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.4 #1Zeiss ZM 35 1.4
Tariq Gibran wrote:
Well, we are hearing different suggestions now for the exit pupil. Which is it? The PDF seems to specify an entrance pupil distance, not exit pupil?
Exactly, Zeiss stopped specifying the exit pupil for a while now.
Well, we are hearing different suggestions now for the exit pupil. Which is it? The PDF seems to specify an entrance pupil distance, not exit pupil?
Exactly, Zeiss stopped specifying the exit pupil for a while now.
Sep 16, 2014 at 08:55 AM
p.4 #2Zeiss ZM 35 1.4
Steve Spencer wrote:
I still hope they make a Loxia version with auto-aperture
Aren't the other Loxias manual aperture?
I still hope they make a Loxia version with auto-aperture
Aren't the other Loxias manual aperture?
Sep 16, 2014 at 09:27 AM
p.4 #3Zeiss ZM 35 1.4
as usual, i can tell nothing from zeiss's first samples. the mtfs look awesome though.
perhaps i will trade in my c/y after all...
perhaps i will trade in my c/y after all...
Sep 16, 2014 at 09:46 AM
p.4 #4Zeiss ZM 35 1.4
Our question of Distagon 35 f/1.4 ZM floating elements is answered by the .7meter close focusing distance specification. If there were FLE helicords in play, that spec would be MUCH closer at say, .2 meters. So the answer comes from a conventional close focus.
As Chambers opines, this is a VERY GOOD LENS and those concerned over A7(r) compatibilities should have no worries ... OTHER than manual operation and a wafer-thin focal plane at 1.4.
BTW the labor-intensive three cemented doublets tell us the 35/1.4 is a long-lived product that wasn't at all conceived in haste and, as I posted yesterday––is ready for delivery in a few weeks.
The astronomers are going to go crazy over this baby.
As Chambers opines, this is a VERY GOOD LENS and those concerned over A7(r) compatibilities should have no worries ... OTHER than manual operation and a wafer-thin focal plane at 1.4.
BTW the labor-intensive three cemented doublets tell us the 35/1.4 is a long-lived product that wasn't at all conceived in haste and, as I posted yesterday––is ready for delivery in a few weeks.
The astronomers are going to go crazy over this baby.
Sep 16, 2014 at 09:56 AM
p.4 #5Zeiss ZM 35 1.4
Size-wise, it's quite similar to the CV35/1.2, though a bit narrower up front. Diameter at the focusing ring seems about the same. At first I thought maybe the ZM was a repackaged CV, but the optics are different. Maybe the narrower front end of the ZM will make a slight difference on viewfinder blockage, but I doubt it will be much different compared to the CV.
Mounting the CV on my M right now (without hood attached) and looking through the viewfinder, blockage extends as a crescent to about 60% towards the 135 frame lines. The majority of the blockage is the focusing ring. Considering that the ZM's focusing ring is narrower and closer to the camera, and with the taper of the front end, my guess is blockage will be only slightly less.
MTF values look phenomenal and pretty much eliminate any residual interest I have in the FLE. Price also seems 'OK' and the test I'm really most curious about is vs. the CV. I'm hoping to Roger at Lensrentals will eventually publish MTFs for the CV, as well as a field curvature graph comparison for these fast 35s.
Mounting the CV on my M right now (without hood attached) and looking through the viewfinder, blockage extends as a crescent to about 60% towards the 135 frame lines. The majority of the blockage is the focusing ring. Considering that the ZM's focusing ring is narrower and closer to the camera, and with the taper of the front end, my guess is blockage will be only slightly less.
MTF values look phenomenal and pretty much eliminate any residual interest I have in the FLE. Price also seems 'OK' and the test I'm really most curious about is vs. the CV. I'm hoping to Roger at Lensrentals will eventually publish MTFs for the CV, as well as a field curvature graph comparison for these fast 35s.
Sep 16, 2014 at 09:57 AM
p.4 #6Zeiss ZM 35 1.4
Which supplier (in North America) has typically had the best delivery of new Zeiss products? I'm already wondering where to place my order - how pathetic I am.... 
Sep 16, 2014 at 10:00 AM
p.4 #7Zeiss ZM 35 1.4
I don't know Gary, but you could try the guys at Camtec in Montreal... Any experience with The Camera Store? I'd probably avoid the huge online dealers like B&H and Adorama unless you were able to be one of the first in line.
