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.40 #1Zeiss ZM 35 1.4
Rich, unless max DoF is required the ZM35D losses its bite by f/8
Few days back I mounted it on Hawks v5 and made few test shots after infinity adjustments where clearly the best sharpness and contrast were visible at f/5.6
This is on Kolari v1 so you may want to recheck on yours.
Exposed at f/5.6 + crops (open in a separate tab) at f/1.4, f/4, f/5.6, f/8 and f/11
You can see this lens outresolves 36MP at f/4!
http://www.kozera.ca/photos/images/20160530_5_1600.jpg
http://www.kozera.ca/photos/images/ZM35D_on_36MPMod.jpg
Few days back I mounted it on Hawks v5 and made few test shots after infinity adjustments where clearly the best sharpness and contrast were visible at f/5.6
This is on Kolari v1 so you may want to recheck on yours.
Exposed at f/5.6 + crops (open in a separate tab) at f/1.4, f/4, f/5.6, f/8 and f/11
You can see this lens outresolves 36MP at f/4!
http://www.kozera.ca/photos/images/20160530_5_1600.jpg
http://www.kozera.ca/photos/images/ZM35D_on_36MPMod.jpg
Jun 10, 2016 at 11:40 PM
p.40 #2Zeiss ZM 35 1.4
Interesting how the type of shutter selected affects the bokeh at 1.4. I cant get my head around that.... But the bokeh is definitely better above 1/500th with the electronic shutter turned off. As it is with all lenses wide open. And you obviously lose that darker lower portion of the frame as previously mentioned. FWIW
Nov 14, 2016 at 04:43 PM
p.40 #3Zeiss ZM 35 1.4
Just ordered one for a7rii.
Happy to revive this thread.
Happy to revive this thread.
Jan 25, 2018 at 07:38 PM
p.40 #4Zeiss ZM 35 1.4
Getting the best from this lens on the Sony requires either a thin stack sensor mod (search Kolari) or some other approach to tweaking the optics. It will not deliver it’s performance on the Sony sensor in stock form.
But it’s an awesome lens on the right (ie. Leica M) sensor.
But it’s an awesome lens on the right (ie. Leica M) sensor.
Jan 26, 2018 at 09:54 AM
p.40 #5Zeiss ZM 35 1.4
I was using this lens for about a year on the Sony A7rII, along with a Novoflex adapter and a Optosigma PCX 5000 filter. After much consideration I recently traded in the Sony for a Leica M-P (typ 240), and I am absolutely blown away with the image quality of the Distagon on the Leica. Infinity focus is located exactly at the hard stop, and landscapes are acceptable (to me) already at an aperture value of 1.4. At this aperture, there is only a slight sharpness falloff from the center. This level of detail required stopping down to about f/4 on the Sony with the PCX filter. Of course, the lower pixel density of 24 MP helps with the apparent resolution. However, this is still a fantastic optic, and the Leica brings out the best of it.
For Sony shooters, I sincerely hope that Zeiss makes a version which natively designed for the Sony flange distance and cover glass, in order to get the best of this optical formula.
For Sony shooters, I sincerely hope that Zeiss makes a version which natively designed for the Sony flange distance and cover glass, in order to get the best of this optical formula.
Jan 28, 2018 at 10:36 AM
p.40 #6Zeiss ZM 35 1.4
andersd wrote:
I was using this lens for about a year on the Sony A7rII, along with a Novoflex adapter and a Optosigma PCX 5000 filter. After much consideration I recently traded in the Sony for a Leica M-P (typ 240), and I am absolutely blown away with the image quality of the Distagon on the Leica. Infinity focus is located exactly at the hard stop, and landscapes are acceptable (to me) already at an aperture value of 1.4. At this aperture, there is only a slight sharpness falloff from the center. This level of detail required stopping down to about f/4...Show more →
How about the mid-field? When I used the ZM 35/1.4 + 5m on the Sony, there was a noticeable resolution dip towards the mid-field. Do you see that on the Leica? I always thought this was induced by the PCX.
I was using this lens for about a year on the Sony A7rII, along with a Novoflex adapter and a Optosigma PCX 5000 filter. After much consideration I recently traded in the Sony for a Leica M-P (typ 240), and I am absolutely blown away with the image quality of the Distagon on the Leica. Infinity focus is located exactly at the hard stop, and landscapes are acceptable (to me) already at an aperture value of 1.4. At this aperture, there is only a slight sharpness falloff from the center. This level of detail required stopping down to about f/4...Show more →
How about the mid-field? When I used the ZM 35/1.4 + 5m on the Sony, there was a noticeable resolution dip towards the mid-field. Do you see that on the Leica? I always thought this was induced by the PCX.
