Reading mode: Light Dark

The real dope on Sony "Carl Zeiss" lenses?

  • Thread starter Thread starter tai
  • Start date Start date
Go to last post
T

tai

Guest
Someone posted this in another forum (no, not at dpreview) which I find hard to believe. I posted a rebuttal, but emphasized that my knowledge was limited to digital photo cameras. Does anyone here know with absolute certainty whether this person is right or wrong?

"PS: The "Carl Zeiss" lens on Sony Cameras means nothing.

First of all, "Carl Zeiss" is now owned by Kyocera, a large Japanese mega-corporation that specializes in ceramics.

The name "Zeiss" is only licensed by Sony, and the lenses are actually sourced by Kiron, and some other Korean and Chinese glassmakers.

It is only a marketing gimmick capitalizing on the German name for snobs and know-nothings.

The Leica lens on the Panasonic is actually designed by Leica. It has some "Leica" designed glass elements.

However, there is no Longer an Ernst Leitz in Wetzlar, it is owned by a Swiss conglomerate, which is owned by a still bigger multinational.

Do you think your Ford or Chevy is made in Detroit out of USA parts?"
 
Check out:
http://www.zeiss.de/C12567A8003B58B9?Open
Click on 'Product Info '.
Then click on 'Camera Brands'.
You will see Sony and click on 'Sony'
Tai said:
Someone posted this in another forum (no, not at dpreview) which I
find hard to believe. I posted a rebuttal, but emphasized that my
knowledge was limited to digital photo cameras. Does anyone here
know with absolute certainty whether this person is right or
wrong?

"PS: The "Carl Zeiss" lens on Sony Cameras means nothing.

First of all, "Carl Zeiss" is now owned by Kyocera, a large
Japanese mega-corporation that specializes in ceramics.

The name "Zeiss" is only licensed by Sony, and the lenses are
actually sourced by Kiron, and some other Korean and Chinese
glassmakers.

It is only a marketing gimmick capitalizing on the German name for
snobs and know-nothings.

The Leica lens on the Panasonic is actually designed by Leica. It
has some "Leica" designed glass elements.

However, there is no Longer an Ernst Leitz in Wetzlar, it is owned
by a Swiss conglomerate, which is owned by a still bigger
multinational.

Do you think your Ford or Chevy is made in Detroit out of USA
parts?"
Click to expand...
 
I think totally possible that Sony only use the Zeiss name for a product that is no more really Zeiss optical, knowing Sony's marketing politic, it sound possible to me.
Tai said:
Someone posted this in another forum (no, not at dpreview) which I
find hard to believe. I posted a rebuttal, but emphasized that my
knowledge was limited to digital photo cameras. Does anyone here
know with absolute certainty whether this person is right or
wrong?

"PS: The "Carl Zeiss" lens on Sony Cameras means nothing.

First of all, "Carl Zeiss" is now owned by Kyocera, a large
Japanese mega-corporation that specializes in ceramics.

The name "Zeiss" is only licensed by Sony, and the lenses are
actually sourced by Kiron, and some other Korean and Chinese
glassmakers.

It is only a marketing gimmick capitalizing on the German name for
snobs and know-nothings.

The Leica lens on the Panasonic is actually designed by Leica. It
has some "Leica" designed glass elements.

However, there is no Longer an Ernst Leitz in Wetzlar, it is owned
by a Swiss conglomerate, which is owned by a still bigger
multinational.

Do you think your Ford or Chevy is made in Detroit out of USA
parts?"
Click to expand...
 
dodfr said:
I think totally possible that Sony only use the Zeiss name for a
product that is no more really Zeiss optical, knowing Sony's
marketing politic, it sound possible to me.
Click to expand...
All you need to do is go to the Carl Zeiss site, as mentioned by greg in his recent post. Let them tell you about the Carl Zeiss name, the specifications, their relationship with Sony, their lenses made in Japan versus their lenses made in Germany, and so forth.

