Carl Zeiss

[Steve_K]

It has nothing to do with country of production. As long as quality

control is the same, specs are the same, and material used is the
same, then the two products are identical (afterall, we are not
talking about hand-made items here. The production process is
completely automated).

That's the whole point. The quality control is NOT the same. I'll go back to my TV point. The XBR I purchased 5 years ago was made in Mexico, not Japan. The 1st one (which was returned) had very bad geometry problems. The 2nd one had better geometry but put out a low level hum from the speakers. The Q.C. situation with Sony TV's poorer now than ever. Just go to audioreview.com & look over the consumer reviews of Sony Flat Screen TV's. Many, many people complaining about problems & sets that never should have left the factory. The only saving grace with the TV's is that when you finally get a good one, the picture really is the best. You may just have to go thru 2 or 3 returns to get one without problems.

Sony isn't the golden, top quality name it once was as far as quality goes. I think in its quest for profit they've let the quality of their product slip quite a bit since they made their name 30 years ago or so. Do you really think their manufacturing philosophy with cameras would be any different than with TV's ?

 

[Perry]

The Sony's have the best lenses of any of the prosumer digital cameras. This is illustrated by Phil's resolution tests. Also the Sony images look so much sharper than other manufactures including Nikon. Sony fails in the total package compared to other brands in my opinion. The lenses and imaging capabilities are the best you will find. Wish they could fill in the gaps and have the best of both worlds. Full manual features that work and full adjustability of LCD's and EVF's.

Perry

Hi! What is good about the Carl Zeiss lens that makes it better
than any other lens? Thanks!

 

[Mishik]

I don't think that it is physically possible to make a zoom lens while it's max aperture won't change during the zoom change.The aperture itself doesn't phisicaly change,but in a new focal length it will be different cuz the aperture is not a constant,but relative value which is dependant on the focal lenght of the lens.(IMO)
Michael.

One must always be aware of the potential "pitfalls" one may face
when buying a brand name. Zeiss, Nikon, and Canon all produce very
high quality lenses, but each of these makers also make low-end
lenses for the consumer market. The pros can afford high-grade
(expensive lenses) because A. Their firm/magazine/company pays for
them or B. The work they do with the camera itself pays for their
equipment.

It is a whole different ball game if you are a non-pro who does not
make money from photography.

While the Zeiss on the Sony (the fact that it is manufactured in
Japan rather than Germany notwithstanding) may be a "good" lens, it
cannot truly compare to top-of-the-line $1K plus lenses from any of
the manufacturers listed above. Nor should it try to, since we are
talking about two completely different markets and users.

Here's why:

The F707 Zeiss has:

1. Severe barrel-distortion at wide angle.
2. Vignetting at wide angle.
3. While pretty wide, a max aperture that decreases with zoom.
4. No image stabilization.
5. No USM (ultra-sonic motor) technology as seen on mid to high end
Canon lenses and some Nikkor lenses.

On the plus side:

1. Lens is pretty sharp (less so at the corners).
2. Lens does not change length with zoom. Only internal elements
move. This "feature" is very desirable and is often seen on
high-end lenses (prevents dust from entering lens mechanism).

I would really like to see someone do an MTF test on bulit in
lenses (like the Zeiss on the F707) to see how they compare to SLR
lenses like Canon, Nikkor and indeed Zeiss.

Just my 2 yen worth.

bluedot.

Hi! What is good about the Carl Zeiss lens that makes it better
than any other lens? Thanks!

--All the best,Michael

 

[bluedot]

I don't think that it is physically possible to make a zoom lens while it's max aperture won't change during the zoom change.

Mishik --

I respectfully disagree. Most high-end zoom lenses have constant apertures. Check out Canon's EF "L" range. A couple of examples: EF 70-200 F2.8L and EF 28-70 F2.8L, both of which have a constant F2.8 aperture throughout their respective zoom ranges.

bluedot.

 

[Abel Kan]

entirely agreed...just about, every single piece of the sony equipment i've owned in the past 10 yrs, and every single piece of the sony equipment a good buddy of mine owns in the past 10 yrs, all have gone bad at least once....
and that's including tvs, car stereos, stereo equipment, etc.

the only reason why i'm willing bought the f707 was the sears ppp. otherwise, their QA is so poor, i'm just simply NOT willing to buy any sony equipment, even though they might be the best performers in their respective categories.

AK

It has nothing to do with country of production. As long as quality

control is the same, specs are the same, and material used is the
same, then the two products are identical (afterall, we are not
talking about hand-made items here. The production process is
completely automated).

