Rumor: New Zeiss Distagon 25mm f/2.0 lens coming in October

Pin It

The current Zeiss Distagon T 25mm f/2.8 lens

According to this FM forum post, Carl Zeiss will be releasing a new Distagon 25mm f/2.0 lens this month:

"Yes, I have an idea about the new 25. It will be announced in October, so keep an eye for the Zeiss website. And if everything goes well, delivery of the first production batch will be in Germany right before Christmas."

The current Zeiss Distagon T 25mm lens has a f/2.8 aperture.

Via Zeissrumors

This entry was posted in Zeiss. Bookmark the permalink. Trackbacks are closed, but you can post a comment.
  • It’s all about my fx

    Not super fast and not not super wide.
    Why the hell is zeiss releasing these overpriced mediocre garbage?

    • David S

      The ZM 25 2.8 is famously one of the sharpest lenses on earth. It resolves at 400 lines/mm, meaning it outresolves any sensor currently on the market.

      You should hope you are one day half as good at anything as this lens is at what it does.

      • It’s all about my fx

        Are you BS me?

        Sharpness??? That’s all you’ve got?? for a $1000+ lens?

        Outresolving, rainbow juice, and magic dust are typical zeiss/leica fanboys justifications for obsolete toys. I’ve heard it all. Try using these lenses in REAL situations and you’ll know how useless these overpriced manual lenses are. Hey, let’s pixel peep brick walls at 400lines/mm resolution :D

        Check this Samyang out for resolution, you should hope you are one day half as good at anything as this lens is at what it does.

        http://www.dxomark.com/index.php/Lenses/Compare-Camera-Lenses/Compare-lenses/%28lens1%29/335/%28brand%29/Zeiss/%28camera1%29/485/%28lens2%29/359/%28brand2%29/Samyang/%28camera2%29/485

        • http://www.marksperryphoto.com Mak

          Zeiss lenses are not good because they are the sharpest. They have an even contrast across the frame and they’re color matched. Are they better than Nikon lenses? No, they’re different. They’re for people who like manual lenses, people who like premium HDSLR video lenses, and people who like the way the T* coating renders color. And for the quality they offer they’re not THAT much more expensive than Nikon lenses.

          The Zeiss 85mm 1.4 is a heck of a lot cheaper than the Nikon.

          Also, nobody is forcing you to care. Buy what you want to buy and stop bitching about companies that have the balls to think different. Obviously you’re not their market.

          • http://tumbleweed-092.livejournal.com Slow Gin

            +1

          • http://www Scurvyhesh

            Gimme a break dude. It’s a really expensive manual lens. Sure its well made but the other qualities are purely subjective. Things have changed a lot in lens manufacturing and for those who cant see the strides made with the Smayang lenses are blind or just want to justify their purchases. It’s time for a side by side blind test with Nikon, Canon Zeiss, and SAMYANG. Then we can all vote on it and see if the price makes them worth it.

          • It’s all about my fx

            “Buy what you want to buy and stop bitching about companies that have the balls to think different”.

            Think different = Halt innovation for the past 5 decades and charge premium prices for fanboys’ blind loyalty. Maybe if you ziessers and leicos stop buying their crap they will actually start to think a little different and start to make good/usable lenses. This is a lens not worth more than $500 on the open market.

            21st century calling zeiss, 21st century calling zeiss! pick up!

            “Obviously you’re not their market.” —- Thank God I am not stupid.

        • David S

          Let’s take apart your initial statement: “It’s not that wide and not that fast.”

          “It’s not that wide” is a preposterous statement. Are you seriously picking a fight with a focal length? It’s like complaining that a 50mm is “not that normal”.

          The 25mm is for those who want a 25mm field of view. Nikon, Leica, Canon, etc. all offer very popular lenses at 24-25mm 2.8. If you want a wider lens, then buy a 21mm.

          As for whether resolution matters — it matters if it matters to you. Many landscape shooters, such as the late Galen Rowell, like the 24-25mm FOV. For many 35mm landscape photographers resolution of fine detail is very important — more important than speed, since they usually use a tripod anyway. If that resolution is not important to you, buy a cheaper lens. Better yet, don’t buy a lens at all.

          For what it’s worth, I don’t own the ZM 25mm 2.8 but everyone who does seems to love it. It also costs 1/4 the $$$ of its Leica competitor.

          We get that you like your Samyang lenses. Great. Go buy a 21mm f1.4 Samyang and shoot some brick walls.

          • scurvy hesh

            David lets not lose focus.

            The comment on the focal length is a personal opinion and not really something to argue about.

