plea to Sony/Zeiss

Given the vastly increased computing power we have today and the computational difficulty of lens design, I would guess that the "classic" Zeiss designs could be improved. I thought that the modern Zeiss advantage would have more to do with specialist glass additives, better coatings, better materials, better quality control, etc.

Correct me if I'm wrong, but as I understand it the terms "planar" and "distagon" have more to do with the arrangement and exact curvatures of the ground glass elements - the parameters that can be improved by throwing more computing power at the problem. Quality workmanship is not that simple to improve or copy.

Another thing is that the flange focal distance on alpha mount is 44.5mm and the throat size is 49.7mm. On Nikon F mount it's 46.5mm and 44mm respectively. What is so hard about making all those EF-S and F mount lenses in A-mount also? Maybe there's an opportunity for the likes of mr James Lao here.

Minolta did 50/1.2 & 58/1.2 in the past. It shouldn't be so hard.
I think it's more about priority in the factory.

PhotoTraveler wrote: What minolta did in the past means nothing.   You can't just tack ancient MF lens and go presto and have a new lens. What is old is gone.   New lens means new effort, all new design. Sony could have Zeiss make a 1.2 or 1.4 50mm very quickly and probably are in fact doing such things. But since they have a 50mm,   3 50 mm lenses actualy, it's not a priority. Let Sony get the other wide angle out. The next 2 ZA primes after that will probably be a 35 and a 50.

Exactly. From what i understood they used glass and methods that are not available anymore or cannot be used for environmental reasons.

technical difficulties related to changing existing Zeiss designs to accept the alpha mount with AF are not a problem. it can be done - and the Zeiss/Sony combo has chosen not to do it.

they have chosen to design completely new lenses and that certainly was not the cheapest option. it may have been wise to do so, from a commercial point of view: the alpha mount now has the privilege of using some dedicated designs that are not available elsewhere, the latest addition being a 24 mm FF lens.

as for a 50 mm and a 35 mm: i would love a Zeiss design. the Sony 50/1.4 is not that good unless stopped down to 2.8 or higher and the 35 mm is, well, a special case that you either like or do not like.

however, introducing a 50 and a 35 mm along what is already available now, does not look good marketing wise. most Sony shooters do not use the 50 and for those who do the 50 is already adequate most of the time. the same goes for the 35 mm. it could be a nice "standard" lens on aps-c but it would be both too large and heavy and too costly.

maybe when a 9xx is introduced a 50/1.2 and a 35/1.2 are nice to come along...

as far as longer lenses are concerned: a Sony rebadged 200 HS or a new and equally good design with SSM would indeed be attractive. a zeiss 200/2 would also be nice, but most likely too expensive to expect interesting sales figures. let's face it, who on Dyxum would be willing and able to pay Euro 3000+ for such a lens?

finally, a 16 mm FF lens from Zeiss for a dslr? i doubt whether there ever will be one. it would be very difficult, costly and complicated to design a lens that would, compared to the other Zeiss WA's, give a decent IQ.

so, there is not much left to wish for, apart from the 50 and 35 and perhaps a future 20. all of these lenses would certainly pose marketing problems that are not easily solved.

No, starting from scratch is easier. You go and want to make a 1.2/50 G SSM from an 1.2/50 MC you aren't going to re-use anything.

It's the reality of the engineering world. Just because you made it in the past, doesn't mean you can today. First, Sony has no rights to those designs. If they did, they are all on paper, someone is going to have to go through and remodel/redraw them to bring them back to the modern world and manufacturing. But then you have to make all the changes. To turn them into AF lenses, all the body and mechanics gets scrapped. Even if you decide to make them manual focus which is a non-starter business wise for Sony, you would re-style much of them just so they don't look stupid in your lineup. And then you have to re-engineer the whol back of the lens to take A mount. Then a whole new aperture system.   Then on to the glass which probably can't be made any more do to materials in the glass being banned. Beyond that the company that made the glass may no longer exist, all the tooling is probably long since gone. And even if you could get the glass all back it's performance is not going to be as good as glass designed brand new today.

Old lenses are worthless to Sony, Zeiss etc. To try and bring something back into production is much more expensive than starting new. This kind of reality happens all the time in engineering/manufacturing. We are surrounded in a world of stuff that cannot be made again, or to make it again involves more effort than just making something all new.   I work in an industry were we have active product in use and still being serviced that was launched in the 1950s. A great deal of engineering is spent developing replacement paths since components simply can't be sourced anymore, or there exist no way to manufacture a component anymore. Often the solution is to update it to something that is 30 years old and obsolete, but better than the 50 year old and obsolete component. At any moment our customer could ask us to make a new batch of product and we haven't made any in decades, it's questionable if we could make them still.   And then your still left with something that while brand new would be completely obsolete.

When Zeiss launches those ZF lenses. They aren't just pulling out files and going to the shop with them. The whole thing needs to go through all their current processes, Q and A, analysis, manufacturing planning, etc, all requiring everything models, drawings, etc to be all updated.   While much of the ZF line may look like something from way back when, in reality it only shares looks, not actual parts.

If Sony wanted a 1.2/50, they could have Zeiss design and make a ground up new one quicker/easier/cheaper than trying to recycle an old design. Where Zeiss would re-use stuff is re-use bits used on the 2/24 ZA SSM, as it would actually have parts they could re-use and leverage.

youpii wrote: MichelvA wrote: PhotoTraveler wrote: What minolta did in the past means nothing.   You can't just tack ancient MF lens and go presto and have a new lens. What is old is gone.   New lens means new effort, all new design. Sony could have Zeiss make a 1.2 or 1.4 50mm very quickly and probably are in fact doing such things. But since they have a 50mm,   3 50 mm lenses actualy, it's not a priority. Let Sony get the other wide angle out. The next 2 ZA primes after that will probably be a 35 and a 50.    Exactly. From what i understood they used glass and methods that are not available anymore or cannot be used for environmental reasons. The Sonnars, Planars, Distagons bear these names because they are based on very old Zeiss classical designs. Adapting them to new glass is much easier than starting from scratch. But what I meant is that if it was possible during the Minolta era (and the limited computers of that time), it should also be possible now. The only problem is that "top management" didn't approve these projects and probably downsized the R&D teams compared to the Minolta era.

PhotoTraveler wrote: When Zeiss launches those ZF lenses. They aren't just pulling out files and going to the shop with them. The whole thing needs to go through all their current processes, Q and A, analysis, manufacturing planning, etc, all requiring everything models, drawings, etc to be all updated. While much of the ZF line may look like something from way back when, in reality it only shares looks, not actual parts.

However difficult you say it is. They actually did it, and quite fast.

I'd like Sony to do a bit more in that area. Sony announced a half-billion dollar investment for a new chips, but nothing for lenses.

My plea to SONY as far as lenses go is:

Drop your prices

Improve Quality Control.

That's it.