Previous news story    Next news story

Zeiss names and defines new lenses for Sony NEX and Fujifilm X cameras

By dpreview staff on Apr 30, 2013 at 21:18 GMT

Zeiss has announced more detail on two forthcoming lenses for Sony NEX and Fujifilm X-mount APS-C cameras -  the 12mm F2.8 and 32mm F1.8 lenses it unveiled at Photokina last year. The announcement came via the Zeiss blog, which details on how the company came to the name for the new series, 'Touit.' Pronounced like the English 'do it,' the new lenses are named after a Latin American band-tailed parrot, which Zeiss describes as 'small and agile,' much like mirrorless cameras are meant to be.

Though carrying the same name, the two lenses are noticeably different for the two platforms. On the Sony E-mount, both have a large focus ring and a straight collar back toward the mount, while the Fujifilm X-mount's focus ring is shorter, presumably to make room for the aperture ring.

Pricing for the two new lenses was not mentioned; their original estimate was around €1000 / $1300 each. Zeiss has also posted data sheets and a brochure for the two new lenses. 

Equivalent to an 18mm lens on either of these APS-C mounts, the Zeiss Touit 2.8/12 is described as having a 99-degree angle of view and a T* anti-reflective coating.
The Zeiss Touit 1.8/32 is equivalent to 48mm, described as a normal lens, offering 'the same angle of view as the human eye,' according to the company.

Comments

Total comments: 110
Babka08
By Babka08 (11 months ago)

OK, let's get this straight. This 35mm 1.8 lens is $900. A 50mm 1.4 on any mount is about $350, and a 50mm 1.8 on any mount is around $110-200. I can buy a full-frame D6 or 600D for about $1600. Plus the couple hundred, and I'm still under $2,000, which is about what the Touit and one of the little apsc cameras costs. I get the whole small form factor thing, but something went sideways here.

0 upvotes
Section10
By Section10 (10 months ago)

You just compared a used full frame camera and unspecified non-zeiss lens with a brand new Zeiss lens and a brand new NEX or equivalent and you're wondering why the one costs more than the other when you still don't necessarily get the same results... hm

0 upvotes
Frankinidaho
By Frankinidaho (11 months ago)

Do these lenses have optical stabilization?

0 upvotes
Frankinidaho
By Frankinidaho (11 months ago)

Ignore the question. I read in posts below that they don't.

1 upvote
J GGG
By J GGG (11 months ago)

I love my Fujis' (sensors and glass) ...and I DO LOVE my Zeiss 15mm in my Canon Dx...so I think I'll not resist buying a Zeiss for my X1-Pro
...but still I wouldn't part with my new 100S (or the older 100) for nothing in this world!!!

Comment edited 2 times, last edit 54 seconds after posting
0 upvotes
schaki
By schaki (11 months ago)

No support for Samsung NX eh?

0 upvotes
GWYNOXY
By GWYNOXY (11 months ago)

If the price is right then it may be a shot in the arm for Sony users but the existing Fuji glass is exceptional... at ridiculously low prices. Either way it is great for the continued progression of the mirrorless market...

Comment edited 1 minute after posting
2 upvotes
Hugo808
By Hugo808 (11 months ago)

I always said I'd get a round touit sooner or later.

Comment edited 19 seconds after posting
0 upvotes
GWYNOXY
By GWYNOXY (11 months ago)

Lol... you should start a separate thread on this line of jokes. Go-on I dare you to touit...

1 upvote
rabbitzilla
By rabbitzilla (11 months ago)

My Zeiss 24 f/1.8 OSS ZA is too good for my NEX-6.
I think the Touit lenses will be the same.

... waiting for a much better body.

0 upvotes
RStyga
By RStyga (11 months ago)

Zeiss lenses prices are lower only than Leica's... ridiculous.

1 upvote
samhain
By samhain (11 months ago)

I don't see them selling many in the fuji mount as the available fuji glass is exceptional & at a lower price.
But Sony NEX needs this, as Sony has left NEX owners somewhat high & dry in the glass dept.

Regardless- good job Zeiss!

1 upvote
peevee1
By peevee1 (11 months ago)

"Sony NEX needs this"

Only 12/2.8 is useful (although at $1250, just too expensive, more expensive than NEX-7, so I would not expect many sales). $900 32/1.8 has little chance against $450 Sony E 35/1.8 OSS.