If you like conspiracy theories, then the arguments sound interesting. But if you want to know the Carl Zeiss position, go and read their stuff.

That's pretty much the long and short of it. Stories, forums, and newsgroup conspiracies don't play a role here.
 
I don't know. I just read through the Zeiss information on their site. It seems improbable that Zeiss would just license their name without being part of the manufacturing process which they are so very proud of. If it ever came out, and it could, their whole company's reputation would be at stake. They're very well respected for their lenses and optical equipment. The only way we could find out is if we take apart a Canon and Sony lens, check the construction, and analyze the coating and optical glass. Shouldn't cost that much more than the cameras themselves.....anybody want to invest in the pursuit of truth?

People claim that the G1 has the same lens. The design could be the same but that doesn't mean that the glass and the coatings are. Will we ever find out? Probably not. Does it matter? Not really.

Pete
Tai said:
Someone posted this in another forum (no, not at dpreview) which I
find hard to believe. I posted a rebuttal, but emphasized that my
knowledge was limited to digital photo cameras. Does anyone here
know with absolute certainty whether this person is right or
wrong?

"PS: The "Carl Zeiss" lens on Sony Cameras means nothing.

First of all, "Carl Zeiss" is now owned by Kyocera, a large
Japanese mega-corporation that specializes in ceramics.

The name "Zeiss" is only licensed by Sony, and the lenses are
actually sourced by Kiron, and some other Korean and Chinese
glassmakers.

It is only a marketing gimmick capitalizing on the German name for
snobs and know-nothings.

The Leica lens on the Panasonic is actually designed by Leica. It
has some "Leica" designed glass elements.

However, there is no Longer an Ernst Leitz in Wetzlar, it is owned
by a Swiss conglomerate, which is owned by a still bigger
multinational.

Do you think your Ford or Chevy is made in Detroit out of USA
parts?"
Click to expand...
 
Who cares..........it still takes an awesome picture
Pete said:
People claim that the G1 has the same lens. The design could be the
same but that doesn't mean that the glass and the coatings are.
Will we ever find out? Probably not. Does it matter? Not really.

Pete
Tai said:
Someone posted this in another forum (no, not at dpreview) which I
find hard to believe. I posted a rebuttal, but emphasized that my
knowledge was limited to digital photo cameras. Does anyone here
know with absolute certainty whether this person is right or
wrong?

"PS: The "Carl Zeiss" lens on Sony Cameras means nothing.

First of all, "Carl Zeiss" is now owned by Kyocera, a large
Japanese mega-corporation that specializes in ceramics.

The name "Zeiss" is only licensed by Sony, and the lenses are
actually sourced by Kiron, and some other Korean and Chinese
glassmakers.

It is only a marketing gimmick capitalizing on the German name for
snobs and know-nothings.

The Leica lens on the Panasonic is actually designed by Leica. It
has some "Leica" designed glass elements.

However, there is no Longer an Ernst Leitz in Wetzlar, it is owned
by a Swiss conglomerate, which is owned by a still bigger
multinational.

Do you think your Ford or Chevy is made in Detroit out of USA
parts?"
Click to expand...
Click to expand...
 
I really don't care who actually made the lens. I have been very happy with the quality of the lens in F505V. It has longer zoom range (5x) but still optically superior to others. Whether CZ actually made it has no meaning to me.
Tai said:
Someone posted this in another forum (no, not at dpreview) which I
find hard to believe. I posted a rebuttal, but emphasized that my
knowledge was limited to digital photo cameras. Does anyone here
know with absolute certainty whether this person is right or
wrong?

"PS: The "Carl Zeiss" lens on Sony Cameras means nothing.

First of all, "Carl Zeiss" is now owned by Kyocera, a large
Japanese mega-corporation that specializes in ceramics.

The name "Zeiss" is only licensed by Sony, and the lenses are
actually sourced by Kiron, and some other Korean and Chinese
glassmakers.

It is only a marketing gimmick capitalizing on the German name for
snobs and know-nothings.

The Leica lens on the Panasonic is actually designed by Leica. It
has some "Leica" designed glass elements.

However, there is no Longer an Ernst Leitz in Wetzlar, it is owned
by a Swiss conglomerate, which is owned by a still bigger
multinational.

Do you think your Ford or Chevy is made in Detroit out of USA
parts?"
Click to expand...
 
Mike,

You should learn to read and comprehend so you won't embarass yourself so publicly in the future.

It is not me who make the statements who so offend you. In fact, I defended Sony to the poster whose comments I quoted. A quick read of my posting history will show that I'm a big Sony fan.

It's a shame there are rabid, childish, vulgar people like you in this otherwise useful forum.
Miljenko Vrankovic said:
Tai said:
First of all, "Carl Zeiss" is now owned by Kyocera, a large
Japanese mega-corporation that specializes in ceramics.
Click to expand...
It's Contax that is owned by Kyocera not Zeiss you @# ...

Miljenko (Mike)
Click to expand...
 
The quality of the lens is what counts, not the name. My question is purely academic as I am merely searching for the truth.

Personally, I believe Sony does have some sort of partnership with Carl Zeiss, so I'm not out trying to debunk anything. Someone put forth information I find bothersome and I'm trying to get to the bottom instead of talking out my butt like so many others on the net.

This is merely a quest for the truth, for the truth's sake. If all you care about is that Sony takes great pictures, then fine, move along. No need to lecture me about what is and what isn't important.
Pondria said:
I really don't care who actually made the lens. I have been very
happy with the quality of the lens in F505V. It has longer zoom
range (5x) but still optically superior to others. Whether CZ
actually made it has no meaning to me.
Click to expand...
 
Hi,
Man, it's hot outside. I have two Sony digicams with Carl Zeiss lens.

I love them both and I really know very little about Carl Zeiss. All I do know is that the partnership or whatever with Sony sure works for me.

Thanks Sony and Carl Zeiss

Luke
Tai said:
Personally, I believe Sony does have some sort of partnership with
Carl Zeiss, so I'm not out trying to debunk anything. Someone put
forth information I find bothersome and I'm trying to get to the
bottom instead of talking out my butt like so many others on the
net.

This is merely a quest for the truth, for the truth's sake. If all
you care about is that Sony takes great pictures, then fine, move
along. No need to lecture me about what is and what isn't important.
Pondria said:
I really don't care who actually made the lens. I have been very
happy with the quality of the lens in F505V. It has longer zoom
range (5x) but still optically superior to others. Whether CZ
actually made it has no meaning to me.
Click to expand...
Click to expand...
 
Tai said:
Someone posted this in another forum (no, not at dpreview) which I
find hard to believe. I posted a rebuttal, but emphasized that my
knowledge was limited to digital photo cameras. Does anyone here
know with absolute certainty whether this person is right or
wrong?

"PS: The "Carl Zeiss" lens on Sony Cameras means nothing.
Click to expand...
^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^

noooooooooooooooooo..... don't break my heart so...8(

hehehe
Carl Zeiss RUULZ!!!
Member said:
First of all, "Carl Zeiss" is now owned by Kyocera, a large
Japanese mega-corporation that specializes in ceramics.

The name "Zeiss" is only licensed by Sony, and the lenses are
actually sourced by Kiron, and some other Korean and Chinese
glassmakers.

It is only a marketing gimmick capitalizing on the German name for
snobs and know-nothings.

The Leica lens on the Panasonic is actually designed by Leica. It
has some "Leica" designed glass elements.

However, there is no Longer an Ernst Leitz in Wetzlar, it is owned
by a Swiss conglomerate, which is owned by a still bigger
multinational.

Do you think your Ford or Chevy is made in Detroit out of USA
parts?"
Click to expand...
 
Tai,

Mike meant no harm. It is only some fun with no malice attached.

As for Pondria, he was not lecturing you. I believe he was trying to show how unimportant the talk of the uninformed is.