That's the whole point. The quality control is NOT the same. I'll
go back to my TV point. The XBR I purchased 5 years ago was made
in Mexico, not Japan. The 1st one (which was returned) had very
bad geometry problems. The 2nd one had better geometry but put out
a low level hum from the speakers. The Q.C. situation with Sony
TV's poorer now than ever. Just go to audioreview.com & look over
the consumer reviews of Sony Flat Screen TV's. Many, many people
complaining about problems & sets that never should have left the
factory. The only saving grace with the TV's is that when you
finally get a good one, the picture really is the best. You may
just have to go thru 2 or 3 returns to get one without problems.

Sony isn't the golden, top quality name it once was as far as
quality goes. I think in its quest for profit they've let the
quality of their product slip quite a bit since they made their
name 30 years ago or so. Do you really think their manufacturing
philosophy with cameras would be any different than with TV's ?

--AK

 

[Mishik]

...It means they probably physically change the aperture diamensions...Never say never

I don't think that it is physically possible to make a zoom lens while it's max aperture won't change during the zoom change.

Mishik --

I respectfully disagree. Most high-end zoom lenses have constant
apertures. Check out Canon's EF "L" range. A couple of examples: EF
70-200 F2.8L and EF 28-70 F2.8L, both of which have a constant F2.8
aperture throughout their respective zoom ranges.

bluedot.

--All the best,Michael

 

[Steve_K]

Yup. I agree. I really think Sonys designs are top notch. It's just that they let their QC slip badly from where it was years ago. I think their TV's are really better looking & sounding than any of the competition, but you have to get a good one which is getting harder & harder.

I've been trying to talk myself into upgrading my S75 to a 707 for a while now. Problem is everytime I get onto this forum I see BFS / NO BFS / LEVBFS / Serial number lists & basically people talking about variences in perfomance all over the place. With a product that retails for $1000 you should be able to get top quality & consistancy. There should not be a variation in quality from unit to unit. I feel if I bought an F707 I'd be rolling the dice and taking a real chance that the camera has problems. I shouldn't have to count on service plans & stores return policies, hunt for a box with a blue dot, black square, etc... . I just went lugging 100 lb + TV sets back & forth because of quality problems & don't really want to do it again, even with a 3 lb camera .

For the money they want for this camera you should be assured of getting a perfect one right out of the box. Seems more like a 50/50 proposition to me right now. I can live with the color saturation issue as that is really a design choice & you know going into this that the Sony digicams color philosophy is that way ( you can argue though that not having user controlled saturation settings is a poor design choice). What I can't live with is paying that much & then having to fight with a salesman to return a camera with some type of operational problem (like LEVBFS, hot pixels, etc). I'm tired of that & don't feel I should have to shell out extra $$$ for a service plan to ensure I'll be able to return some piece of junk that fails 4 months down the road for whatever reason. I know people say that no digicam is perfect & you will find problems no matter what you buy. But, boy ... I could live with that if I paid $200 or $300 for a product. When you pay $1K or so (or even $750 discounted) you really should be able to expect perfection right out of the box. Accepting anything less is like telling the manufacturer its O.K. to put out junk. People will pay no matter what.

Sorry for the rant

entirely agreed...just about, every single piece of the sony
equipment i've owned in the past 10 yrs, and every single piece of
the sony equipment a good buddy of mine owns in the past 10 yrs,
all have gone bad at least once....
and that's including tvs, car stereos, stereo equipment, etc.

the only reason why i'm willing bought the f707 was the sears ppp.
otherwise, their QA is so poor, i'm just simply NOT willing to buy
any sony equipment, even though they might be the best performers
in their respective categories.

AK

 

[Amando Hernández]

Hi! What is good about the Carl Zeiss lens that makes it better
than any other lens? Thanks!

 

[Macro]

Well, not that I'm a Daewoo fan (I drive a US spec Jeep Grand Cherokee)... but here in South Korea... with a Daewoo, I don't have to pay $1500 shipping to get it here... and it's much easier and cheaper to have repaired!

Macroman-

Hi! What is good about the Carl Zeiss lens that makes it better
than any other lens? Thanks!

What would you rather drive. A Cadillac, Lincoln, or a Diawoo?
(^ ^)

--
Eddie

 

[Ed (;¬ >)]

Mike, thanks for the pithy analysis. Very well said.

Also thanks for the link to the post by Rodger Carter. I had forgotten that. I have saved it for future reference.

I have only one comment to make about the similarity between CZ branded lenses on the Sony cameras vs "similar" lenses on other brands: CZ has an exceptionally ridgid QC policy. They have to do something with the lenses they reject. Why not sell them to other camera manufacturers?

