DPR Forum

Welcome to the Friendly Aisles!
DPRF is a photography forum with people from all over the world freely sharing their knowledge and love of photography. Everybody is welcome, from beginners to the experienced professional. Whether it is Medium Format, fullframe, APS-C, MFT or smaller formats. Digital or film. DPRF is a forum for everybody and for every format.
Enjoy this modern, easy to use software. Look also at our Reviews & Gallery!

Have Zeiss lost the plot again

grumpoid

Well-Known Member
Hi all,
So we have the not very surprising news; the new ZF lenses are Nikon F mount. I can see a small niche market for them, but still I am surprised; it seems a financial risk to say the least, Nikon F users are very keen on their Nikkors, why buy more expensive Zeiss lenses? but the real reason I ask If Carl Zeiss have finally lost the plot...M42 lenses,...are they mad? who on earth is going to pay several hundred pounds for new Zeiss lenses for their £40 Pentax spotmatic et al? surely Zeiss are just going to lose lots of money? their totally miguided and you might say plain incompetent product ideas never cease to amaze, or maybe it was just Mr Kobayashi fancying some Zeiss glass for his equally misguided M42 SLR's?
I love Contax & Zeiss but seriously worry for their sanity and business acumen.
Does anyone see any hope of Zeiss making money with M42 lenses?....

Grumpy Steve.
 
My wild and totally uneducated guess.

First part: These mounts were the only ones or ones most easily available from the patent point of view.
Zeiss has lost its partnership in the 35 mm SLR world and now is realigning its business more along Tamron lines - selling lens for various mounts themselves. ZF and ZS could be seen as a desperate stop gap measure to salvage something from the lost slr market. These mounts were just the first that could be arranged speedily.

Second part: Zeiss does not own c/y mount - Kyocera does. My first reaction to Zeiss sales pitch that ZS line is the one to be used on Canon dslr was - why? I can mount my c/y lens on Canon no problem, I do not need another mount for that. But this does not solve Zeiss problem, who needs to keep selling NEW lens to make profit. Obvioulsy, for some reason Zeiss cannot keep producing and selling c/y mount lens themselves (which would make a lot of sense - look at those prices that Canon users pay for used Zeiss C/Y wideangles).

Maybe I am totally misguided and there are no patent restrictions for third party lens makers producing lens for various mounts, but then why Zeiss isn't producing lens with eos mount?

Does M42 mount make a business sense? It could, if Zeiss can somehow demonstrate that the new offerings are really improved designs providing better quality. This could persuade Canon dslr users to buy these lens over second hand C/Y mount lens. One can mount ZF lens on Canon EOS, so M42 is kind of redundant, but maybe the ZS line will be cheaper? Another reason why canon users may opt for ZF or ZS over used C/Y mount lens is because these lens would be new (warranty, service support etc.)
 
Hi Steve,
I cannot see them selling many M42 mount lenses. It is an attractive idea but in a nostalgic sort of way. Retro is fine but the photographic world has moved on to digital.
It is a universal mount I suppose in that adapters are cheap and easily available. I have one myself for C/Y to M42 but it won't be universal for small sensors because the lenses suffer from the crop factor. M42 used to be the universal mount 30 years or so ago. Also you do lose all the auto functions with an adapter plus open aperture metering. I cannot see many people buying the Bessaflex or an old screw mount camera just to be able to use these lenses. After all I doubt that the lenses from Canon and Nikon so bad that someone would pay hundreds to mount a screw thread Zeiss via an adapter. They would have to be very dedicated Zeissophiles.

Maybe in due course CZ will bring out lenses in all the current mounts, in the way that you suggest Didzis like e.g a high class Tamron, but there will still be the problem of non autofocus. Personally I like manual focus but most people now like auto and sometimes I wonder as I squint and try and get the right focus in lowlight through my old eyes and glasses.

I think it is a real problem for CZ and I have to admire them for trying. These may be stop gap measures simply giving us all more options but each option must be very expensive to produce.

