unpopular
Been spending a lot of time on here!
Zeiss still does make lenses, as far as I know their cinema lenses are still being made in Germany by Zeiss. There is no reason why you couldn't drop $4-15,000 and buy one and use it on a still camera. Would they be better? At those prices I sure as hell hope so, no matter who built it.
I do not know the exact arrangement of the Cosina lenses, and as far as I've understood it, these are lenses being manufactured by Cosina on behalf of Zeiss, rather than Cosina simply rebranding one of their lenses as Zeiss. It's not like Kyocera buying the rights to use the name Contax and do pretty much whatever it feels like.
I do not know the arrangement with Sony, and I had assumed that Zeiss had Sony manufacture the ZA line under contract, including specific specification and formula. Maybe those specifications are pretty loose, I don't know. But I am pretty sure that Zeiss isn't going to let Sony slap on a red T* without some specification as to what T* is or what Distagon or Planar means.
Having Zeiss license their technologies and specifications is not the same thing as Minolta or Nikon slapping their logo on a cheap Tamron or Cosina OEM. Zeiss has specifications which are to be met, and I maintain that it does not matter where geographically the factory is located, provided that the factory is technologically capable of producing the product to specification. I also do not believe that if third parties are producing an inferior licensed product Zeiss is in the dark about it.
I also did not mean to accuse any specific person of being a racist, and while I understand why Derrel felt this way, I also don't appreciate MJHoward here outright accusing me of being racist for no other reason than being racially sensitive myself.
As for lens makers - it doesn't really matter. Lenses are "made" in the laboratory, they are manufactured in factories. So long as the factory is capable, it doesn't matter where that factory is. That's all that my point ever was. I'm sorry I misinterpreted the conversation as something it wasn't.
I do not know the exact arrangement of the Cosina lenses, and as far as I've understood it, these are lenses being manufactured by Cosina on behalf of Zeiss, rather than Cosina simply rebranding one of their lenses as Zeiss. It's not like Kyocera buying the rights to use the name Contax and do pretty much whatever it feels like.
I do not know the arrangement with Sony, and I had assumed that Zeiss had Sony manufacture the ZA line under contract, including specific specification and formula. Maybe those specifications are pretty loose, I don't know. But I am pretty sure that Zeiss isn't going to let Sony slap on a red T* without some specification as to what T* is or what Distagon or Planar means.
Having Zeiss license their technologies and specifications is not the same thing as Minolta or Nikon slapping their logo on a cheap Tamron or Cosina OEM. Zeiss has specifications which are to be met, and I maintain that it does not matter where geographically the factory is located, provided that the factory is technologically capable of producing the product to specification. I also do not believe that if third parties are producing an inferior licensed product Zeiss is in the dark about it.
I also did not mean to accuse any specific person of being a racist, and while I understand why Derrel felt this way, I also don't appreciate MJHoward here outright accusing me of being racist for no other reason than being racially sensitive myself.
As for lens makers - it doesn't really matter. Lenses are "made" in the laboratory, they are manufactured in factories. So long as the factory is capable, it doesn't matter where that factory is. That's all that my point ever was. I'm sorry I misinterpreted the conversation as something it wasn't.
Last edited: