FUNDING OUR COMMUNITY:



Contact Us  |  Support Us!  |  Advertise  |  Site Terms  |  Archive  —   Search  |  Mobile Device Access  |  RSS  |  Facebook  |  Linkedin