John
419303.jpg
 
Hi John,

You echo my thoughts exactly, although I simply think Zeiss are barking mad. The whole M42 exercise smacks of real desperation, which is all the more surprising since the Zeiss group is doing so financially well. To simply throw money down the drain just to retain market presence is just non-sensical.
The C/Y mount issue is interesting, I thought Kyocera had rights to the Contax brand, but C/Y mount lenses are ZEISS brand, so is it true that Zeiss are unable to make C/Y lenses? or did Zeiss really negotiate such an awful contract with Kyocera that they cannot even manufacture their own brand lenses?.....makes my head spin, all this German incompetance, hope they are just as poor on the football pitch this summer...

Steve the grumpy one.
 
You guys are right, who want a new line of lens to retrofit into Canon body. The only thing makes sense to me is "if" Zeiss makes a killer M42 21mm and sell for $900. If that's the case, I would get one and a $30 adaptor for Canon body.
 
Steve!
I tend to disagree about the deal with Kyocera being "awful" (providing that it is actually true that Zeiss does not own C/Y mount). Zeiss had it quite easy while things were more or less OK with Contax brand. They did not have to worry about designing the mount, cameras, marketing them, supporting them - all they had to do was to provide their optical designs - and do some manufacturing. Yashica/Kyocera had to take all the market hits etc. Correct me if I am wrong, but I don't think that Zeiss had to introduce very many new optical designs especially and solely for Contax - many of these designs were shared with Rollei 35mm system etc.

In fact I think that the practice where the maker of cameras designs and owns the lens mount is a pretty standard way of doing this business - so, I am 100% sure that Hasselblad owns all the rights to Hassy mount (despite the fact that this is Zeiss glass in front) the same with Rollei in its various mounts etc. The fact that along the right to use their optical designs Zeiss also leased/sold the right to slap a Contax name on Kyocera cameras makes no difference.

A little side note: the final part of your latest post re "German incompetence" makes me a little uneasy. Why generalize, and what has this to do with soccer?

John:
Lack of manual focus is not a problem for the niche market that the Zeiss trying to play to. I think that the majority of applications where I would like to use Zeiss glass on a Canon slr would be tripod based work anyway, where even with Canon EF glass I would use manual focus. Of course there are people out there (and on this here forum) who have learned to use Zeiss glass even for quick paced reportage/social photography work. By the way, many Canon dsrl users DO think that Canon wideangle primes are SO BAD to pay raving amounts of money for second hand Zeiss manual lens.
 
Didzis,

I am sure that Steve's football comment was just a little joke between two Brits because in the best sporting tradition we hope to win the soccer. I don't think that can cause offence. (Hope Steve doesn't mind my commenting.)

As for lack of manual focus, I would still think that in terms of sales of a sufficient volume to make production worthwhile, lack of it must be a problem. It is not as though CZ cannot produce AF lenses either. It could be offered as an option perhaps.

John
 
Hi, Yep....a little in joke refering to this summers football world cup, being held in Germany, where with a little good fortune, 40 years of hurt may be consigned to the dustbin...apologies to all non football fans. Re the 'awful' contract which Zeiss entered into with Kyocera; yes for all the reasons given by Didzis, the contract appears ok, but the one simple reason that Zeiss finds itself in this current crazy mess, is THAT contract! All Zeiss had to do was enter a simple little clause that stated should Kyocera drop Contax early, then the rights reverted to Zeiss with immediate effect, then Zeiss could still make C/Y lenses for its own Contax brand, or maybe even get the nice Cosina people to make C/Y cameras. It is because of that oversight by the Zeiss legal people that they are in the mad sitiuation, where they 'own' Contax but not the rights to manufacture it...crazy!! It must have been fun in the Zeiss boardroom when they heard Kyocera dropped Contax....surely some one must have asked about an early discontinuation clause?...then lots of red faces when the penny dropped. I am no lawyer, but to me it seems obvious the legal lot dropped a BIG clanger. By the way, anyone speculating what the other two ZF lenses are in the Zeiss photos? I see a ZF 60mm f2 Macro Planar and a ZF 28mm f2 Distagon? anyone got any other ideas?
 
I suppose that Kyocera are hanging on to all their options but it makes you wonder what benefit thay can have for keeping the rights to the mount. Perhaps they are hoping to sell them to the highest bidder or hold CZ to ransom.
 
Back
Top