This is common in many industries. When you consider the scale of production involved—I mentioned in another post that CZ has manufactured 5 Million lenses for all Sony cameras in the last 6 years—there were probably enough leftovers for other brands.

It is also possible that CZ manufacturers OEM lenses to lower specifications for these same manufacturers. It would be prudent for them not to publicize this.

I would also suggest that those reading this visit the CZ site and take a tour of their manufacturing process. THey also have excellent treatises on the resolving power of lenses and depth of field.

I might also mention thet they did a very public comparison of the Sony F55 verses other digital, as well as one Contax APS and a Contax SLR (both of which use CZ lenses.) THe results might surprize you.

-Ed (Don't look a gift lens in the aperture) W.
http://www.pbase.com/ewaldorph/dpreview
Sony F505v (with Canon 500D +2 lens for macros)
(;¬ þ)

As has been pointed out in this thread, the Zeiss lenses clearly
are designed, QC'd and produced by Zeiss in Asia. Does Sony
physically manufacture the lens? I think not. I base this
statement on the following: one of our forum members, Rodger
Carter, put the question to the company (Zeiss), and received the
following response, which you can read for yourself...

http://www.dpreview.com/forums/read.asp?forum=1009&message=332956

The issue on this site has been whether the lens is this same as
can be found in the Epson, Canon and other cameras in the
3x/prosumer category. Mr. Askey questions this fact in his review
of the S70 and S75, since the front of the lens physically looks a
lot like the lenses in the aforementioned cameras. Do a search in
the Open Talk Forum or the News Forum and you'll find a thread
wherein Phil responds to the letter Rodger received from Zeiss.
Bear in mind that the letter is dated (it goes back to the time
when the S70 was a new camera). Phil does not seem to question the
Zeiss lens in the F505/F505V/F707 series, just the S70/S75/S85
series, mainly because of the similarity of appearance. But can
one really draw a conclusion that the lens is not really a Zeiss
lens simply because it resembles the other lenses on the outside?
I think not, especially since you'd have to tear the camera apart,
then somehow look at the glass coating, and since I'm both not
smart enough or wealthy enough to do so, I'll pass.

But there are some in this thread that don't even question the
veracity of the lens' origin based on the similarity of appearance
to the other lenses...you guys are questioning it simply because
you suspect fraud at some level, or marketing rhetoric. Maybe Sony
is using the name but not really delivering on the goods. I think
it is safe to say that the Zeiss optics in Sony digicams and
camcorders are indeed designed, manufactured and inspected by Zeiss
in Asia. Is this a problem? Do you want Zeiss optics made in
Germany? Well, then buy a Hasselblad.

On a separate note...why would some think that a high-tech product
made at a remote production facility far away from a company's HQ
is somehow inferior? This strikes me as somewhat unwarrented
(perhaps even xenophobic). Reminds me of the time when people
lamented the fact that CDs weren't made in the US. Why? People at
the time feared that the Japanese were taking over our economy in
retaliation for their defeat in WWII. Fact is, the Japanese
invented the compact disk, so why shouldn't it be made there. So
now even the Japanese use foreign (other Asain) locations to
manufacture their products. What's wrong with that? In many
cases, it makes sense...the Chinese are the BEST plastics
manufactureres in the world. They're pretty dang good at
micro-electronics, too. If micro-electronic circuitry can be
manufactured in places like Singapore, Tawain, Mexico or China at
the SAME level of quality as they can be manufactured in Europe,
Japan or the United States, why not make them in these other
places? Why is a Sony TV of inferior quality if some or all of the
manufacturing is done in China? If Sony is willing to put their
name on it, and they control the production faciility, then I would
think that the quality would be of equal value.

To be fair, what might really be happening is that Sony may allow a
more budget line of electronics to be manufactured in the first
place, and those might just be made in China (or Mexico, or
anywhere but Japan). You buy this product, see that it's made in
China, and immediately make the connection with "made in
China"-Sony products are of inferior quality. What if, however,
you were to buy the latest, top-end Sony TV direct from Sony and
were also to find out that it too was made in China? Would you
ignore this fact? How do you reconcile this with the other,
inferior product?

If you don't like Globalization for other reasons...environmental,
fair labor standards, loss of jobs in your home country, etc...I
can respect that (though I may disagree). But please don't dismiss
foreing-made products as of inferior quality simply because they're
made somewhere other than your home country.

Just my 2 cents.

