The official Zeiss 35/1.4 thread
/forum/topic/839374/112

1       2       3              112      
113
       114              122       123       end

sebboh
Registered: Nov 02, 2009
Total Posts: 12608
Country: United States

Jochenb wrote:
Good to see this thread back. Steve, Some others and myself posted photos from the ZE/ZF in this thread before, so I'm sure it's ok. I still miss the ZE/ZF version quite often. It's a shame that it's so big and heavy. That prevents me from using it on an A7.


you should get a c/y or rollei one, it's more manageable on the a7 (roughly the same size as the ZE 35/2). i admit it's hard to justify when you have an rx1 though:






a shot with the a7 + c/y version:






Jochenb
Registered: May 25, 2010
Total Posts: 2078
Country: Belgium

Thanks for showing the size with an adapter Derek. It looks manageable on an A7.
The problem is that I prefer the ZE/ZF over the C/Y or Rollei version. Mostly because of the bokeh and how detailed it is stopped down. The C/Y and Rollei can look a lot harsher at mid distance. At closer ranges they look superb though.
Btw, I sold my RX1 (I'll still be around in the thread though, I have a lot of unedited photos from it).



sebboh
Registered: Nov 02, 2009
Total Posts: 12608
Country: United States

Jochenb wrote:
Btw, I sold my RX1 (I'll still be around in the thread though, I have a lot of unedited photos from it).


oh, no!

what are you using for 35mm theses days?



Jochenb
Registered: May 25, 2010
Total Posts: 2078
Country: Belgium

sebboh wrote:
Jochenb wrote:
Btw, I sold my RX1 (I'll still be around in the thread though, I have a lot of unedited photos from it).


oh, no!

what are you using for 35mm theses days?



I currently only have a Sony/Zeiss FE 35/2.8. I don't like it optically, but use it for the quick AF. I still have to get a decent 35mm lens for the A7. That's why it's such a pity that the ZE/ZF is so large and heavy.



sebboh
Registered: Nov 02, 2009
Total Posts: 12608
Country: United States

Jochenb wrote:
sebboh wrote:
Jochenb wrote:
Btw, I sold my RX1 (I'll still be around in the thread though, I have a lot of unedited photos from it).


oh, no!

what are you using for 35mm theses days?



I currently only have a Sony/Zeiss FE 35/2.8. I don't like it optically, but use it for the quick AF. I still have to get a decent 35mm lens for the A7. That's why it's such a pity that the ZE/ZF is so large and heavy.



sounds like a good excuse to be guinea pig for the new loxia 35/2.




Jochenb
Registered: May 25, 2010
Total Posts: 2078
Country: Belgium

*edit: oops, double post



Jochenb
Registered: May 25, 2010
Total Posts: 2078
Country: Belgium

sebboh wrote:
Jochenb wrote:
sebboh wrote:
Jochenb wrote:
Btw, I sold my RX1 (I'll still be around in the thread though, I have a lot of unedited photos from it).


oh, no!

what are you using for 35mm theses days?



I currently only have a Sony/Zeiss FE 35/2.8. I don't like it optically, but use it for the quick AF. I still have to get a decent 35mm lens for the A7. That's why it's such a pity that the ZE/ZF is so large and heavy.




sounds like a good excuse to be guinea pig for the new loxia 35/2.



I doubt it. I don't like what I've seen from it so far.



wfrank
Registered: Feb 09, 2011
Total Posts: 3217
Country: Sweden

Heres the CY version on a Contax S2 beside the FE 58/1.8 mounted on the A7.



wfrank
Registered: Feb 09, 2011
Total Posts: 3217
Country: Sweden

And besides some 35mm options. I'm no big fan of the FE 35/2.8 either. But the Voigt 35/1.2II is special.



wfrank
Registered: Feb 09, 2011
Total Posts: 3217
Country: Sweden

And to celebrate the reinvocation of the thread, more cars.







