f707/717 Carl Zeiss lens quality

hello,

if you were to compare the lens in the f7x7 cams to, lets say, those expensive Nikon, Canon, Sigma lense, how would it rate? Is the lens alone expensive???? I wonder how yould a Canon D60 or Fuji S2 work with the Zeiss lens in our cams.
jorge
http://www.pbase.com/jorginho

jorge elguera said:

hello,
if you were to compare the lens in the f7x7 cams to, lets say,
those expensive Nikon, Canon, Sigma lense, how would it rate?

Click to expand...

This is a little bit of apples and oranges. Since the 35mm lenses are so much bigger. Try to find a 38-190mm F2-2.4 35mm lens. IMO, that would be a $500+ lens, if you could find one.

jorge elguera said:

Is the lens alone expensive????

Click to expand...

I don't know. I'd assume that the lens assembly is probably at least a third of the cost of the camera, maybe more. If you could buy it on the open market, it would probably cost around $400-$500.

jorge elguera said:

I wonder how yould a Canon D60 or
Fuji S2 work with the Zeiss lens in our cams.

Click to expand...

I don't know if they'd work, or if they did, how well they'd work. I think they both use a larger sensor than the 7X7. I know you can use a smaller sensor with a lens made for larger ones. I'm not sure it works the other way around.

Steve

--
http://www.pbase.com/slo2k

'If one really wishes to be master of an art, technical knowledge of it is not enough. One has to transcend technique so that the art becomes an 'artless art' growing out of the Unconscious.'

Steve Cavigliano said:

jorge elguera said:

hello,
if you were to compare the lens in the f7x7 cams to, lets say,
those expensive Nikon, Canon, Sigma lense, how would it rate?

Click to expand...

This is a little bit of apples and oranges. Since the 35mm lenses
are so much bigger. Try to find a 38-190mm F2-2.4 35mm lens. IMO,
that would be a $500+ lens, if you could find one.

Click to expand...

Nope...That would be more than 2500$ and would definitely be considered as professional lense. A 28-70 f2 cost already more than 1700$

Steve Cavigliano said:

Steve Cavigliano said:

Is the lens alone expensive????

Click to expand...

I don't know. I'd assume that the lens assembly is probably at
least a third of the cost of the camera, maybe more. If you could
buy it on the open market, it would probably cost around $400-$500.

Click to expand...

Except that you would have to cut the rear side which contains the CCD.
Little detail.

Steve Cavigliano said:

Steve Cavigliano said:

I wonder how yould a Canon D60 or
Fuji S2 work with the Zeiss lens in our cams.

Click to expand...

I don't know if they'd work, or if they did, how well they'd work.
I think they both use a larger sensor than the 7X7. I know you can
use a smaller sensor with a lens made for larger ones. I'm not
sure it works the other way around.

Click to expand...

Whoaw how far can you go in your dreams...It's a bit like "How well would my car work with an F1 engine ???"

Thanks Steve and Jean Francois, although you have different opinion, we all agree the lens quality of the Zeiss zoom in Sony Cams, at least those in f7x7 (not sure about those in S70-85) and if it is made with the same standards as all Carl Zeiss lenses, is tops. Its just a matter of pride, to know that besides having a great CCD sensor in your machine, you also have a top quality lens that rivals those ultra expensive Nikon and Canon large aperture lenses we hear people buy for their expensive S2´s, D60´s , D100's and others. So, I guess we can agree that the Sony F7x7 is more than 50% lense quality, and that if we could couple it with, say the canon lens on a G3 or Nikon 5700, it wouldnt be as prized as it is now.
jorge
http://www.pbase.com/jorginho
Lima - Peru

jorge elguera said:

if you were to compare the lens in the f7x7 cams to, lets say,
those expensive Nikon, Canon, Sigma lense, how would it rate?

Click to expand...

Jorge, an interesting comparison is this page of Canon lens resolution charts...

http://www.dpreview.com/reviews/canoneosd60/page23.asp

compared to this page with the resolution chart for the F717...

http://www.dpreview.com/reviews/sonydscf717/page20.asp

jorge elguera said:

Is the lens alone expensive????

Click to expand...

I'm not that knowledgeable about Canon lenses but the reputation of their 'L' series is they are the best you can get. A friend bought a couple of the 'L' zooms for his D60 and as I recall, each cost more than I paid for my F707. Personally, I'd call that expensive and was one of the factors in me deciding to buy the F707 instead of my own D60.

jorge elguera said:

I wonder how yould a Canon
D60 or Fuji S2 work with the Zeiss lens in our cams.

