This topic is in the 2014 archive. You can read it and like its posts here. It is read only.
Archive 2014Zeiss ZM 35 1.4
p.16 #1Zeiss ZM 35 1.4
rscheffler wrote:
I wonder how much of the 35/2's reputation was born of images like Luka's (denoir) shot wide open at near distance with 50-100 points of clarity and significant contrast and saturation boosts?
AhamB wrote:
I seem to remember that denoir never used clarity because he thought it destroyed the Zeiss microcontrast.
he was trying to make a worst case scenario for that shot, but i think he still just boosted contrast and saturation but not clarity.
i don't think the zm 35/2's bokeh reputation can be attributed just to that shot. every single wide open portrait with any kind of structure or highlights to the background looks incredibly harsh to my eye (even worse than the contax g 35/2). with a little more distance and stopped down to f/4 bokeh looks pretty good though.
this new lens certainly looks better in the bokeh regard.
I wonder how much of the 35/2's reputation was born of images like Luka's (denoir) shot wide open at near distance with 50-100 points of clarity and significant contrast and saturation boosts?
AhamB wrote:
I seem to remember that denoir never used clarity because he thought it destroyed the Zeiss microcontrast.
he was trying to make a worst case scenario for that shot, but i think he still just boosted contrast and saturation but not clarity.
i don't think the zm 35/2's bokeh reputation can be attributed just to that shot. every single wide open portrait with any kind of structure or highlights to the background looks incredibly harsh to my eye (even worse than the contax g 35/2). with a little more distance and stopped down to f/4 bokeh looks pretty good though.
this new lens certainly looks better in the bokeh regard.
Feb 22, 2015 at 12:25 PM
p.16 #2Zeiss ZM 35 1.4
edwardkaraa wrote:
For those interested, I posted a few photos with the 35/1.4 on Leica M240 in the Leica image thread. All street shots, what I normally shoot, with minimal PP (almost none, as usual).
Nice images Edward, the portrait of the person with blue shirt is my favorite. What aperture was that shot at?
From what I have seen so far, this lens performs much better than zm 35/2 biogon wide open. Great contrast, clarity, and colors. It also doesn't suffer from FC like the M 35/1.4 lux right? Maybe a famous Edward back of the sofa FC test shot is in order?
I see this lens selling well for Zeiss.
For those interested, I posted a few photos with the 35/1.4 on Leica M240 in the Leica image thread. All street shots, what I normally shoot, with minimal PP (almost none, as usual).
Nice images Edward, the portrait of the person with blue shirt is my favorite. What aperture was that shot at?
From what I have seen so far, this lens performs much better than zm 35/2 biogon wide open. Great contrast, clarity, and colors. It also doesn't suffer from FC like the M 35/1.4 lux right? Maybe a famous Edward back of the sofa FC test shot is in order?
I see this lens selling well for Zeiss.
Feb 22, 2015 at 01:10 PM
p.16 #3Zeiss ZM 35 1.4
Thank you Wayne! I think it was shot at f/2 or f/2.8. As you know the aperture is not recorded in the exif. The field is as flat as can be, no FC that I can discern, even in the corners.
