[Klaus]

https://www.instagram.com/p/BQ0Xq_2A3lX/

[obican]

I'm expecting a sensibly sized 135/2.8 for around 1200$. 

 

Which means I'll probably buy it. Minolta 135/2.8 is one of the lenses I use the most often.

[Brightcolours]

Is it the Zeiss Batis line where Tamron filed the patents on?

[obican]

Not officially but they have patents which are pretty much similar to the Batis line. 

[Klaus]

My bet is on a 135mm f/2.4 for 1500$

[Rover]

I was thinking about an f/2.5 one. Let's see who's going to get it right in the end.

[JJ_SO]

Okay, why not join the betting? I would like to mention that Zeiss sometimes uses odd FL (like 25 mm, 100 mm, 180 mm) but rarely - if at all - odd apertures. So my guess is rather f/2.8 or f/2.0, but not f/2.4 or 2.5  ^_^

[obican]

Okay, why not join the betting? I would like to mention that Zeiss sometimes uses odd FL (like 25 mm, 100 mm, 180 mm) but rarely - if at all - odd apertures. So my guess is rather f/2.8 or f/2.0, but not f/2.4 or 2.5  ^_^

 

My Flektogon 35/2.4 would like to have a word  

 

Btw, Zeiss uses odd focal length but the thing is, they pretty much always use those. I don't think they ever made a 24mm or a 20mm lens, except for the Sony/Zeiss 24/2 SSM. All else have been at 21/25/28mm, except a few of their zooms.

[JJ_SO]

Flektogon is Zeiss Jena at GDR era, yes?   I'm sorry, this era in this state was a lot of improvisation because there was always missing raw materials.

 

In Oberkochen, they went this 15 / 18 / 21 / 25 / 28 path (28 is not that exotic, but the others are) with a 16 mm fisheye, if I remember well. Btw. I didn't realize they made a 200/2 Apo Sonnar  boah. At the time, my dream was a 180/2.8 Sonnar which would have cost me half a year's income 

[Rover]

Let's get the sweepstakes running.

Speaking of the "odd" aperture values: just recently we got a 85/2.4 Loxia. Not sure if that might mean anything for another product line though.