Zeiss 21mm Distagon T* 2.8/21 ZE

[syntrix]

I've reported your post, and I did take it to PM.

Again, is it the same glass in the ZF over the new ZE? IE, same manufacturing process? Same plant?

I've asked before, and this is very relevant to the ZE model. You did claim that you had a contact at Zeiss. Please confirm.

[Jamie Holladay]

Please refer to the purple section of my signature. Any further disregards to its suggestion will result in a pad lock upon this thread.

Healthy debate is good, heated debate gets you no where ~ James E. Holladay, II

[syntrix]

Dear Madam, Dear Sir,

As you requested we'd like to inform you that the new Distagon T* 2,8/21
ZE with EF mount is now available for purchase.

You can find a list of your nearest dealers as well as the link to our
online shop directly on our website:


Website: http://www.zeiss.com/photo
Online-Shop: http://www.zeiss.com/photo/shop


Very best regards.
Your Carl Zeiss Camera Lens Division

[Double Negative]

^ Yeah, baby!

[CheshireCat]

Originally Posted by MR do little

Or where you just stating the obvious that two lenses dont share the "same" glass ?

I guess the real question here is:

- Does the ZE version use the same optical scheme and chemical composition of the ZF version ?

The answer is just "yes" or "no".
Does anyone know that ?

And most probably that question was actually to be interpreted as "Does the ZE version perform identically as the ZF version ?".

If two lenses have the same optical scheme and chemical composition ("same glass") then they most probably perform identically and some people will have less doubts spending a relatively high amount of money to buy a new untested lens !

[wimg]

Originally Posted by CheshireCat

I guess the real question here is:

- Does the ZE version use the same optical scheme and chemical composition of the ZF version ?

The answer is just "yes" or "no".
Does anyone know that ?

And most probably that question was actually to be interpreted as "Does the ZE version perform identically as the ZF version ?".

If two lenses have the same optical scheme and chemical composition ("same glass") then they most probably perform identically and some people will have less doubts spending a relatively high amount of money to buy a new untested lens !

The answer is: yes, the optical design and glass types used for both the ZE and ZF versions is exactly the same.

It wouldn't make sense for them to be different, anyway. The only difference is the mount and anything related to physical and electric/electronic mount specific implementations. Ant this is also true for any other mounts this lens is avaliable in.

Kind regards, Wim

[syntrix]

Originally Posted by wimg

The answer is: yes, the optical design and glass types used for both the ZE and ZF versions is exactly the same.

It wouldn't make sense for them to be different, anyway. The only difference is the mount and anything related to physical and electric/electronic mount specific implementations. Ant this is also true for any other mounts this lens is avaliable in.

Kind regards, Wim

Well this was a heated discussion before.

And the above question sums it up.... is it the same production process, or is it new?

Sure the design is the same, but many of us are wondering if the glass is the same glass!

I'll leave it at that!

[BlueTsunami]

The only thing I see changing between the two mounts is the exterior (as exhibited by the 28/2). Adding the electronic aspect to the lens seems to have made them a bit bulkier. Other than that, I don't know why they would redesign or make any changes between any of the mounts in regards to the Glass.

[wimg]

Originally Posted by syntrix

Well this was a heated discussion before.

And the above question sums it up.... is it the same production process, or is it new?

Sure the design is the same, but many of us are wondering if the glass is the same glass!

I'll leave it at that!

It is the same production process as the ZF version, not as the old version. Both new ZE and new ZF versions are the same new lens. I don't know if the optical design differs a lot (don't expect so; maybe in some details) from the old version, the one that used to sell for $3000 to $3500 used in good condition, as I 'haven't seen a schematic of the old one (yet), but one thing that has changed for sure is coating, which has been improved over the older version.

Anyway, the glass in ZF and ZE versions is the same too. It would be too expensive anyway to retool and redesign everything completely just for the sake of a few mount differences, especially in the relatively small quantities a lens like this will be manufactured.

Kind regards, Wim

[syntrix]

very nice wimg! A lot of us are about to buy this lens, but are wondering what the differences are.

Sounds like you know the glass is the same!

[Double Negative]

^^ Agreed, Wim.

[BerndGeh]

I got to test one of these lenses in late September. I was extremely impressed. With f=2.8 it is still very crisp in best focus. At f=4 it is simply awesome and even at f=7.1 it outperforms the 17-40 with ease.

I'm itching.....

[BerndGeh]

Here's the f=2.8

[BlueTsunami]

I love how this lens is designed to be a mean landscape lens but also has fantastic close up performance

[wimg]

Considering the questions posed in this thread, I thought I would link here some of the information available on the Zeiss 21 F/2.8 old and new.

Old:
http://www.geocities.com/ilprode/_21f28.htm
http://www.zeiss.com/C12567A8003B8B6...2.8_21mm_e.pdf

New:
http://www.zeiss.com/c12567a8003b58b...2574bf0034c8c1
http://www.zeiss.com/C12567A8003B8B6...E_2.8_21ZF.pdf

It does look like the design is different, for starters 15 elements/13 groups in the old design vs 16/13 for the new one, but when you look at the designs more closely, it appears that only the fourth element from the mount has been split into two in the new design, it looks the same otherwise.

Looking at the MTFs for both lenses it certainly looks like the new version, available in Nikon F, Pentax K and Canon EF mounts, performs slightly better than the older Contax version, especially around 15 mm from the centre. Light fall-off is slightly less too, but distortion is slightly worse.

HTH, kind regards, Wim