new ziess 55mm, redefining?

[RLPhoto]

If zeiss made their lenses with USM AF, I'd never buy a canon lens, Ever.

[Mt Spokane Photography]

If zeiss made their lenses with USM AF, I'd never buy a canon lens, Ever.

 
Here you go 
 
Zeiss Contax N AF lenses can be converted to AF with Canon.  Zeiss knows very well how to make their lenses AF with Canon, they just have chosen not do do so.
http://conurus.com/index.php

[RLPhoto]

If zeiss made their lenses with USM AF, I'd never buy a canon lens, Ever.

 
Here you go 
 
Zeiss Contax N AF lenses can be converted to AF with Canon.  Zeiss knows very well how to make their lenses AF with Canon, they just have chosen not do do so.
http://conurus.com/index.php

LKASJ:DJ! They want a Grand to convert a Contax 85mm 1.4?!

Thats not quite what Meant, I meant just manufactuing EOS mount lenses with AF.

[Axilrod]

I used to own a 28mm f2 and it was less than perfect wide open, with brutal vignetting, but it was also the lens i have ever tried that improved the most one stop downå crazy difference! I reallyreally liked it. However 28 f2.8 is a lot easier to mf than 55 f1.4. Especially since Canon decided to drop my favorite focusing screen for the 1d x..

I think the 28mm f/2 is the least impressive of the entire ZE lineup honestly, all of the other ones are pretty awesome though, I love the 50mm Makro and 21mm in particular.

[Axilrod]

Can someone give me a good reason why Zeiss has never adopted AF?  Always wondered.

I was told by the Zeiss rep that the ZE's were designed with "photography purists" in mind, so I guess in their mind that means no AF.  He also said that had they known how popular they would be for video they probably would have marketed them as lower-end cinema lenses and charged much more than they do. 

It's possible that they didn't do AF because there was no way you could add the AF motor while keeping the lenses reasonably priced.  I mean the 21mm f/2.8 for instance is around $1850, how much would it be if it had AF?  I would think $2500 at least.

But honestly the lack of AF is much less of a big deal than I thought it would be, the throw on the focus ring is much longer and has good resistance so it makes it a lot easier to pull focus.  Also the AF confirmation works, very, very well and seems to be spot on.

[@!ex]

Thanks for the opinions, but I did a little research and found the actual answer (google is amazing).  Since they are a german company they are prohibited from making AF for EF and F lenses.  All the third party lenses for EF and F are from Japanese companies.  It has nothing to do with creating lenses for purists or costs, just international prohibitions.  As evidence, here is a quote from zeiss lens team. 

"Due to international licences, it is not possible at the moment for companies outside Japan to offer AF lenses with EF- or F - mount. So we will concentrate on high-end manual focus lenses with those mounts within the next future.

Best regards

Carl Zeiss Lenses Team"

They should relocate to Japan for all our sake (pun intended)

[Viggo]

I used to own a 28mm f2 and it was less than perfect wide open, with brutal vignetting, but it was also the lens i have ever tried that improved the most one stop downå crazy difference! I reallyreally liked it. However 28 f2.8 is a lot easier to mf than 55 f1.4. Especially since Canon decided to drop my favorite focusing screen for the 1d x..

I think the 28mm f/2 is the least impressive of the entire ZE lineup honestly, all of the other ones are pretty awesome though, I love the 50mm Makro and 21mm in particular.

I guess we have different opinions, and also, I loved the 28mm focal, I'm not a huge fan of either 50 nor the 100. The 35 f1.4 they make I would neverever buy when I can have the L-version.... I heard the 35 f2 is pretty good, I would love to have it look and feel like the 35 f2 for Nikon. Never understood why they are so different in looks.

[Tayvin]

Thanks for the opinions, but I did a little research and found the actual answer (google is amazing).  Since they are a german company they are prohibited from making AF for EF and F lenses.  All the third party lenses for EF and F are from Japanese companies.  It has nothing to do with creating lenses for purists or costs, just international prohibitions.  As evidence, here is a quote from zeiss lens team. 

"Due to international licences, it is not possible at the moment for companies outside Japan to offer AF lenses with EF- or F - mount. So we will concentrate on high-end manual focus lenses with those mounts within the next future.

Best regards

Carl Zeiss Lenses Team"

They should relocate to Japan for all our sake (pun intended)

I read the same thing.  It's not by choice.  I still love their lenses, though.

[risc32]

not that i'm discounting your searching, i have no idea why i didn't do it myself(sometimes i do forget the near limitless info i can get from my keyboard). Maybe i'm just being a bit of a conspiracy theorist, but i'm not buying it. Or perhaps i am, nikon/canon a force behind that international prohibition? I mean, besides canon/nikon who are the big guns? They all happen to be from where? Or, where aren't they from(japan)?    now i'm getting all x-files...  makes sense to me, but then so does making your own yogurt in your slow cooker.

[dr croubie]

I'm thinking about other reasons too. The international licensing sounds like it could happen (but then why can they do AF with Sony? Are they not also Japanese?).

How about this:
SigRonKina reverse-engineer the AF routines, rather than license them, as we all know. If ever a new camera body comes out, if Canon's changed anything, sometimes older lenses don't work. It's happened before, it'll happen again. Sometimes you can send the lens in to be re-chipped, some are just too old and you're stuck with MF or you have to use an old body. Some people steer clear of 3rd-party AF lenses specifically because of this problem.
Now imagine if Zeiss did that? They have a very good, well-respected name behind them. Maybe they can't license the original AF (from international issues, or whatever, ever notice how noone else licenses AF from Canon? Maybe Canon just don't want to license?). They probably don't want their good name being dragged down to the same level as Sigronkina from some simple AF issues, so it's better to stick with MF...

[TexasBadger]

The last time I checked the Zeiss ZE lenses were made in Japan.  Why the conundrum?

[@!ex]

I'm digging the x-file nature of this discussion.  I believe they subcontract Cosina to assemble their ZE lenses, which begs the question, why not subcontract them to assemble AF lenses (since they are in Japan)?