Go Back   Steve's Digicams Forums > Digital SLR and Interchangeable Lens Cameras > Sony Alpha dSLR / Konica Minolta dSLR, Sony SLT

Reply
 
Thread Tools Search this Thread
Old Jun 6, 2006, 9:14 AM   #1
NHL
Senior Member
 
NHL's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jun 2002
Location: 39.18776, -77.311353333333
Posts: 11,547
Default

The Planar T* 85 mm may say Carl Zeiss on it , but it looks a lot like my old Minolta 85mm f/1.4 - Just wondering if Minolta 'asset' is actually transferred to Zeiss as well?

-> Kind of make sense to me since how do they come up with so many lenses in such a short period...
The 16-80mm Vario-Sonnar T* zoom may be new and quite different from the Tamron sourced lens though
NHL is offline   Reply With Quote
Sponsored Links
Old Jun 7, 2006, 6:54 AM   #2
Senior Member
 
Join Date: May 2005
Posts: 338
Default

From what I understand, most of sony's 'Zeiss" glass is licensed. Sony has the lens manufactured by someone else, using the Zeiss specifications and labels them Zeiss. The names from old no longer mean what they used to anyway, Putting Zeiss on the glass is a marketing ploy. I suppose this is okay though, the KM 85 f1.4is a fine lens, they can label it 'Joe Dirt' for all I care.
Mercury694 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old Jun 7, 2006, 7:16 AM   #3
Senior Member
 
nickphoto123's Avatar
 
Join Date: Aug 2004
Posts: 1,356
Default

I recently read that Zeiss has quality control inspectors along the production lines to ensure the 'overseas' Zeiss glass 'equals' their home grown glass.

The reviews will easily determine if the Zeiss magic is deliverable by any lens.

The Zeiss standard of quality is very well define in the images captured with their glass. We won't have to guess which is better.

Regards, Nicholas
nickphoto123 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old Jun 7, 2006, 8:46 AM   #4
Senior Member
 
Join Date: May 2005
Posts: 338
Default

In my mind that conjures up an image of a Zeiss inspector in a military uniform whipping the heck out of a small malaysian boy for not working up to Zeiss standards.

The fact that Zeiss can leverage decades of craftsmanship to make money on Sony's digicams is great for them. It does speak to their current commitment to the quality of the product they're willing to put their name on though.I have to wonder whether they're accepting mediocrity for profit.They cannot possibly expect that I will continue to assume that all glass with the Zeiss name on it is world class.

This is the case with so many products these days though. I guess "everybody's doin it". But then like mom said- "If everyone jumped off a bridge..."
Mercury694 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old Jun 7, 2006, 9:20 AM   #5
NHL
Senior Member
 
NHL's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jun 2002
Location: 39.18776, -77.311353333333
Posts: 11,547
Default

IMO it's all in the design up-front... :idea:

Most manufacturings are now all automated anyway so does it really matter where the actual machines are located? Lower labor cost just mean more affordability for most of us after all



Attached Images
 
NHL is offline   Reply With Quote
Old Jun 7, 2006, 2:19 PM   #6
Senior Member
 
Join Date: May 2005
Posts: 338
Default

NHL,

IMO you're wrong on lens quality hinging on design. The major issue I've noticed with lenses made in the last decade is not flawed design, it is quality variance between copies of exactly the same lens. I've been lucky on a few and been unlucky on a few, but very few lenses are designed poorly today- mostly due to the ease and relative low cost of CAD.

I would personally rather pay 20% more for a lens I know will perform. Right now, I rarely buy high end aftermarket lenses from sources that aren't local. I'd rather pay the markup than send an expensive lens back for RMA to an online source. There was a time when you could buy a Zeiss lens unseen- the quality could be assumed. I think that time has been gone for at least 5 years.