Click to expand...

I don't think that's physically possible.

Gordon
--
An F707 owner and pbase supporter.



ONE OF THE GREAT MYSTERIES OF LIFE

Why do ketchup makers pride themselves on the thickness of their product and then put it in a glass bottle with an opening too small to pour it?

jorge elguera said:

if you were to compare the lens in the f7x7 cams to, lets say,
those expensive Nikon, Canon, Sigma lense, how would it rate? Is
the lens alone expensive???? I wonder how yould a Canon D60 or
Fuji S2 work with the Zeiss lens in our cams.

Click to expand...

It is easier to design smaller lenses for small-sized chips like 707 and such. The D60/D100 DSLR's use much larger chips, so the lenses have to be larger. So the 707 lens, being the best in the p&s would not work (ie. would not have enough coverage) for the DSLR CCD/CMOS chips.

The larger the imager chip, the larger and more difficult to manufacture the lenses are. This is also the reason why a 70-200mm f2.8 SLR lens is so much more expensive than the 707 itself.

As another comparison - take a look at the sony camcoders - they have Zeiss lenses with much larger zooms than 707, but are cheaper than the 707 - small lenses are cheaper.
You want to see expensive stuff - look at medium format Zeiss lens...

Anyway, comparing 707 with DSLRs based on the lens alone does not work - these cameras work for different situations.

Thanks again for your feedback,

So the 707 lens, being the best in the

Victor__ said:

p&s would not work (ie. would not have enough coverage) for the
DSLR CCD/CMOS chips.

Click to expand...

My intentioin was not to try to make the lens work, i said what if ...

I was referring to the lens quality, glass, coating, manufacturing, instead of actualy trying to adapt it into a larger CCD or a different thread size cam.

Im asking this because I heard that this Carl Zeiss lens was not actually made by them, but japanese... I´m definitely happy with the lens quality, just wanted to know the true rough facts, even if i could get hurt.

Victor__ said:

The larger the imager chip, the larger and more difficult to
manufacture the lenses are. This is also the reason why a 70-200mm
f2.8 SLR lens is so much more expensive than the 707 itself.

Click to expand...

I dont want to compare the Sony lens to either a bigger zoom or a lens made for another CDD size, just the quality of it.

I hope I made it clearer now.
Jorge

jorge elguera said:

My intentioin was not to try to make the lens work, i said what if ...
I was referring to the lens quality, glass, coating, manufacturing,
instead of actualy trying to adapt it into a larger CCD or a
different thread size cam.

Click to expand...

Rest assured, the 7x7 has the best lens system in its class. Even though, it's licensed from Zeiss and not directly done by CZ. (AFAIK)

Victor__ said:

jorge elguera said:

if you were to compare the lens in the f7x7 cams to, lets say,
those expensive Nikon, Canon, Sigma lense, how would it rate? Is
the lens alone expensive???? I wonder how yould a Canon D60 or
Fuji S2 work with the Zeiss lens in our cams.

Click to expand...

It is easier to design smaller lenses for small-sized chips like
707 and such. The D60/D100 DSLR's use much larger chips, so the
lenses have to be larger. So the 707 lens, being the best in the
p&s would not work (ie. would not have enough coverage) for the
DSLR CCD/CMOS chips.
The larger the imager chip, the larger and more difficult to
manufacture the lenses are. This is also the reason why a 70-200mm
f2.8 SLR lens is so much more expensive than the 707 itself.
As another comparison - take a look at the sony camcoders - they
have Zeiss lenses with much larger zooms than 707, but are cheaper
than the 707 - small lenses are cheaper.
You want to see expensive stuff - look at medium format Zeiss lens...

Click to expand...

I own a Hasselblad medium format camera with Zeiss lense. Expensive - you bet. I have the "cheapest" lense (50mm equivalent) replacement cost is about $1000-$1200. Needless to say to quality is superb. Because of that, this is my primary reason for the Sony 7x7 camera - the Zeiss lense.

Victor__ said:

Anyway, comparing 707 with DSLRs based on the lens alone does not
work - these cameras work for different situations.

Click to expand...

dgd684 said:

replacement cost is about $1000-$1200. Needless to say to quality
is superb. Because of that, this is my primary reason for the Sony
7x7 camera - the Zeiss lense.

Click to expand...

I don't have any MF gear, but I have couple Contax lenses - I love the quality and feel (not to mention the results) of them. I wish the Digifilm guys were for real - I'd gladly pay 2k for it and use my existing 35mm SLR gear. Contax RTS coupled with Planar 85/1.4 is soo sweet....