Introduction to Carl Zeiss lenses please.?

Position:Home>Visual Arts> Introduction to Carl Zeiss lenses please.?

Question:

I've only used Nikon lenese and would like to learn more about lenses!.
For example, Carl Zeiss lenses is one!.
They seem to be one of the best lenses and they are very expensive too!. So what is the diffrence with Zeiss lenses that the Nikon lenses don't do!?

also, there are so many different types of lenses so can someone tell me what these mean!?
"Planar T"
"Planar Rollei"
"Sonnar T"
"Biogon T"
"Distagon T"
"CFE" & "CFi"Www@QuestionHome@Com

Best Answer - Chosen by Asker:

I have wet dreams about Zeiss glass!. (that came out weird)

Zeiss lenses are made with very high quality glass and ground with extreme precision, producing incredibly vivid, sharp images!. Once you use them, Nikon lenses will seem like they're made from plastic and polished with sand paper!.

Planar lenses are designed to reduce ghosting and light flares, allowing higher contrast and color rendering!.

Distagon lenses are designed to allow for a wider aperture and focusing ranges, making these very versatile lenses!. (my favorite)

Biogon lenses are wide angle lenses that are designed to have minimal distortion!.

Sonnar lenses are the classic 30's lenses that made Zeiss famous!. People like them for their high speed capabilities!.

Hope that helps!Www@QuestionHome@Com

Carl Zeiss were one of the early innovators in lens design and many modern lenses are devlopment s from Zeiss designs!.

The reputation of the East German lens produced in Jena (hence the name Carl Zeiss Jena on some lenses) is of one of uneven quality!. But when they are good they are very good!.

Zeiss have concentrated on making lenses for medium format cameras as original equipment such as Hasselblad, although now the new owners make their own!. They aslo produce arange of lenses for movie cameras, and epics such as Lord of The Rings used Zeiss lenses!.

The current SLR ranges are now made in Japan by a specialist optical manufacturer to Ziss designs and with proper Zeiss quality control!.

http://photography!.suite101!.com/article!.!.!.!.

some people love them, but in the end it is a subjective personal opinion!.Www@QuestionHome@Com

I think you have to look at the end result to figure if the end justifies the means!.

It would take an expensive piece of machinery to tell you the differences in resolution, color, etc from Nikon, Zeiss, Olympus, Canon, Leica, Schneider or any other class act lens!.

If you need the name to toot your whistle, and you think it is going to be worth it, then spring for the bucks and get yourself a lens!. You might not be able to tell the difference between your lens and the man shooting through a coke bottle next to you!.Www@QuestionHome@Com

Your looking at the new Sony mount Zeiss lenses if your looking at the planars - they are sharp!.

Ok you need to learn what lenses do then you will find out the major differences are : speed (max aperture), sharpness (optical quality of the glass and how the elements of glass in the lens render light to a sensor or film)!.

When you get the above the the difference in two lenses is the sharpness of each and their speed - some shoots riquire "slow" lenses with F45 or 64 or more, but thats another issue!.

In glass (lenses) its what you pay for is what you get!.

aWww@QuestionHome@Com

First let me say Ive always been disappointed with Zeiss lenses!. They have never matched their hyperbole, in the dozen or so samples I own!.

In the 1920's and 30's Zeiss had an enviable reputation for the optical quality of their lenses, Sonnar was classed as the epitome of lenses!. The names refer to the lens design, how many element and in what configuration, the most common was Tessar which was used by a lot of manufacturers!.

There were two schools of thought on lens design at the time, the German particularly Zeiss and Leica (Leica was second class at the time - still is IMHO) went for resolving power (how many lines per mm the lens can distinguish), but there is more to lens design than that, the English, USA and French manufacturers went for better contrast and colour correction, which produce a better overall lens, but on paper the Zeiss lenses LOOKED better!.

Zeiss lenses are expensive as they are all the equivalent of L series, in other word they were (are) all hand assembled from a 'tray' of lenses to get the best!. Zeiss were notorious for producing the odd 'great' lens amid a mediocre collection, and really professional photographers went to great lengths to select one of the 'great' ones, so for every 10 lenses produced 2 would be great, the rest would be in a descending scale of mediocre, at an expensive price!.

From the late 1940's to the present day the Japanese manufacturers came into the equation (they used the English/USA/ French model as their inspiration) and were concerned with boke and other 'ethereal' concerns (boke means idiot, childish in Japanese and refers to how the lens resolves the out of focus part of an image)!.

All the Zeiss lenses you list are old technology and in my opinion don't hold a candle to some modern lens designs, your modern Nikon lenses will put the Zeiss well and truly in their place, just in the lens coating technology alone!.

Zeiss didn't make many zooms, I have one sample (a 35 - 70mm) bought in the 1970's and it is dire, a Sigma bought a few years later out performs it easily, the Sigma is an f2!.8 throughout the range the Zeiss is only f3!.5 - f4!.5, the Sigma has little value, the Zeiss would sell for several thousand dollars - go figure!.

In my book, based on practical experience, Zeiss are masters of unfulfilled expectations, at a very expensive price, just like Leica are nowadays, but the Zeiss myth continues, usually by people who have never used one!.

ChrisWww@QuestionHome@Com