Home · Register · Search · View Winners · Software · Hosting · Software · Join Upload & Sell

Moderated by: Fred Miranda
Username   Password

  New fredmiranda.com Mobile Site
  New Feature: SMS Notification alert
  New Feature: Buy & Sell Watchlist
  

FM Forums | Alternative Gear & Lenses | Join Upload & Sell

1      
2
       3       end
  

Archive 2011 · 35mm prime showdown
  
 
Anden
Offline
• • • • •
Upload & Sell: Off
p.2 #1 · 35mm prime showdown


Thanks Luka! Interesting.

You will get the ZE 35/1.4 too right? :-)



Feb 25, 2011 at 08:49 AM
denoir
Offline
• • • •
Upload & Sell: Off
p.2 #2 · 35mm prime showdown


Thanks guys


sirimiri wrote:
I know Cornerfix can clean up the files - my buddy gave me a half-hour tutorial once...I was chagrined though, to see such a marked problem. My point was more along the lines of "people accept this from a twelve-thousand dollar setup?" :/


If you use C1 for RAW development you can automate the removal completely. Anyway, I know it's a serious issue for some but I have honestly never really been bothered about it. M9 RAW files generally require processing anyway so I see it as just another step in the RAW development process. There are other far more serious compromises one has to live with - such as the lack of live view and a poor LCD.

As for the price, well, it's set by the market and doesn't necessarily have to be related to anything objective. Leica (official reseller) prices are in reality actually too low as the stuff is always out of stock. Subsequently people are making a killing on where you have true market prices.

For instance you can order a new 35 Summilux ASPH (Mk II version) from B&H for $5,000 but you'll have to wait a few months for it or you can get one off ebay for $7,000. The price difference is more than most people spend on a complete camera system. Crazy, but a good demonstration of the principle that there is no absolute value, just supply and demand.


pdmphoto wrote:
My Rollei/Zeiss 35/1.4 seems to do much better at the edge of the frame, at f/5.6. Could it be an adapter issue? I use the hard to find Kindai adapter.


Paul, if that's the case then you have a one-of-a-kind 35/1.4 The edge results are precisely according to specs at f/5.6:







The edge/corner performance is what they have (according to specs) improved with the new 35/1.4 ZE/ZF.

Anden wrote:
You will get the ZE 35/1.4 too right? :-)


No, at least not for now. I think three 35mm Zeiss primes is enough. To me 35mm is an ideal focal length for casual handheld photography, but I don't particularly like it for more traditional landscape photography. While I prefer the 5DII for tripod based work, I prefer the M9 for handheld use. Subsequently my 35mm use on the 5DII will probably be limited in the future.




Feb 25, 2011 at 09:31 AM
AhamB
Offline
• • • •
Upload & Sell: On
p.2 #3 · 35mm prime showdown


Ed Sawyer wrote:
It's hard to beat a non-retrofocus design (e.g. rangefinder lenses). Thanks for the comparison.


For sharpness across the frame and CA, yes. The 3D effect and bokeh are better on the Rollei, IMO. The Summilux seems to have significantly deeper DOF at f/1.4.



Feb 25, 2011 at 10:22 AM
pdmphoto
Offline
• • • •
Upload & Sell: On
p.2 #4 · 35mm prime showdown


I must be very lucky. Would you state what adapter you are using? And is that MTF for the C/Y Zeiss or the Rollei Zeiss (not that I have great faith in either)?

Honestly, mine is excellent for sharpness except for the very corner at F/5.6 Just as important, it doesn't have that amount of CA at the edge of the frame, although it does have a similar amount in the very corner of the frame.




Feb 25, 2011 at 10:46 AM
denoir
Offline
• • • •
Upload & Sell: Off
p.2 #5 · 35mm prime showdown


pdmphoto wrote:
I must be very lucky. Would you state what adapter you are using? And is that MTF for the C/Y Zeiss or the Rollei Zeiss (not that I have great faith in either)?

Honestly, mine is excellent for sharpness except for the very corner at F/5.6 Just as important, it doesn't have that amount of CA at the edge of the frame, although it does have a similar amount in the very corner of the frame.


Adapter ring - no idea. It came with the lens. Andreas (Anden) maybe knows as I bought the lens from him.

MTF - C/Y (identical optical design as the Rollei).

Less CA - not only must you be very lucky but you must have added (or removed) a lens element or two. Or did you perhaps exchange an element and replaced the type of glass used? Those are the the only way you could change CA.

Sharpness - You should really contact Zeiss. Imagine all the money they could have saved by replicating your copy. Now instead it must have cost them millions to make the new design that is actually relatively sharp at the edges/corners @ f/5.6...

Listen Paul, I'm sorry, but it's not the first time you have attributed superpowers to your copy so you'll have to forgive me if I'm skeptical. I'm sure your is a very good copy, but I do doubt that it can defy the laws of physics.