Both are only for real brand fans.

0 upvotes
yabokkie
By yabokkie (11 months ago)

lenses for NEX, XF, and EF-M are virtually the same and all of the three mounts need good glasses as well as good bodies.

in general a lens becomes very expensive when the focal length passes (shorter than) half of the flange-back, which is 9mm for these three mounts. so this is a good place for makers to sell cheap lenses at high prices.

Comment edited 1 minute after posting
0 upvotes
peevee1
By peevee1 (11 months ago)

Flange has little to do with it, diagonal of the sensor a lot, and how much can you protrude rear elements inside of the mount (mirror mirror).

0 upvotes
yabokkie
By yabokkie (11 months ago)

agree the image circle is a big factor but at least it's the same for these three mounts.

0 upvotes
ggsphoto
By ggsphoto (11 months ago)

From my fuji oriented perspective - the key is going to be how it performs against the fuji 14mm lens. I don't own this (see my posts today for various 14mm vs <put your own lens her> topics). I was just about to pull the trigger on buying it...now I have to wait...

1 upvote
Sad Joe
By Sad Joe (11 months ago)

Think the Sony NEX line NEEDS decent glass, less so the Fuji X range which already has some excellent lenses. Still a good move for Zeiss me thinks. Leica to do the same next > ? Only joking Leica fans !!

1 upvote
km25
By km25 (11 months ago)

This gives new depth to the Sony and Fuji systems. I may look at the f/1.8 32mm.
But the wide, have the f/2.8 14mm Fuji. Zeiss is going to hard pressed to beat that lens, even if it does it will be by small amounts. I wish the 14mm more of 16mm so it would be like a 24mm in full frame. I am just in love with the 14mm and can live without the 2mms, 12mm, just tto wide for me. The 35mm f1.4 Fuji lens is faster and is a fine lens. I moe than likely the the next lens I get for X-pro. If not the Fuji f/1.4 23mm.
I am so glad I went mirrorless with Fuji!

2 upvotes
yabokkie
By yabokkie (11 months ago)

32/1.8 is a very cheap and taste flat lens on APS-C and
it's way easier to make a 14/2.8 for mirrorless than SLR mounts.

Comment edited 1 minute after posting
0 upvotes
pictureAngst
By pictureAngst (11 months ago)

If Zeiss do a x2 teleconvertor for these, do you think they'll call it the touit touoo?

4 upvotes
HBowman
By HBowman (11 months ago)

Touit is about the dumbest name I’ve ever heard for a lens line. Why not tweet or trout ... wtf ??!!

6 upvotes
EinsteinsGhost
By EinsteinsGhost (11 months ago)

That is because you don't know what it means. Your name has a meaning and can be distorted as well.

4 upvotes
yabokkie
By yabokkie (11 months ago)

they can call it sh!t and I'll be interested if the cost-performance is good. Leica, Zeiss, Canon, or Nikon mean no difference to me though Leica and Zeiss may mean "stupid user." I'll always cover them with tape, the standard process before I use any camera/lens.

Comment edited 2 times, last edit 3 minutes after posting
1 upvote
Petka
By Petka (11 months ago)

Eh... do you cover the lens or your face with tape? It works the same.

If you cover the lens with tape it really signifies a "stupid user"...

1 upvote
yabokkie
By yabokkie (11 months ago)

Petka, actually not covering the lens/camera with tape (better physically remove the emblem/brand name for good if possible) mean stupid.

it could even risk your life. this is happening in Syria where camera men are considered high value target.

Comment edited 3 minutes after posting
0 upvotes
AngryCorgi
By AngryCorgi (11 months ago)

The human eye comment is interesting. I've seen 40mm and 42mm referred to as the "same AOV as the human eye", but never an AOV as narrow as 48mm. This proves that marketing is worth exactly nil.

Comment edited 2 times, last edit 52 seconds after posting
7 upvotes
caerphoto
By caerphoto (11 months ago)

The angle of view of the average human eye is more like 180 degrees, as is obvious if you just test it: see how far you can move your hands back before you can no longer see them when looking straight ahead.