Steve Spencer
Registered: Nov 08, 2006
Total Posts: 9888
Country: United States

sebboh wrote:
Jochenb wrote:
Good to see this thread back. Steve, Some others and myself posted photos from the ZE/ZF in this thread before, so I'm sure it's ok. I still miss the ZE/ZF version quite often. It's a shame that it's so big and heavy. That prevents me from using it on an A7.


you should get a c/y or rollei one, it's more manageable on the a7 (roughly the same size as the ZE 35/2). i admit it's hard to justify when you have an rx1 though:






a shot with the a7 + c/y version:






I have thought about getting the C/Y or rollei version a thousand times, but like Jochenb I prefer the bokeh of the ZE, so I have never took the plunge. I am still a good six months away from getting an A7 anyway, so I can wait. it doesn't look like the loxia 35 f/2 will be a solution for me either. At this point I think I am most likely to get a 35 lux pre-asph for something small and keep the ZE when I want to shoot wide open with good bokeh. The Voigtlander 35 f/1.2 is still in the running, however, but as odd as it may seem I think the like the bokeh from the lux pre-asph better than the Voigtlander. As the pre-asph stops down it seems to have very nice bokeh and I am not overly offended by the funky bokeh wide open. The Voigt on the other hand has nice bokeh at times, but exactly the kind of bokeh I don't like at others, so I am torn. I got a long time to decide, however. I probably won't pick up a 35 for the A7 until I am sure I want to keep it, and for me that means about a year after I get it.


Jochenb
Registered: May 25, 2010
Total Posts: 2078
Country: Belgium

I have a question about the C/Y. Are there any differences between the MMJ and AE version?



twoeye
Registered: Jan 14, 2011
Total Posts: 749
Country: Norway

Cheers to the Distagon 1,4/35:












Mescalamba
Registered: Jul 06, 2011
Total Posts: 3731
Country: Czech Republic

Jochenb wrote:
I have a question about the C/Y. Are there any differences between the MMJ and AE version?


MMs are servicable by Zeiss (I hope that is still valid) and they dont have so-called ninja bokeh (different aperture blades). Also MMs are adaptable to any mount, while AE are Canon EF only. Sometimes there are some design updates, sometimes not.. unsure about 35/1.4.



wfrank
Registered: Feb 09, 2011
Total Posts: 3217
Country: Sweden

Mescalamba wrote:
Jochenb wrote:
I have a question about the C/Y. Are there any differences between the MMJ and AE version?

...
Also MMs are adaptable to any mount, while AE are Canon EF only.


No. Are you referring to Leitax-kits or something? Main difference historically was that MM (multi mode) lenses supported shutter prio/program mode as they could change aperture through a lever. A piece of metal told the camera that a MM lens was mounted hence enabling those modes in some cameras.

Same number of elements/groups and key figures such as MFD suggests gradual improvements if any between the AE and MM - but perhaps the ninja aperture thing. My personal experience is that it is easier to find minty MM lenses than AE, but there are unfortunately plenty of bad condition MMs out there too. Fine copies are getting rarer.

Anyone that knows about the claim that Zeiss still supporting MM lenses? I've read it many times (here) but never really heard anyone doing it. Would you send it to Germany - or how would that come about? I would like to see if they could do something about one of the Contax lenses I have (luckily not the 35/1.4 though :-).



sebboh
Registered: Nov 02, 2009
Total Posts: 12608
Country: United States

wfrank wrote:
Mescalamba wrote:
Jochenb wrote:
I have a question about the C/Y. Are there any differences between the MMJ and AE version?

...
Also MMs are adaptable to any mount, while AE are Canon EF only.


No. Are you referring to Leitax-kits or something? Main difference historically was that MM (multi mode) lenses supported shutter prio/program mode as they could change aperture through a lever. A piece of metal told the camera that a MM lens was mounted hence enabling those modes in some cameras.

Same number of elements/groups and key figures such as MFD suggests gradual improvements if any between the AE and MM - but perhaps the ninja aperture thing. My personal experience is that it is easier to find minty MM lenses than AE, but there are unfortunately plenty of bad condition MMs out there too. Fine copies are getting rarer.

Anyone that knows about the claim that Zeiss still supporting MM lenses? I've read it many times (here) but never really heard anyone doing it. Would you send it to Germany - or how would that come about? I would like to see if they could do something about one of the Contax lenses I have (luckily not the 35/1.4 though :-).



zeiss told me they would replace my rear element if it was an MM version. they also me that the rear element from an MM was not compatible with my AE, the way they worded it though gave me the impression that was either BS or the difference was just in the coatings.