Kind of surprised you'd sell the tiny Cron for this.
Another question in my mind about this lens: how precisely will it be calibrated for wide open performance on the Leica M system? Since Zeiss no longer offers the Ikon bodies, it would be hoped that they've quietly calibrated it for Leica instead. The fact they've pictured it mounted on a Leica M offers some promise...
Kind of surprised you'd sell the tiny Cron for this.
Another question in my mind about this lens: how precisely will it be calibrated for wide open performance on the Leica M system? Since Zeiss no longer offers the Ikon bodies, it would be hoped that they've quietly calibrated it for Leica instead. The fact they've pictured it mounted on a Leica M offers some promise...
Sep 16, 2014 at 10:06 AM
p.4 #8Zeiss ZM 35 1.4
rscheffler wrote:
I don't know Gary, but you could try the guys at Camtec in Montreal... Any experience with The Camera Store? I'd probably avoid the huge online dealers like B&H and Adorama unless you were able to be one of the first in line.
Kind of surprised you'd sell the tiny Cron for this.
Another question in my mind about this lens: how precisely will it be calibrated for wide open performance on the Leica M system? Since Zeiss no longer offers the Ikon bodies, it would be hoped that they've quietly calibrated it for Leica instead. The fact they've pictured it...Show more →
Of course the lens has been calibrated for the M, what else. From my correspondence with Zeiss technical staff, it is understood their ZM line main use is on M bodies. They even keep a well calibrated M to test the lenses after adjustment at the repair center.
Sep 16, 2014 at 10:10 AM
p.4 #9Zeiss ZM 35 1.4
sector99 wrote:
Our question of Distagon 35 f/1.4 ZM floating elements is answered by the .7meter close focusing distance specification. If there were FLE helicords in play, that spec would be MUCH closer at say, .2 meters. So the answer comes from a conventional close focus.
no, it's close focus distance is .7m because it's a rangefinder lens and the rangefinder mechanism doesn't really allow for close focusing.
Our question of Distagon 35 f/1.4 ZM floating elements is answered by the .7meter close focusing distance specification. If there were FLE helicords in play, that spec would be MUCH closer at say, .2 meters. So the answer comes from a conventional close focus.
no, it's close focus distance is .7m because it's a rangefinder lens and the rangefinder mechanism doesn't really allow for close focusing.
Sep 16, 2014 at 10:14 AM
p.4 #10Zeiss ZM 35 1.4
Hey, that's not so big after all. Looks like a really nice lens.
Sep 16, 2014 at 10:18 AM
p.4 #11Zeiss ZM 35 1.4
I wonder how confident Leica is on the pricing of their new Summarit 35/2.4 ASPH now, since it's roughly the same price as this little potential bad boy.
Sep 16, 2014 at 10:40 AM
p.4 #12Zeiss ZM 35 1.4
rscheffler wrote:
Size-wise, it's quite similar to the CV35/1.2, though a bit narrower up front. Diameter at the focusing ring seems about the same. At first I thought maybe the ZM was a repackaged CV, but the optics are different. Maybe the narrower front end of the ZM will make a slight difference on viewfinder blockage, but I doubt it will be much different compared to the CV.
Of course the CV is faster but one thing nice about this ZM 35/1.4 is that it's noticeably lighter in weight compared to the CV. Going by the wide open MTF, my guess is that it will likely crush the CV performance wise (as it should given it's price).
Size-wise, it's quite similar to the CV35/1.2, though a bit narrower up front. Diameter at the focusing ring seems about the same. At first I thought maybe the ZM was a repackaged CV, but the optics are different. Maybe the narrower front end of the ZM will make a slight difference on viewfinder blockage, but I doubt it will be much different compared to the CV.
Of course the CV is faster but one thing nice about this ZM 35/1.4 is that it's noticeably lighter in weight compared to the CV. Going by the wide open MTF, my guess is that it will likely crush the CV performance wise (as it should given it's price).
Sep 16, 2014 at 10:54 AM
p.4 #13Zeiss ZM 35 1.4
freaklikeme wrote:
I wonder how confident Leica is on the pricing of their new Summarit 35/2.4 ASPH now, since it's roughly the same price as this little potential bad boy.
For Leica, the only price comparison/relevance is against their own lenses, and in this respect, the Summarit is still the 'bargain' option.