The 40–50mm range is, I guess, the AoV of the foveal part of our vision, which of course is much narrower.

2 upvotes
Samuel Dilworth
By Samuel Dilworth (11 months ago)

The human fovea has an angle of view of about 2 degrees: much less than a 50 mm-e lens. And as you note, our peripheral vision encompasses vastly more than a 50 mm-e lens.

A 50 mm-e lens in no way has a similar angle of view to human vision. See micahmedia’s comment below – and my reply to his point about distortion – for the real reason a 50 mm-e lens is often said to have similarities to human vision.

5 upvotes
pictureAngst
By pictureAngst (11 months ago)

Back in the mists of time when I was using a Ricoh KR5 Super film SLR, I had a 55mm prime that Ricoh said was the same FOV as eyesight.
When I looked through the viewfinder and kept both eyes open it pretty much matched in magnification.
Of course OVF magnification had a big part to play in that but that's how I came to regard the 50mm range as 'normal'

1 upvote
yabokkie
By yabokkie (11 months ago)

the angle of view of our eyes is narrower than super telephoto lenses. you can test this by looking at a newspaper and see how wide you can read the text without moving your eyes.

0 upvotes
blank_
By blank_ (11 months ago)

I dont get the size - zeiss website says 86 /81 (with caps?) , but when pictured with the camera it looks smaller to me.

full frame Zeiss 18/3,5 designed around bigger sensor and much longer flange distance has about the same lenght - I think these should be much smaller to go with compact camera concept

Comment edited 26 seconds after posting
0 upvotes
Jun2
By Jun2 (11 months ago)

no aperture rings in the E-mount versions.

Comment edited 16 seconds after posting
1 upvote
88SAL
By 88SAL (11 months ago)

Why should there be? Alternatively, why shouldnt all lenses have aperture rings?

2 upvotes
Samaistuin
By Samaistuin (11 months ago)

It's a delight to see that Fuji has chosen to finally bring back the aperture ring on lenses.

I've never really gotten along well with digital system cameras for they usually chose to forego implementing aperture selection with the ring. Canon in particular. Nikon being a notable exception, and Pentax to some extent.

If I ever get an EVIL, I'll definitely go with a Fuji.

1 upvote
ogl
By ogl (11 months ago)

Are 12/2.8 with AF or not?

0 upvotes
Shamael
By Shamael (11 months ago)

they all go for 1500$, 32/1.8, 12/2.8, and 50/2.8. A lot of money for 2 diaphragm faster than Sigma 30 that sells 199$. It is not pocketable, so better run a Tokina 11/16 2.8 with adapter and a Sigma 30 1.4 beside. You get the 2 lenses and the adapter for the price of one Zeiss lens. Now, just answer AF, with EA2 adapter on NEX they do that as well. Zeiss is good, but their prices suck.

Comment edited 7 minutes after posting
5 upvotes
ashwins
By ashwins (11 months ago)

Why would you pay $199 for a Sigma 30mm F2.8 EX DN lens??

Here in Europe it sells for 90 euros (less than $120).

0 upvotes
AngryCorgi
By AngryCorgi (11 months ago)

The old 30 DN is $99 in the US. The new variant (old DN is discontinued), the 30 DN Art is $199. I think that is where your disconnect is.

2 upvotes
brendon1000
By brendon1000 (11 months ago)

The main competitor of the Zeiss 32mm is not the Sigma 30mm f2.8.

People who need a f1.8 lens isn't going to compromise on a f2.8 lens.

The Sigma is no doubt a good lens but Zeiss lenses are legendary for their IQ. They would have would up a long ago in the DSLR lens market if they weren't good considering they were all manual focus lenses with little to no electronics.

For E mount and XF mount they are fully electronic with AF, camera aperture control and metering.

Plus Zeiss lenses generally have stellar build quality.

That said the main competitor is going to be the Sony 35mm f1.8 OSS which is a sharp lens, as fast as the Zeiss, has OSS as well and costs around $1000 less.

For the Fuji system Zeiss will have a far tougher time as the very capable 35mm f1.4 lens is available for half the price of the Zeiss and is 2/3rds of a stop faster to boot.

However those who want every last bit of quality will pay the extra premium that the Zeiss lens commands.