Anden used to have a pre contax rollei and a contax version (think it was MM) and reported no obvious optical differences somewhere in this thread if i recall correctly (right before he sold the rollei to luka).



aly324
Registered: May 06, 2013
Total Posts: 398
Country: United States

I posted some of these in the A7/R thread, here're a few of my favorites

from Labrang Monastery, in cultural Tibet, southern Gansu Province, China.

A7R+Contax Zeiss 35/1.4 AEG, january 2014

I still have a the Distagon, but since May or so I've been shooting with the Summilux-R 35 and 80 exclusively. I miss many things about the Distagon.



aly324
Registered: May 06, 2013
Total Posts: 398
Country: United States

When I used my Contax set on my A7R, 90% of my favorite photos were with the Distagon 35/1.4.



Mescalamba
Registered: Jul 06, 2011
Total Posts: 3731
Country: Czech Republic

wfrank wrote:
Mescalamba wrote:
Jochenb wrote:
I have a question about the C/Y. Are there any differences between the MMJ and AE version?

...
Also MMs are adaptable to any mount, while AE are Canon EF only.


No. Are you referring to Leitax-kits or something? Main difference historically was that MM (multi mode) lenses supported shutter prio/program mode as they could change aperture through a lever. A piece of metal told the camera that a MM lens was mounted hence enabling those modes in some cameras.

Same number of elements/groups and key figures such as MFD suggests gradual improvements if any between the AE and MM - but perhaps the ninja aperture thing. My personal experience is that it is easier to find minty MM lenses than AE, but there are unfortunately plenty of bad condition MMs out there too. Fine copies are getting rarer.

Anyone that knows about the claim that Zeiss still supporting MM lenses? I've read it many times (here) but never really heard anyone doing it. Would you send it to Germany - or how would that come about? I would like to see if they could do something about one of the Contax lenses I have (luckily not the 35/1.4 though :-).



Yes Leitax, if one owns Nikon or Sony A-mount camera, getting AE isnt option. They have very different mount side. While its possible to convert them, it means pretty much to completely put lens apart and find someone who will manufacture replacement mount. Canon shooters and any mirrorless dont need to care much.

I asked them about servicing my lens (50/1.4 MM) last year and they said ok, still didnt manage to get it there tho.. will try this month. Kinda left is as much as I left shooting. My MM was supposedly perfect according to seller, well it isnt. :/



Anden
Registered: Jun 22, 2004
Total Posts: 6605
Country: Sweden

I started this thread with the first version Rollei. I now have the Contax AEG.
I haven't used the MMG or MMJ.

From my tests the rollei and the contax was equal. The bokeh is the difference.

sebboh wrote:
wfrank wrote:
Mescalamba wrote:
Jochenb wrote:
I have a question about the C/Y. Are there any differences between the MMJ and AE version?

...
Also MMs are adaptable to any mount, while AE are Canon EF only.


No. Are you referring to Leitax-kits or something? Main difference historically was that MM (multi mode) lenses supported shutter prio/program mode as they could change aperture through a lever. A piece of metal told the camera that a MM lens was mounted hence enabling those modes in some cameras.

Same number of elements/groups and key figures such as MFD suggests gradual improvements if any between the AE and MM - but perhaps the ninja aperture thing. My personal experience is that it is easier to find minty MM lenses than AE, but there are unfortunately plenty of bad condition MMs out there too. Fine copies are getting rarer.

Anyone that knows about the claim that Zeiss still supporting MM lenses? I've read it many times (here) but never really heard anyone doing it. Would you send it to Germany - or how would that come about? I would like to see if they could do something about one of the Contax lenses I have (luckily not the 35/1.4 though :-).



zeiss told me they would replace my rear element if it was an MM version. they also me that the rear element from an MM was not compatible with my AE, the way they worded it though gave me the impression that was either BS or the difference was just in the coatings.

Anden used to have a pre contax rollei and a contax version (think it was MM) and reported no obvious optical differences somewhere in this thread if i recall correctly (right before he sold the rollei to luka).





1       2       3              112      
113
       114              122       123       end