I do believe that the doubt about this lens is generated largely by the reviewers, who highlight the similar lens fitted to other makes and models.

Enjoy the forum and the abundance of characters herein.

regards

Andy
Tai said:
You should learn to read and comprehend so you won't embarass
yourself so publicly in the future.

It is not me who make the statements who so offend you. In fact, I
defended Sony to the poster whose comments I quoted. A quick read
of my posting history will show that I'm a big Sony fan.

It's a shame there are rabid, childish, vulgar people like you in
this otherwise useful forum.
Miljenko Vrankovic said:
Tai said:
First of all, "Carl Zeiss" is now owned by Kyocera, a large
Japanese mega-corporation that specializes in ceramics.
Click to expand...
It's Contax that is owned by Kyocera not Zeiss you @# ...

Miljenko (Mike)
Click to expand...
Click to expand...
 
Tai said:
The quality of the lens is what counts, not the name. My question
is purely academic as I am merely searching for the truth.

Personally, I believe Sony does have some sort of partnership with
Carl Zeiss, so I'm not out trying to debunk anything. Someone put
forth information I find bothersome and I'm trying to get to the
bottom instead of talking out my butt like so many others on the
net.

This is merely a quest for the truth, for the truth's sake. If all
you care about is that Sony takes great pictures, then fine, move
along. No need to lecture me about what is and what isn't important.
Click to expand...
Tai, you ask a question which can invite a variety of answers. This is what you get, not a lecture. We know your posting history and your affinity for Cyber-shots. Your name is not in question here. :)

But what good is the truth if it is only academic.

The truth is that Sony does have a deal with Carl Zeiss, which is not enjoyed or benefitted from by other manufacturers in several ways. It's very easy to research this stuff for anyone who wants to know.
 
Thanks for the reasonable tone, in contrast to some of the other I have received. I didn't say anything critical of Sony and yet I'm attacked as if I'm a heretic.

The relationship between companies now are very complex and often hidden. This isn't a big deal as long as the product is good, but unfortunately many people use brand names as symbols to rally around or attack.

The person who I quoted brought up some interesting information, and I'd like to know if it's true.

Is Carl Zeiss merely a Japanese company now? If yes, what does the Carl Zeiss name mean and why is it still being bandied about? The "Carl Zeiss" web page doesn't really mean much, as it could be little more than a public showing.

If Sony merely paid for the name, without offering any more added value than, say, Canon, that is fine, but I'd like to know so I don't feel like a fool when someone else gives me the truth.

Ignorance isn't bliss when it is revealed.
Member said:
Tai, you ask a question which can invite a variety of answers. This
is what you get, not a lecture. We know your posting history and
your affinity for Cyber-shots. Your name is not in question here.
:)

But what good is the truth if it is only academic.

The truth is that Sony does have a deal with Carl Zeiss, which is
not enjoyed or benefitted from by other manufacturers in several
ways. It's very easy to research this stuff for anyone who wants to
know.
Click to expand...
 
Andy said:
Tai,

Mike meant no harm. It is only some fun with no malice attached.
Click to expand...
I'll be the judge of that since I was on the receiving end. If you know Mike, you might let him know his virtual slapping of complete strangers will often come across as less than humorous.
Member said:
As for Pondria, he was not lecturing you. I believe he was trying
to show how unimportant the talk of the uninformed is.
Click to expand...
The talk of the uninformed is unimportant, but first show me how it is uninformed.
Member said:
I do believe that the doubt about this lens is generated largely by
the reviewers, who highlight the similar lens fitted to other makes
and models.
Click to expand...
First, let me be clear that I have no doubt about the quality of the lens in my F505V. I would have bought it even without the Carl Zeiss name on the lens, and would still buy one.

The question here is whether the Carl Zeiss name has meaning longer. If it doesn't I don't expect or seek to have Sony remove its association to the name. The answer will be used solely for fulfilling my curiosity.
 