I'm curious if Leica revised the optics at all, or if it's only cosmetic? I didn't see any technical data available for the new Summarits yet.
I wonder how confident Leica is on the pricing of their new Summarit 35/2.4 ASPH now, since it's roughly the same price as this little potential bad boy.
For Leica, the only price comparison/relevance is against their own lenses, and in this respect, the Summarit is still the 'bargain' option.
I'm curious if Leica revised the optics at all, or if it's only cosmetic? I didn't see any technical data available for the new Summarits yet.
Sep 16, 2014 at 11:01 AM
p.4 #14Zeiss ZM 35 1.4
Pre-ordered, I change my mind to decide not wait, as I may have to wait forever to get one.
The MTF is great, if it is anything like distagon ZF with correct focus direction, I am in. My only wish is it get better CA control than that beast(ZF). My lux R kill it in that regard.
Edit: I want add this is the most exciting new lens over past several years to me judge from its paper performance, weight, and price. I hate that chrome ring though.
The MTF is great, if it is anything like distagon ZF with correct focus direction, I am in. My only wish is it get better CA control than that beast(ZF). My lux R kill it in that regard.
Edit: I want add this is the most exciting new lens over past several years to me judge from its paper performance, weight, and price. I hate that chrome ring though.
Sep 16, 2014 at 11:10 AM
p.4 #15Zeiss ZM 35 1.4
carstenw wrote:
Aren't the other Loxias manual aperture?
They are but I can still hope they change their mind and make some of the new lenses with auto-aperture. You can still have a good manual focus with auto-aperture.
Steve Spencer wrote
I still hope they make a Loxia version with auto-apertureThey are but I can still hope they change their mind and make some of the new lenses with auto-aperture. You can still have a good manual focus with auto-aperture.
Sep 16, 2014 at 11:16 AM
p.4 #17Zeiss ZM 35 1.4
joe88 wrote:
when is expected availability of this lens?
Someone previously had stated a few weeks but the press release states 4th quarter 2014.
http://www.dpreview.com/articles/2425714873/zeiss-introduces-distagon-t-35mm-f1-4-zm-lens
when is expected availability of this lens?
Someone previously had stated a few weeks but the press release states 4th quarter 2014.
http://www.dpreview.com/articles/2425714873/zeiss-introduces-distagon-t-35mm-f1-4-zm-lens
Sep 16, 2014 at 11:56 AM
p.4 #18Zeiss ZM 35 1.4
rscheffler wrote:
Kind of surprised you'd sell the tiny Cron for this.
I haven't sold it yet.... Will still have to think about this decision. Main factor at the moment is the size. I bought the CV35/1.2 and sold it primarily due to size and weight.
Michael - where did you preorder?
Kind of surprised you'd sell the tiny Cron for this.
I haven't sold it yet....
Will still have to think about this decision. Main factor at the moment is the size. I bought the CV35/1.2 and sold it primarily due to size and weight.Michael - where did you preorder?
Sep 16, 2014 at 12:01 PM
p.4 #19Zeiss ZM 35 1.4
Gary Clennan wrote:
I haven't sold it yet.... Will still have to think about this decision. Main factor at the moment is the size. I bought the CV35/1.2 and sold it primarily due to size and weight.
Michael - where did you preorder?
BH, not sure how it turns out? On the list first, decide cold fact later
rscheffler wrote
Kind of surprised you'd sell the tiny Cron for this. Will still have to think about this decision. Main factor at the moment is the size. I bought the CV35/1.2 and sold it primarily due to size and weight.Michael - where did you preorder?
BH, not sure how it turns out? On the list first, decide cold fact later
Sep 16, 2014 at 12:40 PM
p.4 #20Zeiss ZM 35 1.4
@ sebboh (On close focus M lenses)
there are many M lenses that focus closer than .7 meters ... thus negating your argument that .7 is the close limit due to rangefinder mechanics.
here's the Zeiss 15 f/2.8 as an example
there are many M lenses that focus closer than .7 meters ... thus negating your argument that .7 is the close limit due to rangefinder mechanics.
here's the Zeiss 15 f/2.8 as an example
 |
||
| https://interventional.files.wordpress.com/2014/09/screen-shot-2014-09-16-at-2-39-42-pm.png | ||
|
Sep 16, 2014 at 12:52 PM