Also, has anyone noticed that APO means very little these days? APO lenses used to always have better apertures and high quality builds.
Mercury694 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old Jun 7, 2006, 3:52 PM   #7
NHL
Senior Member
 
NHL's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jun 2002
Location: 39.18776, -77.311353333333
Posts: 11,547
Default

Mercury694 wrote:
Quote:
The major issue I've noticed with lenses made in the last decade is not flawed design, it is quality variance between copies of exactly the same lens...
Isn't this issue addressed by the ISO-9000 certification?
http://www.zeiss.de/c12567be0045da85...highlight=9000





Quote:
Also, has anyone noticed that APO means very little these days? APO lenses used to always have better apertures and high quality builds.
Well it's still mean all that to me - APO lenses in the Sigma's EX family that I happened to own (and highly recommended):
http://www.sigmaphoto.com/lenses/len...mp;navigator=3
http://www.sigmaphoto.com/lenses/len...mp;navigator=3
http://www.sigmaphoto.com/lenses/len...mp;navigator=5
NHL is offline   Reply With Quote
Old Jun 7, 2006, 4:24 PM   #8
Senior Member
 
tmoreau's Avatar
 
Join Date: Dec 2005
Posts: 477
Default

"Isn't this issue addressed by the ISO-9000 certification?"

LOL!!!! No. Its a great theory, but working in a certified plant myself I can imagine all the ways that it dosent help.

Search for info about the Sigma 18-50 f/2.8, they range from amazing to worse than a kit lens based on user reports, I finally decided to pass on that lens becuase its a $130 markup if I want to buy it local, and I am too uneasy to buy one online. The people who got bad samples certainly have more to say than those who got good ones (making things appear worse than they are), but that dosent change the fact that there are dozens of reported lenses sold in defective condition.
tmoreau is offline   Reply With Quote
Old Jun 7, 2006, 11:50 PM   #9
NHL
Senior Member
 
NHL's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jun 2002
Location: 39.18776, -77.311353333333
Posts: 11,547
Default

I can only speak for myself since I own at least 5 Sigma all EX series and no return (and will likely buy again in the Minolta mount)

See these links below for sample images:
120-300 f/2.8 EX (with a 2x teleconverter ON)!
150 f/2.8 EX Macro
12-24 EX
17-35 f/2.8 EX

Think about it - how can an outfit stay solvent when they are offering a 3-years warranty on their lenses when most of the shipments get returned?
As you probably know from your plant that warranty repair works can be costly to any business - Would it then behoove any company to get their product right the 1st time out through QC (i.e. six Sigma) so they can maximize their profits?

-> There's no doubt in my mind that some lens can be faulty (through shipment or otherwise), but they tend to be more in the (vocal)minority than the norm... :idea:
NHL is offline   Reply With Quote
Old Jun 8, 2006, 9:49 PM   #10
Senior Member
 
Join Date: May 2005
Posts: 338
Default

Whoa, is this thread pinwheeling out of control fast. All I originally intended to say and still believe is that I find it a bit disappointing that names we used to count on for world class lenses 100% are licensing their names to the lowest bidder. You may or may not think that effects the quality of the lenses you're buying- I do.

I've had good luck with Sigma also. I have the 18-50 that is rated somewhere between poor and very poor at every site I visit and mine is pretty decent (I'd say average). It's no masterpiece but it will fill in for my below 35mm needs just fine until I can get my hands on something truly great. I cannot say the same thing for my Sigma flashgun. It's mediocre, inconsistent and regardless of what Sigma says- it does not seem to have communication with the camera (beyond focal length).

I have been eyeing that 12-24 EX sigma, the range would be nice to have. The lenses in that range are still a way down my research list though, andI'm more partial to Tamron lenses in the aftermarket.
Mercury694 is offline   Reply With Quote
 
Reply


Thread Tools Search this Thread
Search this Thread:

Advanced Search

Posting Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

BB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is Off
Trackbacks are Off
Pingbacks are Off
Refbacks are Off



All times are GMT -5. The time now is 4:17 PM.