Tai:

If CZ is a japanese company do you really think they would keep the CZ site in Germany (.de)? Would German still be the only other selectable language on their site -- rather than Japanese?? I am not trying to wee wee in anyones Corn Flakes here, but I think the point is moot.

Check this page (.pdf format)

http://www.zeiss.de/C125679B0029303C/EmbedTitelIntern/OrganeZeissStiftungenglisch/

In this org chart I don't notice any Japanese names.

Anyway, this does make for some fun conversation!

Stever
Tai said:
The relationship between companies now are very complex and often
hidden. This isn't a big deal as long as the product is good, but
unfortunately many people use brand names as symbols to rally
around or attack.

The person who I quoted brought up some interesting information,
and I'd like to know if it's true.

Is Carl Zeiss merely a Japanese company now? If yes, what does the
Carl Zeiss name mean and why is it still being bandied about? The
"Carl Zeiss" web page doesn't really mean much, as it could be
little more than a public showing.

If Sony merely paid for the name, without offering any more added
value than, say, Canon, that is fine, but I'd like to know so I
don't feel like a fool when someone else gives me the truth.

Ignorance isn't bliss when it is revealed.
Member said:
Tai, you ask a question which can invite a variety of answers. This
is what you get, not a lecture. We know your posting history and
your affinity for Cyber-shots. Your name is not in question here.
:)

But what good is the truth if it is only academic.

The truth is that Sony does have a deal with Carl Zeiss, which is
not enjoyed or benefitted from by other manufacturers in several
ways. It's very easy to research this stuff for anyone who wants to
know.
Click to expand...
Click to expand...
 
...as an addendum the conspiracy theory still swirls...

http://www.dpreview.com/reviews/canong1/

Even Phil Askey questions the lens used.

No matter, I still love my s75 and won't love it any less if I find out otherwise about the lens.

Stever
Stever said:
If CZ is a japanese company do you really think they would keep the
CZ site in Germany (.de)? Would German still be the only other
selectable language on their site -- rather than Japanese?? I am
not trying to wee wee in anyones Corn Flakes here, but I think the
point is moot.

Check this page (.pdf format)

http://www.zeiss.de/C125679B0029303C/EmbedTitelIntern/OrganeZeissStiftungenglisch/

In this org chart I don't notice any Japanese names.

Anyway, this does make for some fun conversation!

Stever
Tai said:
The relationship between companies now are very complex and often
hidden. This isn't a big deal as long as the product is good, but
unfortunately many people use brand names as symbols to rally
around or attack.

The person who I quoted brought up some interesting information,
and I'd like to know if it's true.

Is Carl Zeiss merely a Japanese company now? If yes, what does the
Carl Zeiss name mean and why is it still being bandied about? The
"Carl Zeiss" web page doesn't really mean much, as it could be
little more than a public showing.

If Sony merely paid for the name, without offering any more added
value than, say, Canon, that is fine, but I'd like to know so I
don't feel like a fool when someone else gives me the truth.

Ignorance isn't bliss when it is revealed.
Stever46789 said:
Tai, you ask a question which can invite a variety of answers. This
is what you get, not a lecture. We know your posting history and
your affinity for Cyber-shots. Your name is not in question here.
:)

But what good is the truth if it is only academic.

The truth is that Sony does have a deal with Carl Zeiss, which is
not enjoyed or benefitted from by other manufacturers in several
ways. It's very easy to research this stuff for anyone who wants to
know.
Click to expand...
Click to expand...
Click to expand...
 
I must say, I found this discussion thoroughly amusing, to say the least!

Thanks Tai, for making my day!!

Lorna
 
You must log in or register to reply here.

Keyboard shortcuts

f
Forum
m
My threads
Mobile site
About
Editorial content
Cameras & Lenses
Community
All content, design, and layout are Copyright © 1998–2025 Digital Photography Review All Rights Reserved.
Reproduction in whole or part in any form or medium without specific written permission is prohibited.
When you use DPReview links to buy products, the site may earn a commission.
©GPS Media - Guides, Products, Services.
Back
Top