1 upvote
Petka
By Petka (11 months ago)

Fuji 35 f/1.4 is so damn sharp that Zeiss has to pull a miracle from their hat to beat it. I think they have made a mistake. They should design lenses Fuji does not have in their lineup.

2 upvotes
h2k
By h2k (11 months ago)

Funny the esoteric naming details in your front-page news. Who cares? Better would be to mention if they are stabilized and if they autofocus and if a release date is known.

3 upvotes
Trollshavethebestcandy
By Trollshavethebestcandy (11 months ago)

You need a fancy name to sell it to fools with lots of expendable cash.

8 upvotes
Alberto Tanikawa
By Alberto Tanikawa (11 months ago)

Touit like a touiger? :D

3 upvotes
cgarrard
By cgarrard (11 months ago)

Zeiss will sell a ton, nothing touit.

C

10 upvotes
lmtfa
By lmtfa (11 months ago)

lol. Classic

0 upvotes
peevee1
By peevee1 (11 months ago)

So no stabilization on either?

1 upvote
Spectro
By Spectro (11 months ago)

wide angle you don't really need it. maybe if you can't hold a camera.

Comment edited 7 seconds after posting
2 upvotes
h2k
By h2k (11 months ago)

Yes, on wide-angle you never need stabilization, especially NOT indoors or after sunset.

9 upvotes
CFynn
By CFynn (11 months ago)

.. and how many stabilized w/a prime lenses are there from other manufacturers?

Optical stabilization also comes at a cost - extra elements, design constraints to accommodate those elements, and some loss of IQ.

2 upvotes
brendon1000
By brendon1000 (11 months ago)

Sony has a 10-18mm OSS lens and a 35mm f1.8 OSS lens for E mount. There isn't always a loss of IQ else Canon wouldn't have launched lenses with IS/VR.

3 upvotes
peevee1
By peevee1 (11 months ago)

"wide angle you don't really need it. "

Good luck shooting hand-held video.

And even for stills, with just f/2.8, shutter speed will fall below 1/20s very quickly in low light, where are those 16-24 mpix are going to end up?
The same with 32/1.8, below 1/50 very quickly. Are you lugging a tripod with that small and light mirrorless cam?
With modern sensor resolutions and video in every cam NOT having stabilization does not make any sense. If you are OK with bright-daylight-only usage or lower final resolution after noise reduction, you always can use a P&S for 1/15 of the price of that lens. And its video will be stabilized.

Comment edited 37 seconds after posting
0 upvotes
EinsteinsGhost
By EinsteinsGhost (11 months ago)

1/20s is possible under very low, indoor light. But then, with only 12mm for focal length, that isn't an issue at all.

0 upvotes
Sad Joe
By Sad Joe (11 months ago)

Nope ! This is old school classic engineering with all the benefits and issues that brings...

0 upvotes
WJMWJM
By WJMWJM (11 months ago)

Bzzz^2 on not needing stabilisation on NEX camera's....

Hint: there is a reason why the Sony 16/2.8 has no appeal at all for the (in-camera auto-) pano-stitchers among us....neither bare nor with its wide-angle converter....it simply won't work, as in blocked electronically....
(NB: the A-series SLR's don't suffer from this problem, by having a sensor-based stabilisation....)

0 upvotes
billybones1918
By billybones1918 (11 months ago)

the 55mm f/1.0 wil be called the "Tuoit Tuowoo"

5 upvotes
yabokkie
By yabokkie (11 months ago)

55/1.0 should be a lot cheaper than 85/1.4 for 35mm format.

Comment edited 25 seconds after posting
0 upvotes
ZhanMInG12
By ZhanMInG12 (11 months ago)

No aperture ring and dof scale on the e-mount version. AF simply isn't necessary for something with an 18mm FOV, you can zone focus wide open and after f5.6 it's just point and shoot.

5 upvotes
AlanG
By AlanG (11 months ago)

This is true if your idea of acceptable dof is based on an 8x10 print. Otherwise you'll need to focus accurately.

2 upvotes
EinsteinsGhost
By EinsteinsGhost (11 months ago)

But, zone focusing isn't about accurate focus either, it is about acceptable focus. Far more accurate focusing can be achieved via Focus Peaking (and since Sony E-mount system allows Live DOF, you will see "the zone" highlighted).