            As for resolution you should really check the Samyang because it has some impressive numbers. I’m sure even the late great Mr Rowell would have been impressed. Anyways dude was shooting at F8 or greater. Many quality primes will shine at smaller apertures.

            I really don’t think you have ever shot with any of the new Samyang primes. If you did you wouldn’t be so quick to make dismissive comments about brick walls. Again i would like to see a side by side test. Maybe I should just rent a Zeiss when I get back from California and put it to the test…

          • David S

            Scurvy,

            I had never even heard of the brand until now. Having checked them out on DXO mark, they indeed seem very sharp, particularly for the price. I’m unlikely to ever buy one, because I like small cameras/lenses, and the Samyangs seem very large (as are the Zeiss SLR lenses, btw). That is not to say that I wouldn’t buy one in the future, particularly if they make something smaller, like a pancake prime.

          • It’s all about my fx

            I am not just picking on this particular lens, I am picking on the mentality that Zeiss and Leica products are always superior without quantifiable evidence or data. Anecdotal experiences tell me that everyone who loves Z/L can only describe their optical superiority in terms of “it’s just better, it feels different” or “sharper and if you zoom in 500% you can see the difference” or “color are more consistent (when all they shoot are b&w” or “DOF is less harsh”. WTF?

            Spear me the BS. I personally hated the Zeiss T50 ZF2 f/1.4, as a fine example of myth busting. It is a garbage lens no matter how you look at it and offers no improvement on the optical quality of the final product.

            When tests after lab tests continually shows other “inferior” brands blow the zeiss out of the water, not one of the loyalists would dare admit that the premium priced toys are duds.

            Can someone please explain why the hell zeiss is still in business in 2011? I don’t even think they deserve the niche market that they have now.

  • iluvhatemail

    its a zeiss and if its anything near current price it will be a steal

  • jake

    if so , I will get that one for Nikon and use it on both my Nikon and Canon bodies.

    I love my 24Lmk2 but it is a bit too big and I never shoot it at f1.4 , so if this Zeiss is coming so soon , I might replace my 24Lmk2 with this lens.

    thanks for the info.

  • http://StandDevelopment.com Axel

    Why do these lenses get such terrible reviews then? I want to believe Moulder, I want to believe.

    • David S

      The Zeiss SLR-mount lenses are hit or miss, and some are not worth the $$$ or the size.

      The Zeiss M-mount lenses are some of the best 35mm lenses on earth, across the board — they equal (or in some cases, like the lens above, better) their Leica counterparts.

    • http://www.marksperryphoto.com Mak

      The reviews don’t look for the right things. It’s not about how sharp they are. It’s more about the look they offer, and the manual build and all that.

      And the really expensive lenses are worth it. The 35mm 1.4 is AMAZING.

      • asdasd

        i yet need to see any review which would show any difference at all.
        but let fanboys buy whatever they want

        • http://Www.marksperryphoto.com Mark

          So you don’t consider a long throw helicoid focus ring a difference? And what about the manual aperture? Video dude. Some people need these things.

          • http://www Scurvyhesh

            samyang?

        • it’s all about my FX

          voice of reason

  • julia

    what? <$1000 please :)
    where is the mtf?

  • Sahaja

    Looks like it could be a nice lens to put on the rumored new Nikon D800 with it’s 36mp sensor.

  • Kevin

    Any idea if this lens will find it’s way into the ZM line? I have been looking for a fast ultra-wide that wasn’t so pricey as the leica offerings. 25/2 or 28/2 in a ZM would be great.

  • http://tumbleweed-092.livejournal.com Slow Gin

    Awesome news!

  • http://www Scurvyhesh

    For Nikon Shooters I would suggest looking at some of the beautiful AIS lenses made in the 70s and 80s. There are some real dreams at steal prices right now. The 24 F2 AIS comes to mind and you will probably save yourself about $1000.00 More than enough to buy and extra FE2 body and a Sweet 105 2.5 AIS and maybe a nifty 50

    • its all about my FX

      +1

    • http://mrjava.tumblr.com/ MrJava

      So true!

  • marco polo

    hi all. i believe they have run all the test without warming the lens at the enviromental temperature.
    i have a photo that show an incredible sharpness. where can i post it?

  • ihateidiots

    Oh Lord. People making comments like “Why is Zeiss still in business?” Zeiss has better concerns than the photography industry, making 100-element lenses for example for the semiconductor industry for example. You like the Zeiss look, you buy the Zeiss look. You like the Samyangs? Buy the Samyangs. Making silly comments is just lame.

  • Back to top