Mike M - who doesn't care where his S75 was made

 

[Jimmy Chen]

Because labor in China is cheaper than in Japan.

It has nothing to do with country of production. As long as quality
control is the same, specs are the same, and material used is the
same, then the two products are identical (afterall, we are not
talking about hand-made items here. The production process is
completely automated).

Right, all the machine parts are the same, but the human factor isnt.

The Honda analogy does not apply here because car manufacturers
tweak the specs to suit among other things the climate, geography
(hilly or flat) and fuel standrads of the country of use.

Actually, that isnt the reason why there are two kind of Honda is US. It has to do with the bottom line, $$$. Anything west of the Mississippi is freight over from Japan, anything East of it is assembled together here in USA. However, can you say US auto workers have the same work ethic as Japanese auto workers? LOL, we all know they arent equal.

This very same human factor is going to play a factor in Germany, Japan and China.

jc

 

[Ed (;¬ >)]

Sorry if I misunderstood you, Jimmy. But this is what you said:

"As for the Carl Zeiss on the Sony, it is only a CZ by design and association, by the lens is actually made in Japan, not Germany, so in name you are getting a well known name, but it isnt the real product per say."

I took that to mean you thought the lens was manufactured by Sony and not CZ. Sorry.

So if you do think the lens is made by CZ in Japan, what makes that less desireable than one made in Germany?

Remember that CZ also manufactures its Contax lenses in Japan and they are recognized as among the finest in the world. Only the lenses for German cameras are made in Germany.

The point I was trying to make is that the CZ lenses on the Sony digi-cams and cam-corders are the finest lenses available for any fixed lens camera of any type, that they are not Carl Zeiss in name only but in fact, and the fact that Sony can sell an entire camera for the price of an accessory lens should say something about lens pricing and not the quality of the CZ/Sony lens.

-Ed (You say toe-MAY-toe, I say toe-MAH-toe) W.
http://www.pbase.com/ewaldorph/dpreview
Sony F505v (with Canon 500D +2 lens for macros)
(;¬ þ)

Ed, you may want to re-read my statement. I said the Sony CZ lens
is made in Japan and not in Germany. No where in my post I said it
is not made by CZ. Btw, that info I extracted from the F505V
review, not your post.

As for quality and price, I used Sony itself as a perfect example
of why there can be two pricing for a Sony Walkman when one
compares the made in China vs made in Japan. Can we really say the
quality is the same? If it is the same quality product, then why
would Sony sell the made in China one at a much lower price?

This is no different then why people thinks Japanese made Honda is
better then American made Honda.

jc

 

[Ed (;¬ >)]

The car anology aside, are you just disparaging Japanese labor vs German labor? Are you willing to say that a CZ Contax lens is inferior to a CZ Hassleblad lens?

--Ed (Void Where Prohibited, Your Mileage May Vary) W.
http://www.pbase.com/ewaldorph/dpreview
Sony F505v (with Canon 500D +2 lens for macros)
(;¬ þ)

Because labor in China is cheaper than in Japan.

It has nothing to do with country of production. As long as quality
control is the same, specs are the same, and material used is the
same, then the two products are identical (afterall, we are not
talking about hand-made items here. The production process is
completely automated).

Right, all the machine parts are the same, but the human factor isnt.

The Honda analogy does not apply here because car manufacturers
tweak the specs to suit among other things the climate, geography
(hilly or flat) and fuel standrads of the country of use.

Actually, that isnt the reason why there are two kind of Honda is
US. It has to do with the bottom line, $$$. Anything west of the
Mississippi is freight over from Japan, anything East of it is
assembled together here in USA. However, can you say US auto
workers have the same work ethic as Japanese auto workers? LOL, we
all know they arent equal.

This very same human factor is going to play a factor in Germany,
Japan and China.

jc

 

[Don Fordham]

.................... Reminds me of the time when people
lamented the fact that CDs weren't made in the US. Why? People at
the time feared that the Japanese were taking over our economy in
retaliation for their defeat in WWII. Fact is, the Japanese
invented the compact disk, so why shouldn't it be made there.

The Dutch might be upset that you forgot the rather significant role that Phillips played in the invention of the CD.

Regards,
Don

 

[Jimmy Chen]

Sorry if I misunderstood you, Jimmy.

NP, Ed. its part of the problem with internet. Words in text just dont always tell the whole message compared to in person.

So if you do think the lens is made by CZ in Japan, what makes that
less desireable than one made in Germany?

It may all come down to QC.

Remember that CZ also manufactures its Contax lenses in Japan and
they are recognized as among the finest in the world. Only the
lenses for German cameras are made in Germany.

