p.1 #1 · How do the Contax C/Y Vario-Sonnar 35-70/3.4 and Leica Vario-Elmar-R 35-70/4 compare?
I am interested in possibly getting the Leica Vario-Elmar-R 35-70mm F/4 lens and am wondering how is compares with the Contax C/Y Vario-Sonnar 35-70mm f/3.5 in terms of image quality and rendering. I have the Contax lens and like it a lot, with the exception of the CA that can occur and purple cast that can occur in the shadow areas. It is sharp and renders nicely.
I would really like to gain some information and hopefully sample images for the Leica to see if it is a lens that I want to also get.
p.1 #2 · How do the Contax C/Y Vario-Sonnar 35-70/3.4 and Leica Vario-Elmar-R 35-70/4 compare?
It is said that the Vario Elmar R 35-70mm F/3.5 used the same optics like Minolta https://phillipreeve.net/blog/minolta-md-zoom-35-70mm-3-5-review/
The Minolta zoom is very good but I think it is slightly behind the primes in the corners. The Zeiss 35-70mm on the other hand competes very nicely with the primes at f 5.6 and f8. So I dont think the Minolta or Leica 3.5 35-70mm would add value to your C/Y...
But you are asking about the Vario Elmar F4, so I dont know but check here:
p.1 #3 · How do the Contax C/Y Vario-Sonnar 35-70/3.4 and Leica Vario-Elmar-R 35-70/4 compare?
I got both the Vario- Sonnar 35-70/3.4 and Vario-Elmar R 35-70/4.
The Vario-Elmar is optically a better lens - sharp wide open at any fl across the FF,whereas Vario-Sonnar needs to be stopped to f5.6 to get there.Zeiss has a tad higher micocontrast though.Colours are to my like in both.Quite typical Zeiss and Leica zooms.
p.1 #4 · How do the Contax C/Y Vario-Sonnar 35-70/3.4 and Leica Vario-Elmar-R 35-70/4 compare?
chris9 wrote:
It is said that the Vario Elmar R 35-70mm F/3.5 used the same optics like Minolta https://phillipreeve.net/blog/minolta-md-zoom-35-70mm-3-5-review/
The Minolta zoom is very good but I think it is slightly behind the primes in the corners. The Zeiss 35-70mm on the other hand competes very nicely with the primes at f 5.6 and f8. So I dont think the Minolta or Leica 3.5 35-70mm would add value to your C/Y...
But you are asking about the Vario Elmar F4, so I dont know but check here:
Thanks for the info and for all of the reference links. It is very helpful for me. I had come across the discussion regarding the f/3.5 Leica being inferior to the f/4 and having the same optics as Minolta.
---------------------------------------------
Peire wrote:
I got both the Vario- Sonnar 35-70/3.4 and Vario-Elmar R 35-70/4.
The Vario-Elmar is optically a better lens - sharp wide open at any fl across the FF,whereas Vario-Sonnar needs to be stopped to f5.6 to get there.Zeiss has a tad higher micocontrast though.Colours are to my like in both.Quite typical Zeiss and Leica zooms.
Peire - thanks so much for your info and for sharing your direct experience with both lenses. The images that you supplied for the Leica are beautiful and I love the rendering and other qualities. Knowing that the Leica is sharper is very helpful. I have found the Zeiss to be quite good, with the exception of CA and some weird coloring that can occur in shadows sometimes.
p.1 #5 · How do the Contax C/Y Vario-Sonnar 35-70/3.4 and Leica Vario-Elmar-R 35-70/4 compare?
According to Erwin Put there is also some color fringing with the Elmar f4 35-70mm:
"A verbal description would run like this: at maximum aperture the overall contrast is high with excellent definition of very fine detail over a large part of the image frame. There is some softening of edge contrast of small detail due to some colour fringing at white-black gradients. At the edges and in the corners of the image there is a visible softening in the reproduction of fine detail, which becomes blurred. "
p.1 #6 · How do the Contax C/Y Vario-Sonnar 35-70/3.4 and Leica Vario-Elmar-R 35-70/4 compare?
Abuttolph wrote:
Thanks for the info and for all of the reference links. It is very helpful for me. I had come across the discussion regarding the f/3.5 Leica being inferior to the f/4 and having the same optics as Minolta.
---------------------------------------------
Peire - thanks so much for your info and for sharing your direct experience with both lenses. The images that you supplied for the Leica are beautiful and I love the rendering and other qualities. Knowing that the Leica is sharper is very helpful. I have found the Zeiss to be quite good, with the exception of CA and some weird coloring that can occur in shadows sometimes.
I like both of them,but Leica is a newer optical formula with special glass,which shows.If I had to stay with just one lens it would have been Leica.
And yes - Vario Elmar R 35-70/3.5 was a Minolta formula and behaves the same as Minolta MD 35-70/3.5.Compared to Zeiss and Leica 35-70/4,it presents the weakest overall corner performance,especially at 35mm,when stopping down to f11 is advisable to get acceptable sharpness there.In this cas,I would say, Minolta is a better buy,because it is 3x cheaper and has nice close up facility,whereas Leica 35-70/3.5 is only sturdier.
p.1 #7 · How do the Contax C/Y Vario-Sonnar 35-70/3.4 and Leica Vario-Elmar-R 35-70/4 compare?
Peire’s photographs say everything you need to know about the quality of the Leica zoom but another difference between the Vario-Sonnar C/Y 35-70mm f/3.5 and the Vario-Elmar-R 35-70mm f/4–which may or may not be important to you—is that the Contax is a push-pull zoom whereas the Leica has a separate zoom ring. That, along with the image quality, prompted me to choose the Leica 35-70/4.
p.1 #8 · How do the Contax C/Y Vario-Sonnar 35-70/3.4 and Leica Vario-Elmar-R 35-70/4 compare?
Thank you everyone for your helpful information. I will be on the lookout for the Leica. I really love Peire's images and the lens looks to be a terrific performer.