0 upvotes
AlanG
By AlanG (11 months ago)

That is precisely my point. It depends on what is acceptable focus to you and that may also be related to the size of the image and way it will be viewed. What once was acceptable to me no longer is because I study every image at 100% now.

Comment edited 33 seconds after posting
0 upvotes
d2f
By d2f (11 months ago)

I did not read anywhere that the new lens are AF, are they?

0 upvotes
ET2
By ET2 (11 months ago)

This was covered before during phorokina. They are AF lenses

0 upvotes
peevee1
By peevee1 (11 months ago)

Yes.
http://lenses.zeiss.com/camera-lenses/carl-zeiss-camera-lenses/camera_lenses/touit/touit1832.html

Smooth and reliable AF action
The design of the autofocus system demands an extremely precise movement of certain lens elements. As the mass of the elements or groups to be moved within the optical system differs, various motor types may be installed. The focusing system of the Touit lenses is designed to guarantee robust and smooth autofocusing without any need for compromises or limitations in their optical design.

Information: To reach the best compatibility on Sony NEX Cameras (AF in video mode) we highly recommend to use the latest Sony NEX firmware.

0 upvotes
ogl
By ogl (11 months ago)

What about 12/2.8? 32/1.8 is with AF, but no info about 12 mm

0 upvotes
brendon1000
By brendon1000 (11 months ago)

They aren't going to make only one lens MF. If they have the capability to make one AF lens they won't stop with another lens in the same series launched at the same time.

Sony and Fuji have shared their lens mount specifications so third party manufacturers are free to make AF lenses for the system. Tamron, Sigma and now Zeiss also makes AF lenses for Sony and AF works as good as Sony lenses.

On DSLRs, none of the major manufacturers except Olympus have given out the specs of their mounts so most third party manufacturers reverse engineer to have AF lenses.

In E mount and XF mount Zeiss has all info required to make AF lenses. Samsung and Canon EOS M have propriety mounts and so Zeiss isn't making lenses for them.

1 upvote
Charles C Lloyd
By Charles C Lloyd (11 months ago)

Is it a coincidence that they are 'round?

0 upvotes
micahmedia
By micahmedia (11 months ago)

"...described as a normal lens, offering 'the same angle of view as the human eye,' according to the company."

Bah! Not the "same angle of view", but similar amount of distortion. Angle of view for a single human eye is wider than a 14mm. Maybe as much as a 10mm in some people. In any case, it's wider than either of these lenses, and the description is incorrect.

It's a common mistake, but a mistake nonetheless.

8 upvotes
Mike Arledge
By Mike Arledge (11 months ago)

that's for the 32mm lens

0 upvotes
Samuel Dilworth
By Samuel Dilworth (11 months ago)

I agree the human eye in no way has a similar angle of view to a 50 mm-e lens (how could anyone who’s ever considered the matter think that?). But nor does it have a similar amount of distortion as you claim.

First, what do you mean by distortion? Probably not rectilinear distortion but perspective ‘distortion’. But perspective depends on the distance between the camera and the various objects in the scene, not the angle of view of the lens.

A photograph only appears to have wide-angle or telephoto distortion because it’s viewed at a distance other than its centre of perspective. If viewed at a distance such that the angle subtended at the eye by the print equals the angle of view of the lens, then the perspective shown in the photo appears natural – whether taken with a 14 mm-e or 300 mm-e lens.

The reason a 50 mm-e photo often appears natural is that its angle of view is roughly equal to the angle subtended at the eye by a photo at a typical viewing distance.

Comment edited 2 minutes after posting
7 upvotes
ogl
By ogl (11 months ago)

Absurd. It's just marketing myth.

0 upvotes
RichRMA
By RichRMA (11 months ago)

Well, you've basically traded manual focus, better build and support for FF of the normal Cosina-made Zeiss lenses for AF. Imagine if you could get all three characteristics in one lens. The speed of these, given their FF focal length equivalents, is not "blistering" but adequate.

0 upvotes
HowaboutRAW
By HowaboutRAW (11 months ago)

Well with theses lenses, they communicate with camera bodies, it's not as if one can put say a 50mm Zeiss Cosina on a Nikon F to Sony E mount adapter then mount that lens and adapter on a Sony Nex 7 and shoot in auto.