Feb 22, 2015 at 08:10 PM
p.16 #4Zeiss ZM 35 1.4
35mm/1.4 Distagon ZM @ F/1.4:
Bicycles, Harvard University, Cambridge, MA 2015 by Steven Keirstead, on Flickr
35mm/1.4 Distagon ZM @ F/2.8:
Bicycles, Harvard University, Cambridge, MA 2015 by Steven Keirstead, on Flickr
35mm/1.4 Distagon ZM @ F/1.4:
Memorial Church, Harvard University, Cambridge, MA 2015 by Steven Keirstead, on Flickr
Edited on Mar 07, 2015 at 10:18 PM · View previous versions
Bicycles, Harvard University, Cambridge, MA 2015 by Steven Keirstead, on Flickr35mm/1.4 Distagon ZM @ F/2.8:
Bicycles, Harvard University, Cambridge, MA 2015 by Steven Keirstead, on Flickr35mm/1.4 Distagon ZM @ F/1.4:
Memorial Church, Harvard University, Cambridge, MA 2015 by Steven Keirstead, on FlickrEdited on Mar 07, 2015 at 10:18 PM · View previous versions
Mar 02, 2015 at 10:43 PM
p.16 #6Zeiss ZM 35 1.4
Harvard Science Center and Music Library, 35mm/1.4 Distagon ZM @ F/5.6:
Harvard University, Cambridge, MA 2015 by Steven Keirstead, on Flickr
Zelkova Bark at close to the minimum focus distance, 35mm/1.4 Distagon ZM @ F/5.6:
Zelkova Bark, Harvard University, Cambridge, MA 2015 by Steven Keirstead, on Flickr
Harvard University, Cambridge, MA 2015 by Steven Keirstead, on FlickrZelkova Bark at close to the minimum focus distance, 35mm/1.4 Distagon ZM @ F/5.6:
Zelkova Bark, Harvard University, Cambridge, MA 2015 by Steven Keirstead, on FlickrMar 07, 2015 at 10:21 PM
p.16 #7Zeiss ZM 35 1.4
Thanks for posting, these, Steven, they confirm why I ordered mine and am waiting for it.
Mar 07, 2015 at 11:38 PM
p.16 #8Zeiss ZM 35 1.4
I got mine yesterday. 2 shots SOOC save for the very moderate cropping. One is wide open, the other at f:2.0. Truly fantastic performance, even with Leica Sumilux and APO Summicron in mind.
Mar 11, 2015 at 12:37 AM
p.16 #9Zeiss ZM 35 1.4
philber wrote:
I got mine yesterday. 2 shots SOOC save for the very moderate cropping. One is wide open, the other at f:2.0. Truly fantastic performance, even with Leica Sumilux and APO Summicron in mind.
These look like a very good start, Phillipe. I am glad you go the lens and look forward to seeing more of your work with it.
I got mine yesterday. 2 shots SOOC save for the very moderate cropping. One is wide open, the other at f:2.0. Truly fantastic performance, even with Leica Sumilux and APO Summicron in mind.
These look like a very good start, Phillipe. I am glad you go the lens and look forward to seeing more of your work with it.
Mar 11, 2015 at 12:57 AM
p.16 #12Zeiss ZM 35 1.4
Thanks, people! An added bonus for this lens is that a helicoid adapter gives it a minimum 50% shorter MFD on the A7R, enabling fairly close-up shots, not unlike the ZE/ZF 25f:1.4
Mar 12, 2015 at 06:57 AM
p.16 #13Zeiss ZM 35 1.4
Congrats, Philippe!.
Our local store offer this lens at US$2180. Is it a good price ?
Our local store offer this lens at US$2180. Is it a good price ?
Mar 12, 2015 at 08:13 AM
p.16 #14Zeiss ZM 35 1.4
philber wrote:
Thanks, people! An added bonus for this lens is that a helicoid adapter gives it a minimum 50% shorter MFD on the A7R, enabling fairly close-up shots, not unlike the ZE/ZF 25f:1.4
That is good to know, so the MFD is .35M then right? That gives it quite reasonably magnification, something like 1:10 or so. I had assumed the adapter would help a lot, but it is good to know how much.
Thanks, people! An added bonus for this lens is that a helicoid adapter gives it a minimum 50% shorter MFD on the A7R, enabling fairly close-up shots, not unlike the ZE/ZF 25f:1.4
That is good to know, so the MFD is .35M then right? That gives it quite reasonably magnification, something like 1:10 or so. I had assumed the adapter would help a lot, but it is good to know how much.
Mar 12, 2015 at 08:33 AM
p.16 #15Zeiss ZM 35 1.4
My experience with the helicoid varies a lot depending on the lens. For some of them, it cuts the MFD by some 60%, for others maybe by half. And then the character of the result may appeal -or not. The 75 Cron APO acquired a delicate soft glow which was a delight. The ZM seems to be one of the better ones close up. MFD around 30cm is my guess.
