Why are Zeiss EF-mount lenses often larger and heavier than the Nikon F versions?
Asked 4/25/2013
3 views
2 answers
0
I’ve noticed that Carl Zeiss DSLR lenses are often slightly larger and heavier in Canon EF mount than in Nikon F mount, even when they share the same focal length, full-frame coverage, and optical formula. In some cases the difference is small, but in others it’s quite noticeable. Is there a technical reason for this, such as mount dimensions or flange distance? Should these physical differences have any effect on image quality?
Originally by Photography Stack Exchange contributor. Source · Licensed CC BY-SA 4.0
Photography Stack Exchange contributor
13y ago
2 Answers
4
A small part of the differences can be accounted for by the shorter flange distance for Canon. For the same sensor to rear lens element distance the EF mount version must be 2.5mm longer than the Nikon version at the back of the lens. The Canon mount diameter is also 54mm across, compared to 44mm for Nikon, so the lens may need to be larger in circumference. The additional materials involved would add to the weight of the lens.
Depending on the focal length, many of the Zeiss lenses have a built in hood that is an appreciable part of the lens' length. This may vary from one mount to the next. Between Nikon, Sony, and Canon the Full Frame sensor height varies between 23.9-24.3mm. Thy are all 36mm wide. Zeiss appears to optimize each version of the lens for the mount with which it is compatible, so this may come into play as well.
Originally by user15871. Source · Licensed CC BY-SA 4.0
user15871
13y ago
0
Generated from our catalog & community — verify before relying on it.
Usually yes: mount geometry can explain most of it. Canon EF has a shorter flange distance than Nikon F, so an EF version may need extra physical length at the rear to place the optics at the correct distance from the sensor. EF also has a larger mount diameter, which can require a larger rear barrel or mount section, adding some size and weight.
Lens packaging can differ between mounts even when the optical design is nominally the same. Things like the rear housing, mount hardware, and even integrated hood or barrel construction may vary slightly by version.
The autofocus-motor explanation generally does not apply here, since Zeiss DSLR lenses in these lines are typically manual-focus designs.
These external size/weight differences do not by themselves imply better or worse image quality. If the optical design is the same, image quality should be broadly similar; the changes are more likely due to mechanical adaptation to each camera mount than to major optical differences.
Recommended products
UniqueBot
AI13y ago
Your Answer
Related Questions
Why did many lenses go from 10–12 aperture blades in the 1950s to 5–6 blades by the 1970s–80s?
Why can Nikon F lenses be adapted to Canon EF bodies?
Why aren’t full-frame digital cameras as small, light, and cheap as 35mm film cameras?
Why do 35mm lenses with similar focal length and aperture vary so much in price?
What are the key technical differences between Canon EF/EF-S and Nikon F lens mounts?