At least when one does exactly that with a Samsung NX body a better manual focus assist is available.

0 upvotes
ZhanMInG12
By ZhanMInG12 (11 months ago)

And I doubt that their performance will hold up to the 50mm Zeiss Planar M and the 18mm Distagon. The 25 biogon is quite a bit better than the Zeiss 24mm e-mount.

2 upvotes
avicenanw
By avicenanw (Apr 30, 2013)

The focus have a nice ring touit.

5 upvotes
rjx
By rjx (Apr 30, 2013)

I like the idea of the 12mm. But why a 32mm 1.8 lens? I'm sure it will be a great quality lens hopefully with the great Zeiss microcontrast. But the Fuji 35mm 1.4 is a one of the best lenses on any system and it's half the price of the Zeiss 32mm. Why not release something different, like an 85mm prime?

Comment edited 1 minute after posting
8 upvotes
Andrew Booth
By Andrew Booth (11 months ago)

Sony has a decent 35mm f1.8 prime too. Can't see the point of a much more expensive f2.8 alternative.

2 upvotes
Scott Nicol
By Scott Nicol (11 months ago)

And of course the Sigma 30mm f2.8 for NEX as well - a tad slower, plastic shell but great IQ and ridiculously cheap.

I guess choice is good though as all 3 are great to fab lenses (i'm giving the zeiss the benefit of the doubt - I expect it to be stunning).. dirt cheap, mid range with OSS or ultimate IQ at a price.

I too would have liked to see something different but then a fast 85mm in a small, NEX friendly size would be a lot trickier to design.

3 upvotes
vodanh1982
By vodanh1982 (11 months ago)

http://www.photozone.de/fuji_x/746-fuji35f14?start=1
I am not impressed.

3 upvotes
balios
By balios (11 months ago)

The 32mm will be a great alternative to the Fuji lens if the AF is fast.

1 upvote
HowaboutRAW
By HowaboutRAW (11 months ago)

Scott Nicol:

That fast very high image 85mm quality lens you want, not small, is made by Samsung for the NX system. Not real likely to be made in a Sony E mount. Optically it's better than Fuji X lenses.

1 upvote
HowaboutRAW
By HowaboutRAW (11 months ago)

rjx--

One issue is that hypothetical fast (say F1.4) 85mm Zeiss for these APSC bodies would be big and expensive--like more than 2000usd.

You can always go with the Samsung NX system, they already have an 85mm 1.4 that's optically better than Fujis and basically equals Zeiss--has a different look, the way Leica looks different than Zeiss. Samsung just needs to improve the buffering, and no nonstandard bayerlike filter to work with when extracting raws.

0 upvotes
HowaboutRAW
By HowaboutRAW (11 months ago)

Andrew Booth:

Why would anyone take Sony native Nex system lenses seriously (except the 1.8 24mm Zeiss).

The Nex system lenses are so poor; they're reason to avoid that system, and avoid the interchangeable video camera that also uses them.

Sony should be embarrassed for shipping so many bad lenses. The one you claim is good, maybe good, but it's no where near Zeiss and Sony did shot itself in the foot with the Nex lenses. Sony should thank its stars that Zeiss has announced these lenses.

0 upvotes
Den Sh
By Den Sh (11 months ago)

> That fast very high image 85mm quality lens you want, not small, is made by Samsung for the NX system. Not real likely to be made in a Sony E mount. Optically it's better than Fuji X lenses.

No, it's not. According to photozone 85mm on 20mp sensor resolves less detail than Fuji's 60mm on 16mp sensor.

Comment edited 17 seconds after posting
0 upvotes
yabokkie
By yabokkie (11 months ago)

Fuji XF 35/1.4 is a very low quality and cheap lens sold at ripping-off price.

0 upvotes
wayfarers
By wayfarers (Apr 30, 2013)

No DOF scale for zone focusing? The first ever in a prime lens in this price bracket?

7 upvotes
micahmedia
By micahmedia (11 months ago)

On a mirrorless camera? You're doinitwrong. That's what stopped down live view is for--no math or guessing.

1 upvote
onlooker
By onlooker (11 months ago)

No, he is NOT doing it wrong. He is doing it differently. Look up zone focusing. It may not be useful to you when doing landscapes, but it IS useful.