Every mfg'er produces different quality goods, right? So just because the lens in Sony is a CZ, can we assume it is of the same quality of other CZ lens? I think Bluedot in "The perils of speculation" gave a few good reasons to why we shouldnt.

jc

 

[Mike_D]

I have a point of contention with what you wrote below, there have been few quality issues differentiating Marysville built Honda and those from Japan. The Honda company itself fosters a pride in workmanship that no American auto manufacturer has yet to match. The American Honda plant in Ohio has continually thwarted union attempts to move in because there is a bond there between company and worker. It's not the us vs. them mentality that is so prevalent in Detroit. The difference isn't between the Japanese and American worker, the difference is in corporate philosophy, and that is why an American built Honda is every bit as good as one from Japan. If you want see the difference just look for companies where the employees don't feel the need for a labor union. Honda is certainly one of those companies, Saturn is certainly not.

Actually, that isnt the reason why there are two kind of Honda is
US. It has to do with the bottom line, $$$. Anything west of the
Mississippi is freight over from Japan, anything East of it is
assembled together here in USA. However, can you say US auto
workers have the same work ethic as Japanese auto workers? LOL, we
all know they arent equal.

This very same human factor is going to play a factor in Germany,
Japan and China.

jc

 

[Wes Keys]

Armando, I think you make an excellent point. If you look at the pictures, and they're incredibly sharp, who cares who made it and where. In fairness however, some on the forum seem to be pretty new to photography and probably don't have a good frame of reference for sharpness, especially if their pictures aren't sharp, and they're not sure whether it's because of the lens, or their technique.

Hi! What is good about the Carl Zeiss lens that makes it better
than any other lens? Thanks!

--Wes

 

[Pete]

Armando, I think you make an excellent point. If you look at the
pictures, and they're incredibly sharp, who cares who made it and
where.

But what pictures do you look at to compare? I remember a similar go around with regards to 707 macro performance. By several test comparisons, it is not as good as some other digicam lenses but Dark Angel owners parade their macro photo collections to dispute this. Of course the pictures are all great - but not a one of them will readily reveal the lenses barrel distortion (not reveal - due to subject matter).

In fairness however, some on the forum seem to be pretty
new to photography and probably don't have a good frame of
reference for sharpness, especially if their pictures aren't sharp,
and they're not sure whether it's because of the lens

(or camera sharpness setting)

, or their technique.

• • • which further brings home the point. If you want to compare lens performance the comparisons you can trust are the ones made with test images on a test bench. And these need to be sensor independent (like tests done on removable 35 mm camera lenses) otherwise we are really talking about performance of both the lens and the imager.

Pete

 

[Robert Holloway]

This has to be a joke Eh?

I'm far more into home theater and stereo than digital photography
Speakers that are THX certified are not even close to the best
in fact, the specification set down by Tomlinson Holman makes them
very different to conventional speakers.

I won't get into crossovers and everything else on this forum
But trust me.... THX is not a sign of the best speakers

That said, THX speakers by definition are not bad speakers either.

Rob

Hi! What is good about the Carl Zeiss lens that makes it better
than any other lens? Thanks!

--Take lots of of pictures - Have fun with your cameraRobert

 

[Larry G43983]

Armando, I think you make an excellent point. If you look at the
pictures, and they're incredibly sharp, who cares who made it and
where.

But what pictures do you look at to compare? I remember a similar
go around with regards to 707 macro performance. By several test
comparisons, it is not as good as some other digicam lenses but
Dark Angel owners parade their macro photo collections to dispute
this. Of course the pictures are all great - but not a one of them
will readily reveal the lenses barrel distortion (not reveal - due
to subject matter).

In fairness however, some on the forum seem to be pretty
new to photography and probably don't have a good frame of
reference for sharpness, especially if their pictures aren't sharp,
and they're not sure whether it's because of the lens

(or camera sharpness setting)

, or their technique.

• • • which further brings home the point. If you want to compare

lens performance the comparisons you can trust are the ones made
with test images on a test bench. And these need to be sensor
independent (like tests done on removable 35 mm camera lenses)
otherwise we are really talking about performance of both the lens
and the imager.

Pete

I was handed some digital images on a CD a few weeks ago and was asked to prepare some 'flyers' and promo material for an exhibition. The pictures were sharper and cleaner than I was used to seeing (having once owned a Fuji 6900) and curiousity got the better of me. I discovered the shots had been taken on a Sony S70. Need I say more... for me, that Carl Ziess lens lived up the name.
--Larry G