Feb 25, 2011 at 02:06 PM
rsolti13
Offline
• • • •
Upload & Sell: On
p.2 #6 · 35mm prime showdown


Luka, thanks for this test. This proves my thought that I NEED a 35 Lux

I see here and have seen in other examples you have posted that the ZM 35 beats the 35 Lux stopped down....you think any of that has to do with focus shift on the 35 Lux? Based on your examples I have seen, you are right that the focus shift is very light compared to the amount of yelling you typically hear about this lens having.

Also, #4, does the ZM 35 have CA or red edges? It looks very weak on the edges vs the Lux

AhamB wrote:
For sharpness across the frame and CA, yes. The 3D effect and bokeh are better on the Rollei, IMO. The Summilux seems to have significantly deeper DOF at f/1.4.


The DOF on the Lux is far deeper....you don't need to look any further than the first pic to see that. Of course, this can have its positives and negatives



Feb 25, 2011 at 02:48 PM
millsart
Offline
• • • •
Upload & Sell: On
p.2 #7 · 35mm prime showdown


You can't really factor is cost when talking about a m9 because frankly it is a very poor value. My M8.2 at less than half the cost is still a very poor value for that matter.

Most people out there would be more upset about how it doesn't even have AF. I'll let people try my M8.2 and most hate it and tell me it was the worst rip off ever lol.

A classic sports car is another example of something that for all purposes is a horrible value. The gas milage sucks, there is no ABS, traction control, no a/c, its got no safety features like air bags, seats are uncomfortable, needs tune ups all the time etc. Horrible car compared to any modern Honda, Toyota etc, all of which you could buy 2 of for the price of some of the more desirable classic muscle cars. Still something pretty darn cool about having a 65 GTO convertible to cruise around in on a Saturday night though isn't there ? I'd love one

Leica in this day and age is just full of compromise and things that rational consumers shouldn't accept but its the nature of the camera. "Should" have AF, live view, cleaner high ISO files, shoot 8 fps, 3" 920k display, hd video mode, a wide collection of affordable lens covering 14-400mm at least, be lighter, more ergonomic etc as well for $7000 for a camera body right ?

But its not, and its still pretty cool even though your giving up all that stuff going in, and then do have issues with corners and such as well (in their defense thats an issue of the rf lens design and digital sensors rather than film. Leica have actually done a great job of making a ff digital sensor work as well as it does)

Its sort of a glass half full/half empty thing I guess. Whats better ? No ff sensor or one that while every attempt was made to make it as good as it can be, perfection may not be possible due to simple physics.

I guess it could be summed up by saying if you want perfection, don't buy a Leica, but....if you do want perfection, buy a like.

Its both a perfect and imperfect camera at the same time. My m8.2 is the best camera I've ever owned even though its probably the lowest featured, noised, slowest and most overpriced camera I've ever owned at the same time lol



sirimiri wrote:
I know Cornerfix can clean up the files - my buddy gave me a half-hour tutorial once...I was chagrined though, to see such a marked problem. My point was more along the lines of "people accept this from a twelve-thousand dollar setup?" :/

I agree with you, about edges containing "good stuff"...it's a pity to lose it on cropping, sometimes.

(even with red edges, I wish I had your setup, the delicious street images that could be taken here...)





Feb 25, 2011 at 04:15 PM
sebboh
Offline
• • • • • •
Upload & Sell: Off
p.2 #8 · 35mm prime showdown


thanks for the test luka! you just need to figure out a way to mount and focus the slr lenses on your m9 so we can have a real comparison.


Feb 25, 2011 at 04:37 PM
carstenw
Offline
• • • • • •
Upload & Sell: Off
p.2 #9 · 35mm prime showdown


Nice test Luka, thanks!


Feb 25, 2011 at 05:47 PM
trusty
Offline

Upload & Sell: Off
p.2 #10 · 35mm prime showdown


Luka. Thank you so much. I would pay for your tests, really ! They're very valuable for the community.

I'm not sure you could resist to swap one of your ZE or Rollei for the ZE 1.4 really long, at least just to satisfy your curiosity/passion.



Feb 25, 2011 at 06:41 PM
 

Search in Used Dept. 



denoir
Offline
• • • •
Upload & Sell: Off
p.2 #11 · 35mm prime showdown


Thanks guys


rsolti13 wrote:
Luka, thanks for this test. This proves my thought that I NEED a 35 Lux

I see here and have seen in other examples you have posted that the ZM 35 beats the 35 Lux stopped down....you think any of that has to do with focus shift on the 35 Lux? Based on your examples I have seen, you are right that the focus shift is very light compared to the amount of yelling you typically hear about this lens having.