8 upvotes
EinsteinsGhost
By EinsteinsGhost (11 months ago)

Use Focus Peaking for the purpose.

2 upvotes
imbimmer
By imbimmer (11 months ago)

But the X series cameras don't support focus peaking ... no?

5 upvotes
wayfarers
By wayfarers (11 months ago)

PS: see:
http://www.mikekobal.com/blog/?p=6880
and for technically minded throrough explanation how important it is in serious photography - from... Carl Zeiss Camera Lens Division:
http://www.zeiss.com.au/C12567A8003B8B6F/EmbedTitelIntern/CLN_35_Bokeh_EN/$File/CLN35_Bokeh_en.pdf

Comment edited 6 minutes after posting
0 upvotes
fhorn1
By fhorn1 (11 months ago)

Regarding the photo zone review of the fuji 35mm I think they must have had a dud lens. Look at the golden temple photo - not good at all. I was there in February and this photo is straight out of the camera jpg. http://pr28893.zenfolio.com/p678286187/h5d9dbc9c#h5d9dbc9c

0 upvotes
Mescalamba
By Mescalamba (Apr 30, 2013)

Aperture ring? Nice touch. :)

1 upvote
peevee1
By peevee1 (11 months ago)

You cannot use an X-system lens without it.

1 upvote
Trollshavethebestcandy
By Trollshavethebestcandy (Apr 30, 2013)

You would be a half-touit to buy at those prices.

7 upvotes
Ken Aisin
By Ken Aisin (Apr 30, 2013)

Hey Zeiss, while you are at it, could you please get Cosina to make E-Mount and X-Mount Voigtlander 50mm F1.1.

0 upvotes
Mescalamba
By Mescalamba (Apr 30, 2013)

Dunno, but theres already 50/1.1 with M-mounts which can be used on both E-mounts and X-mounts? Simple adapter and it works..

3 upvotes
micahmedia
By micahmedia (11 months ago)

Zack Lee. There's no electronic coupling to be gained, so just use an adapter.

0 upvotes
vodanh1982
By vodanh1982 (Apr 30, 2013)

Camerapro guessing price is about $1499
http://www.camerapro.com.au/camera-lenses.html#cat=fujifilm-x-mount-lenses&manufacturer=zeiss&gan_data=true

0 upvotes
Jim Evidon
By Jim Evidon (Apr 30, 2013)

Nice to see that Zeiss finally got around Touit.

12 upvotes
Samuel Dilworth
By Samuel Dilworth (Apr 30, 2013)

Nice name. Nice focal lengths. Nice lenses. Not so sure about the projected prices, but I haven't yet handled these lenses. Do they feel like premium lenses?

0 upvotes
FoolyCooly
By FoolyCooly (Apr 30, 2013)

Looks like Sigma Art Series.

4 upvotes
deleted_081301
By deleted_081301 (Apr 30, 2013)

I expext they will do a Micro four thirds version also
when they get "Around touit" ;)

17 upvotes
mike kobal
By mike kobal (Apr 30, 2013)

and I wait for lower pricit ;)

5 upvotes
DPReview Staff
By DPReview Staff (Apr 30, 2013)

I knew I could count on one of you.

7 upvotes
Chez Wimpy
By Chez Wimpy (11 months ago)

A 12/2.8 for $1300 when there is already a great 12/2 for around half? A 32/1.8... an odd focal length on m43... when there is a 25/1.4 going for about a third? Touit, no reason to bother (which is why they didn't)

3 upvotes
HowaboutRAW
By HowaboutRAW (11 months ago)

Chez Wimpy:

Are these lenses meant for the M4/3s system?

4 upvotes
wayfarers
By wayfarers (11 months ago)

For Sony NEX and Fujifilm X APS-C cameras.
Also no iPhone attachment.

2 upvotes
jseliger
By jseliger (11 months ago)

Exactly. It seems like a weird omission, since they'd just have to offer a different mount.

0 upvotes
Adrian Seah
By Adrian Seah (11 months ago)

Any manufacturer out there making portrait lense for Fujifilm X system?? Like 85mm to 135mm prime, I am sure there is demand for it, please. Sigma perhap. :)

0 upvotes
Total comments: 110