Mar 12, 2015 at 02:47 PM
p.16 #16Zeiss ZM 35 1.4
Philippe, how would you judge the "sharpness" border to border when at MFD with the helicoid adapter? And is the plane of focus plane or severely bent? I ask as my experience (Summilux 35/1.4 ASPH and Cosina Voigtländer 35/1.2 both versions) from going that close with RF lenses is not very good.
One can of course also be interested in the result when using a Sony A7(x) with converted glass stack but I don't know if anyone has the combo.
One can of course also be interested in the result when using a Sony A7(x) with converted glass stack but I don't know if anyone has the combo.
Mar 12, 2015 at 03:54 PM
p.16 #17Zeiss ZM 35 1.4
Jonas B wrote:
Philippe, how would you judge the "sharpness" border to border when at MFD with the helicoid adapter? And is the plane of focus plane or severely bent? I ask as my experience (Summilux 35/1.4 ASPH and Cosina Voigtländer 35/1.2 both versions) from going that close with RF lenses is not very good.
One can of course also be interested in the result when using a Sony A7(x) with converted glass stack but I don't know if anyone has the combo.
The ZM 35 f/1.4 does have a floating element which should help with the close focusing on the helicoid adapter. I'm not sure anyone with a modified camera has the ZM yet, but I would love to see the results if someone has.
It would also be interesting to see the results of the 50 lux ASPH on the helicoid adapter, with its floating elements it ought to do pretty well close up too, and the the helicoid adapter on the 90 cron AA would only reduce the MFD to about what it is on the R version of the lens, so that lens ought to do pretty well too.
Philippe, how would you judge the "sharpness" border to border when at MFD with the helicoid adapter? And is the plane of focus plane or severely bent? I ask as my experience (Summilux 35/1.4 ASPH and Cosina Voigtländer 35/1.2 both versions) from going that close with RF lenses is not very good.
One can of course also be interested in the result when using a Sony A7(x) with converted glass stack but I don't know if anyone has the combo.
The ZM 35 f/1.4 does have a floating element which should help with the close focusing on the helicoid adapter. I'm not sure anyone with a modified camera has the ZM yet, but I would love to see the results if someone has.
It would also be interesting to see the results of the 50 lux ASPH on the helicoid adapter, with its floating elements it ought to do pretty well close up too, and the the helicoid adapter on the 90 cron AA would only reduce the MFD to about what it is on the R version of the lens, so that lens ought to do pretty well too.
Mar 12, 2015 at 10:56 PM
p.16 #18Zeiss ZM 35 1.4
Here is one example of the ZM with close focusing helicoid, close to the shorter MFD, and I think f:2.0. I have no idea how this would be corner-to-corner because I usually focus on a central element and the rest is wildly OOF, but I can try; Just give me a brick wall...
Mar 13, 2015 at 12:52 AM
p.16 #19Zeiss ZM 35 1.4
philber wrote:
My experience with the helicoid varies a lot depending on the lens. For some of them, it cuts the MFD by some 60%, for others maybe by half. And then the character of the result may appeal -or not. The 75 Cron APO acquired a delicate soft glow which was a delight. The ZM seems to be one of the better ones close up. MFD around 30cm is my guess.
the relationship between distance traveled by the helicoid and change in mfd is related to the focal length. the wider the lens the smaller the travel necessary to change focus distance by a given amount. this means that wider lenses will have more dramatic shortening of mfd with the helicoid adapter than longer lenses.
Steve Spencer wrote:
One can of course also be interested in the result when using a Sony A7(x) with converted glass stack but I don't know if anyone has the combo.The ZM 35 f/1.4 does have a floating element which should help with the close focusing on the helicoid adapter. I'm not sure anyone with a modified camera has the ZM yet, but I would love to see the results if someone has.
It would also be interesting to see the results of the 50 lux ASPH on the helicoid adapter, with its floating elements it ought to do pretty well close up too, and the the helicoid adapter on the 90 cron AA would only reduce the MFD to about what it is on the R version of...Show more →
the floating element does not move with the helicoid so it does not correct for that movement, nonetheless it's better than a lens optimized for infinity with no floating element...