Also, #4, does the ZM 35 have CA or red edges? It looks very weak on the edges vs the
...Show more

Regarding focus shift - at MFD and f/1.4 it's within DOF so at f/5.6 and infinity there isn't a trace of it. The issue there is that the mechanical infinity stop isn't quite reliable. On the ZM it's dead on but not on the Lux. Subsequently I've used focus bracketing - taking four shots with slight variation in focus and picking the best one. It's the disadvantage of not having live view on the M9.

Anyway, the ZM vs Lux questions you ask are interesting and here is a set that I think will answer them.

Scene J:





f/5.6: Lux35 , ZM35/2

Edge crops, Lux35 on the left side ZM on the right:

Left edge:






Right edge:






I'm a bit surprised by the result. First there is a significant color difference. The shots were taken at most a minute or so apart and the white balance was set to the same thing. The Lux35 produces more saturated and vivid colors.

As for resolution, both are really good at the edges - far beyond what you get even with the mighty 21 Distagon on a DSLR. The Lux does have a slight advantage though and seems to show somewhat less CA than the Zeiss.



Feb 25, 2011 at 07:18 PM
trusty
Offline

Upload & Sell: Off
p.2 #12 · 35mm prime showdown


Regarding SLRs :that's my eyes of the ZE seems to really oversharp the Rollei at sames apertures ?

Looks like the rollei have real thinner DOF than ZE&ASPH still at the same aperture and is also less sharp...and maybe that accentuates the bokey effect also ?

Regarding rangefinder : the leica thing is a real killer.

Edited on Feb 25, 2011 at 08:19 PM · View previous versions



Feb 25, 2011 at 08:06 PM
rsolti13
Offline
• • • •
Upload & Sell: On
p.2 #13 · 35mm prime showdown


Luka, very interesting. I know I have seen several reports including yourself that the ZM is not just slightly sharper, but noticeably sharper when stopped down. This certainly disproves that...which is what you would hope out of a lens 4x the price . They are both so good stopped down its hard to complain but I didn't think the Lux was capable of that. Now I want to send you my Cron ASPH to add to the comparison and show me what I'm missing out on other than f/1.4-f/2


Feb 25, 2011 at 08:15 PM
carstenw
Offline
• • • • • •
Upload & Sell: Off
p.2 #14 · 35mm prime showdown


There are some Lux/Cron comparison shots here:

http://www.l-camera-forum.com/leica-forum/leica-m8-forum/29964-35-lux-asph-vs-35-cron.html



Feb 25, 2011 at 08:25 PM
abam
Offline
• • • •
Upload & Sell: Off
p.2 #15 · 35mm prime showdown


Amazing how much your pics remind me of Vienna, along the Donaukanal. (sigh)


Feb 25, 2011 at 08:26 PM
JimBuchanan
Offline
• • •
Upload & Sell: On
p.2 #16 · 35mm prime showdown


denoir wrote:
Leica 35 Summilux:
+Excellent performance across the frame
+Very nice sharpness-to-blur transition
+Good bokeh for the most part
-Dodgy bokeh on occasion
(-)Barrel distortion



Speaking of the Leica 35 Summilux ASPH barrel distortion, this link shows it compared to the 2 Summicrons, at 3 meters.



Feb 26, 2011 at 01:04 PM
Bifurcator
Offline
• • • • •
Upload & Sell: On
p.2 #17 · 35mm prime showdown


I'd still like to see a Rokkor, Zuiko, or Nikkor compared with these - Heck, even a Yashica.

I think that would be as much or more interesting than just Zeiss vs. Zeiss. (hey, wasn't that a Mad Magazine skit?)



Feb 26, 2011 at 02:37 PM
NikkorAIS
Offline
• • •
Account locked
p.2 #18 · 35mm prime showdown


I really like your photography, Lens test are not easy to do and you did a great job. It's to bad you never shot and on film.

Gregory



Feb 26, 2011 at 03:38 PM
carstenw
Offline
• • • • • •
Upload & Sell: Off
p.2 #19 · 35mm prime showdown


Bifurcator wrote:
I think that would be as much or more interesting than just Zeiss vs. Zeiss. (hey, wasn't that a Mad Magazine skit?)


Spy vs. Spy?



Feb 26, 2011 at 04:20 PM
aleksanderpolo
Offline
• • •
Upload & Sell: Off
p.2 #20 · 35mm prime showdown


Bifurcator wrote:
I'd still like to see a Rokkor, Zuiko, or Nikkor compared with these - Heck, even a Yashica.

I think that would be as much or more interesting than just Zeiss vs. Zeiss. (hey, wasn't that a Mad Magazine skit?)


You can donate the lens to the man.

By the way, can someone point me to resources where I can learn how two lens of the same focal length at the same F stop can have different apparent DOF? I thought the DOF is only a function of the focal length, F stop, and focus distance?



Feb 26, 2011 at 05:40 PM
1      
2
       3       end




FM Forums | Alternative Gear & Lenses | Join Upload & Sell

1      
2
       3       end
    
 

You are not logged in. Login or Register

Username   Password    Retrive password