Kenko Tokina forms alliance with Carl Zeiss to be its distributor for lenses and more in Japan

@panther fan,
This is not quite true. There are a few photographic lenses that is made by themselves. I believe one wide angle for zm, zf and ze series.
In Europe Zeiss has serviced my lenses, even though it was handled by a distributer.

@Sylverphoto
Yeah I know I know. Zeiss makes exactly one lens in Germany the 15mm, because it is identical to their cine line. That doesn't count

Based on my personal experience with classic ZF.2 vs AI-S lenses that I have and use. The Zeiss are all glass and metal, the Nikon also has some high quality rubber that still looks brand new after 20 years. For 180mm is not heavy at all. And it's clearly better made than the ZF.2's.

@Igor Sotelo
The classic and Zf.2 line was discontinued some time ago. There is a reason the Milvus, Otus and Loxia line followed

There is also ZEISS FOR EYE CARE PROFESSIONALS and Zeiss eywear (glasses)
ZEISS Instruments & Systems optical instruments.
https://www.zeiss.co.uk/vision-care/eye-care-professionals/home.html

You mean Zeiss branded eyewear, it's made by the same company that make dozens of other brands including Prada, RayBan etc.

Sony designs and manufactures lenses that wear Zeiss branding, that doesn't make them a Zeiss product.

My point, again, it's brand and solely a brand now, it was a leading manufacturer, buy that was long ago.

Melinda, Zeiss makes a large array of different products, not just photographic and cine lenses. Like many companies it manufactures in a number of different countries, sometimes contracting out to third parties. Does that make it a name only? In that case so are Apple, Nike and most other major brands.

Not really, Apple own their IP, they design the products and only the manufacturing is outsourced.

For example, as above, in the case of Zony lenses, almost all (possibly all) of them are designed by Sony, manufactured in a Sony owned or contracted plant and the only input by Zeiss is consultation, if that even happens.

Boom, some of them wear a Zeiss badge and no Sony badge. Some wear both like it was a combined effort.

The branding helps sell the product, but the brand had almost nothing to do with the design or manufacture.

Yes, that makes sense, Zeiss has sales of over 6 billion euro a year but doesn't actually design or make anything themselves, only branding. Even if that was the case, which it isn't, thats a pretty good job of selling your name! From medical technology, industrial optics, microscopes, photo and cine lenses, they really should stop wasting their time and money on all that R&D and concentrate on their core business of "branding".

Lots of incorrect assumptions there champ.

It takes a big person to admit their assumptions were wrong. Well done.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Carl_Zeiss_AG#Vision_Care

ZEISS is active in four business segments with approximately equal revenue, Industrial Quality and Research, Medical Technology, Consumer Markets and Semiconductor Manufacturing Technology in almost 50 countries, has 30 production sites and around 25 development sites worldwide.

KZ7 Zeiss does have production sites in Germany. It's more than branding.

@pixel
Thats the point I have been trying to make to Melindra. They are the one trying to say Zeiss is a brand name only. Obviously my attempt at sarcasm in my previous couple of posts didn't work :)

You're congratulating yourself?

I thought I'd do some research, so I asked a Zeiss medical rep, he said the biggest seller (in our country anyway) is a Topcon manufactured products branded Zeiss.

'Designed by Zeiss' (rofl), obviously designed and manufactured in Japan by Topcon, branded Zeiss.

He said they go through tonnes of Zeiss branded mouse mats etc.

That's from a Zeiss rep from HQ, gimme some data, happy to be proven wrong.

Being 'active' in four businesses doesn't mean they aren't simply white labelling.

"My point, again, it's brand and solely a brand now, it was a leading manufacturer, buy that was long ago."

That's obviously not true. But KZ7 is also partially wrong. Yes, Zeiss does a lot of branding, especially for consumer stuff. That doesn't mean they are not a leading manufacturer. They are just not in the consumer space.

Zeiss makes the highest quality and highest resolution optics in the world by far. They just have no application in cameras instead they are used to make the chips that work in cameras. If TSMC, Samsung, Intel, etc... need a new chip Fab they go to ASML and ASML let's Zeiss build a lithography optic the size of a house with performance unmatched by anyone in the world.

They still are the leading optical manufacturer. They just have no interest in low margin consumer products. And yes part of their industry and medical optics are also in partnership. But they still do a lot of stuff in house. (They even do their Cine lenses still in house, which break records)

@panther
As far as I am aware the Arri/Zeiss cine lenses are designed and manufactured by Zeiss. I deal a lot more with the medical side and their surgical microscopes are also designed and manufactured by them. Yes they sell their brand, as do other companies, but as you mentioned they are one of the premier optics companjes in the world.