My experience with the helicoid varies a lot depending on the lens. For some of them, it cuts the MFD by some 60%, for others maybe by half. And then the character of the result may appeal -or not. The 75 Cron APO acquired a delicate soft glow which was a delight. The ZM seems to be one of the better ones close up. MFD around 30cm is my guess.
the relationship between distance traveled by the helicoid and change in mfd is related to the focal length. the wider the lens the smaller the travel necessary to change focus distance by a given amount. this means that wider lenses will have more dramatic shortening of mfd with the helicoid adapter than longer lenses.
Steve Spencer wrote:
Jonas B wrote
Philippe, how would you judge the "sharpness" border to border when at MFD with the helicoid adapter? And is the plane of focus plane or severely bent? I ask as my experience (Summilux 35/1.4 ASPH and Cosina Voigtländer 35/1.2 both versions) from going that close with RF lenses is not very good.One can of course also be interested in the result when using a Sony A7(x) with converted glass stack but I don't know if anyone has the combo.
It would also be interesting to see the results of the 50 lux ASPH on the helicoid adapter, with its floating elements it ought to do pretty well close up too, and the the helicoid adapter on the 90 cron AA would only reduce the MFD to about what it is on the R version of...Show more →
the floating element does not move with the helicoid so it does not correct for that movement, nonetheless it's better than a lens optimized for infinity with no floating element...
Mar 13, 2015 at 12:58 AM
p.16 #20Zeiss ZM 35 1.4
I agree about the relationsship between the helicoid, the focal length and MFD. Old school stuff really - like tubes between the lens and the camera.
But the floating lens element... as expressed by Steve: The ZM 35 f/1.4 does have a floating element which should help with the close focusing on the helicoid adapter. I'm not sure anyone with a modified camera has the ZM yet, but I would love to see the results if someone has.
Most floating rear element(s) are parts of designs where the rear element is supposed not to move (they are at a fixed distance from the film/sensor). Some, but move back and forth but I think most don't. Anyway, one great FLE lens is the Zuiko OM100/2.0. I have tried two copies of that lens, together with three different cheap adapters. The adapters all worked very well together with my other Zuiko lenses. Only one of them worked with the 100/2 - the lens had to be at the exact right distance from the sensor.
Other lenses have given me mixed results. Most RF lenses have been less than stellar when used with the helicoid adapter (or a tube). I guess they have been optimized for longer distances and never made to be used closer than 1m.
A long text just to say I don't believe a construction including FLE is better or worse than a traditional design when used together with a tube. They will just be what they are.
Philippe, your image of all that love tells us the lens when used with a 5mm tube probably can be "sharp". maybe very sharp, in the center. It's an expensive lens and I would appreciate, really, if you could try some more close-ups. I can't give you a brick wall but you may have a book or a paper or something at home?
But the floating lens element... as expressed by Steve: The ZM 35 f/1.4 does have a floating element which should help with the close focusing on the helicoid adapter. I'm not sure anyone with a modified camera has the ZM yet, but I would love to see the results if someone has.
Most floating rear element(s) are parts of designs where the rear element is supposed not to move (they are at a fixed distance from the film/sensor). Some, but move back and forth but I think most don't. Anyway, one great FLE lens is the Zuiko OM100/2.0. I have tried two copies of that lens, together with three different cheap adapters. The adapters all worked very well together with my other Zuiko lenses. Only one of them worked with the 100/2 - the lens had to be at the exact right distance from the sensor.
Other lenses have given me mixed results. Most RF lenses have been less than stellar when used with the helicoid adapter (or a tube). I guess they have been optimized for longer distances and never made to be used closer than 1m.
A long text just to say I don't believe a construction including FLE is better or worse than a traditional design when used together with a tube. They will just be what they are.
Philippe, your image of all that love tells us the lens when used with a 5mm tube probably can be "sharp". maybe very sharp, in the center. It's an expensive lens and I would appreciate, really, if you could try some more close-ups. I can't give you a brick wall but you may have a book or a paper or something at home?
Mar 13, 2015 at 11:12 AM