Loxia 25 on its way...

Started 11 months ago | Discussions thread
kamituel Senior Member • Posts: 1,121
Re: What's the advantage of this duplication?

silentstorm wrote:

biza43 wrote:

Why wasting? Do you have the details of what resources: R&D, man-hours, assembly line, QA/QC, etc, have they invested in the new lens? The Loxias are actually built by Cosina in their factory in Japan, so perhaps Zeiss resources are not that stretched? Sure, there are many other MF lenses even native to E mount, but not one 25mm lens. And Milvus requires adapters and are huge on the little Sony cameras. We all have choices indeed, and the more the merrier, so a new Loxia is welcomed.

And as pointed many times before, the same focal length in AF and MF, with different sizes and apertures, serves different people and objectives. I am sure that Zeiss sees it not as wasting resources, but as an investment.

For me I just don't see the advantage of Zeiss doing it. IMO Zeiss is better off just producing either Loxia or Batis range.

Sure, that is your opinion. But I think it is ill-informed, and out of touch with reality.

I don't have details, well, do you? But I certainly don't think it is as easy as Zeiss picking up the phone & call Cosina "Hey buddy, make me a 35mm F2 will ya?" & then sit back, do nothing, & money starts rolling in. I also don't know if Zeiss commissioned Tamron to manufacture any of their lenses, more like a hearsay to me.

I understand the separation of product range, usually or most companies practice higher quality (much higher price) vs lower quality (much lower price) with the same FL, eg. FE85mm/1.8 vs FE85mm/1.4GM. Bear in mind this is in the context of Loxia & Batis, not Otus vs Milvus. In this case with Zeiss, we have 2 high quality, high price range of lenses. Why not stick to one range with high quality, high price & more FL to use?

Yes, definitely just my opinion that Zeiss should focus their lens designs, QC, research, prototyping, production line capacity, logistic, marketing, etc etc. to just 1 range with more FL instead. Why is this out of touch with reality?

We are able to buy either Loxia or Batis lens becos' Zeiss makes them. If Zeiss didn't make Loxia or Batis range, we can only buy either one of the range.

True, but if there was a market for the other, unmade lens lineup, someone else might've jumped in and made them. Folks at Zeiss clearly assumed they can sell enough Batises and enough Loxias to justify all the costs.

Zeiss didn't decide to make an extra range becos' people ask for it, that's the reality.

How do you know that? How do you know Zeiss didn't do a market research before deciding to invest both in Batis and Loxia lines? How do you know they, after being in business for decades, aren't aware what kinds of lenses their typical customers would be willing to buy?

If making a Batis line is wasting resources, why Zeiss introduced Batis 18 a full year after Batis 85 and 25? If making a Loxia line is wasting resources, why did Zeiss introduce Loxia 21 and later 85 long after they introduced 35 and 50?

Clearly sales of both Batis' and Loxias were strong enough to warrant the development of new lenses. As simple as that.

-- hide signature --
Post (hide subjects) Posted by
Keyboard shortcuts:
FForum PPrevious NNext WNext unread UUpvote SSubscribe RReply QQuote BBookmark MMy threads
Color scheme? Blue / Yellow