The irony there is that the ZeissVario- Tessar lens design which is approx 80 years old is still being produced.I worked with and used Nikkor lenses for 20 years.

The Zeiss image was distinctly different(superior) to the Nikkors, although Nikkor quality is still acceptable.What is not acceptable is when you get to binocular. Zeiss 10x56 Night Owls when compared to the Nikon equivalent has to be seen to be believed.I had my own Night Owls which were matched against the best Nikons by the Nikon sales manager.His first and last response was @#$! as he walked out and I was told never to bring the Zeiss binoculars to work again.

teddoman:

Not at B+H Photo's website, or last time I looked. they didn't.

I'd not go by Sony's website, it's not known to be super well updated.

Ted do an, though it is noticeable that Sony hasn’t released any ZA lenses for a few years. It’s premium ranges now appear to be G and GM only.

following the comments from teddoman, a keen observer might be able to spot the Zeiss logo on that lens.

@HowaboutRAW

Not seeing the same thing you are seeing. The B&H site still says "ZA Lens" right in the title, and the main picture has the lens showing a big blue Zeiss logo on it.

https://www.bhphotovideo.com/c/product/1264965-REG/sony_sel50f14z_planar_t_fe_50mm.html

JakeJY:

Right, ZA is the mount.

Also the URL you posted says "Sony" not "Zeiss".

This is the name on the webpage:

"Sony Planar T* FE 50mm f/1.4 ZA Overview"

And the text reads "based on the Zeiss planar design".

These were called Zeiss lenses as recently has 2 years ago. They were not called Sonys, nor were they called SonyZeisses, by Sony at least, commenters at DPR is a different matter.

Zeiss has been a reowned company for many years and they have developed many technologies. Since this only applies to Japan they were maybe looking for a partner who can distribute and repair their lenses. There are only a few possibibitlies:

a) Zeiss wants to cut costs at their service/sales department in Japan. Zeiss lens sales could have slowed down. Who of you knows who have repaired Zeiss lenses in Japan? Cosina?

b) The demand of Zeiss lenses has grown and they no longer can handle the work load and therefore there is change needed to find a partner? With Kenko Tokina Zeiss would have an advantage because they are Japanese and represent more than one company.

c) Zeiss does no longer fit into Cosinas portfolio and Cosina wants to expand the production for their one line up? EF and F mount sales could have decline since every new camera is basically mirrorless.

panther fan:

"Tamron owns the patents to the Batis lens designs. So Zeiss at least bought the designs from Tamron."

Citation please.

No one here is asserting that Cosina manufacturers Zeiss AF lenses, so the Batis line in this context. In fact, I explicitly referenced manual focus lens lines made by Cosina under contract for Zeiss, those being the Milvus and Otus lines. I'm not making any claims to know which party makes the manual focus Zeiss Loxia lenses. Though pretty sure that Cosina makes the Zeiss M lenses.

The 85mm f/1.8 SLR lens from Tamron has a different elements count than the 85mm f/1.8 FE mount sold under the Zeiss Batis name.

I was unaware of, and would like a citation to support, Sony's part ownership of Tamron. It's certainly possible. And I have read the rumor, so that's unconfirmed, that Sony makes the Batis lenses. BUT Sony is no longer labeling lenses like the "Zeiss" FE mount 50mm f/1.4 as Zeiss. They're now Sonys based on Zeiss designs.

Tamron has been making lenses for Sony for a long time. Most if not all of the lenses on the Sony camcorders as well as the compact cameras come from Tamron. That Sony has been one of the major Tamron shareholders has never been a secret, it's a public company.

Txoni, I was mainly referring to the fact that, of all the APS-C mounts, and all the lens makers on the market, Fuji is the only one (to my most up-to-date knowledge) to also have an f/2.8 ultra-wide-angle zoom, the 8-16mm f/2.8. All the other brands besides Tokina are "stuck" with either f/4 or variable aperture ultra-wide APS-C lenses, unless I am forgetting one. Sigma makes a 16mm f/1.4 for Sony's APS-C E-mount bodies, and also for Fuji X-mount IIRC, and it is apparently quite good. Other than that, there's just not much in terms of wide-angle, fast-aperture glass for APS-C.

@Looking,

I consider f/2.8 to be decently fast for a zoom, but not for a prime, at least not on APS-C where there's a ~1 stop loss of light-gathering ability. (Which is why I'd almost rather have the Tokina 14-20mm f/2 than the Tokina 11-20mm f/2.8)

The Rokinon/Samyang 12mm f/2 is great, if you're on mirrorless, but I spent most of my former time with APS-C in the DSLR realm, so it wasn't an option. And all of the other primes I tried that were wide enough were just terrible in the corners, besides the Roki-Yang 10mm f/2.8; that one was decent.