Zeiss Distagon T* 15mm f/2.8 vs. Zeiss Milvus 15mm f/2.8

[Ethan]

Of course they sell the discontinued models at a discount why wouldn't they,,,

Leica R and Leica M mostly hold their prises well, some of the items even increase in value, just look at 'Black Paint' versions  This is mostly due to collectors. There are not many Zeiss collectors,,,

Hummm. I wonder about the obvious reasons as to why there are not "many Zeiss collectors".

Don't ya?

[bjornthun]

Leica R lenses are probably easiest to use on the Sony A7 series these days, or on the new Leica SL, with an adapter. Leica R lenses are cumbersome on Nikon, been there done that. You learn that auto aperture actuation is really a nice invention. Nikon and Zeiss ZF are so much easier to use.

I think too, like Erik, that the Leica M system is the best platform for Leica wide angles, where you get the Leica Tri-Elmar 16-18-21/4 and e.g. the Leica 21/3.4. The Leica 21/3.4 is really nice. Besides, you get newer lens designs and even better coatings than the Leica R lenses had.

[John Koerner]

Zeiss just announced a price drop.

The 15/2.8 is now $1999.00 instead of $2950.00
https://www.bhphotovideo.com/c/product/850104-REG/Zeiss_1964830_Distagon_T_15mm_f_2_8.html

The 135mm as well as the new Sigma Art 135/1.8 just killed it.
https://www.bhphotovideo.com/c/product/909191-REG/Zeiss_1999_676_135mm_f_2_0_Apo_Sonnar_ZF_2.html

I hope you got your lens at the new lower price.

I did.

The Sigma Art hasn't "killed" anything.

The Zeiss APO Sonnar 135 is being discontinued to make room for the Milvus 135, which remains a the same price the discontinued Sonnar held.

The price drop has nothing to do with Sigma.

This is one of the reasons that Zeiss are alienating their customer base by releasing new products and making old ones loose value.
The Leica R 15/2.8 is a better lens in terms of color render and luminosity. The Leica R 15/2.8 value goes up and never down.
Told ya.

Why do you say Zeiss is losing its customer base?

As for the "superiority" of the Leica (really, Schneider) over Zeiss, we're back to square one: do you have any reference data to support this position?

I am not sure I will keep the Zeiss at this point. Its greater size is less convenient for hiking.

However, its front lens element is less bulbous, and more recessed, also allowing for a thin filter, which is nice.

I will be going to Mammoth soon, and will have a chance to give it a spin.

[John Koerner]

Leica R lenses are probably easiest to use on the Sony A7 series these days, or on the new Leica SL, with an adapter. Leica R lenses are cumbersome on Nikon, been there done that. You learn that auto aperture actuation is really a nice invention. Nikon and Zeiss ZF are so much easier to use.

What I really like about the Leica is the small sizes of their lenses.

For example, the Leica Apo-Summicron-M 1:2/50mm ASPH is on a par with the Zeiss Apo Distagon T* 1.4/55 Otus optically ... but the Leica weighs only 300g whereas the Zeiss weighs almost 1000g.

However, the Leica (while a third the weight) is twice the price of the Otus.

The Leica is not any better optically than the Zeiss; it's just twice the price.

However, the tiny size of the Leica (while sporting that kind of quality) is not only more convenient, it's less obvious and obtrusive.

[Jack Dahlgren]

The weight/size differential between f/2 and f/1.4 is always substantial.

[John Koerner]

The weight/size differential between f/2 and f/1.4 is always substantial.

The slightly lower-ranked (but still similar-quality) Leica Summilux-M 1:1.4/50mm ASPH is only 335g.

[Ethan]

I did.

The Sigma Art hasn't "killed" anything.

The Zeiss APO Sonnar 135 is being discontinued to make room for the Milvus 135, which remains a the same price the discontinued Sonnar held.

The price drop has nothing to do with Sigma.



Why do you say Zeiss is losing its customer base?

As for the "superiority" of the Leica (really, Schneider) over Zeiss, we're back to square one: do you have any reference data to support this position?

I am not sure I will keep the Zeiss at this point. Its greater size is less convenient for hiking.

However, its front lens element is less bulbous, and more recessed, also allowing for a thin filter, which is nice.

I will be going to Mammoth soon, and will have a chance to give it a spin.

There is a song which title is: Do you believe in Life after Love (Cher)

Do you believe in coincidences where Zeiss announced a price drop "few hours" after Sigma announced their new lenses.

Do you believe that all interested photographers are going to make the jump to the 135 A.

Zeiss are alienating their Love base.

As for me, I am enjoying the music