Jan 28, 2018 at 10:42 AM
p.40 #7Zeiss ZM 35 1.4
Fred Miranda wrote:
For Sony shooters, I sincerely hope that Zeiss makes a version which natively designed for the Sony flange distance and cover glass, in order to get the best of this optical formula.How about the mid-field? When I used the ZM 35/1.4 + 5m on the Sony, there was a noticeable resolution dip towards the mid-field. Do you see that on the Leica? I always thought this was induced by the PCX.
The derogatory effect of the PCX filter on the midfield is exactly what Bastian's infinity tests showed in the review at phillipreeve.net. However, a dip in this zone of the highest frequencies is inherent to the design independent of the sensor, as shown in the official Zeiss MTF charts. In practice, I find this dip absolutely acceptable, as I believe it is introduced to increase performance in the far corners.
andersd wrote
I was using this lens for about a year on the Sony A7rII, along with a Novoflex adapter and a Optosigma PCX 5000 filter. After much consideration I recently traded in the Sony for a Leica M-P (typ 240), and I am absolutely blown away with the image quality of the Distagon on the Leica. Infinity focus is located exactly at the hard stop, and landscapes are acceptable (to me) already at an aperture value of 1.4. At this aperture, there is only a slight sharpness falloff from the center. This level of detail required stopping down to about f/4 on the Sony with the PCX filter. Of course, the lower pixel density of 24 MP helps with the apparent resolution. However, this is still a fantastic optic, and the Leica brings out the best of it.For Sony shooters, I sincerely hope that Zeiss makes a version which natively designed for the Sony flange distance and cover glass, in order to get the best of this optical formula.
The derogatory effect of the PCX filter on the midfield is exactly what Bastian's infinity tests showed in the review at phillipreeve.net. However, a dip in this zone of the highest frequencies is inherent to the design independent of the sensor, as shown in the official Zeiss MTF charts. In practice, I find this dip absolutely acceptable, as I believe it is introduced to increase performance in the far corners.
Jan 28, 2018 at 10:48 AM
p.40 #8Zeiss ZM 35 1.4
andersd wrote:
For Sony shooters, I sincerely hope that Zeiss makes a version which natively designed for the Sony flange distance and cover glass, in order to get the best of this optical formula.How about the mid-field? When I used the ZM 35/1.4 + 5m on the Sony, there was a noticeable resolution dip towards the mid-field. Do you see that on the Leica? I always thought this was induced by the PCX.The derogatory effect of the PCX filter on the midfield is exactly what Bastian's infinity tests showed in the review at phillipreeve.net. However, a dip in this zone of the highest frequencies is inherent to the design independent of the sensor, as shown in the official Zeiss MTF charts. In practice, I find this dip absolutely acceptable, as I believe it is introduced to increase performance in the far corners.
Yes, that dip shown on the Zeiss MTF is perfectly acceptable imo. As you wrote it's a lens characteristic but I believe the PCX amplifies the issue. For the Sony sensor stack, I got better results at mid-area when removing the PCX and focusing on that area.
Fred Miranda wrote
andersd wrote
I was using this lens for about a year on the Sony A7rII, along with a Novoflex adapter and a Optosigma PCX 5000 filter. After much consideration I recently traded in the Sony for a Leica M-P (typ 240), and I am absolutely blown away with the image quality of the Distagon on the Leica. Infinity focus is located exactly at the hard stop, and landscapes are acceptable (to me) already at an aperture value of 1.4. At this aperture, there is only a slight sharpness falloff from the center. This level of detail required stopping down to about f/4 on the Sony with the PCX filter. Of course, the lower pixel density of 24 MP helps with the apparent resolution. However, this is still a fantastic optic, and the Leica brings out the best of it.For Sony shooters, I sincerely hope that Zeiss makes a version which natively designed for the Sony flange distance and cover glass, in order to get the best of this optical formula.
Yes, that dip shown on the Zeiss MTF is perfectly acceptable imo. As you wrote it's a lens characteristic but I believe the PCX amplifies the issue. For the Sony sensor stack, I got better results at mid-area when removing the PCX and focusing on that area.
Jan 28, 2018 at 11:01 AM
p.40 #9Zeiss ZM 35 1.4
andersd wrote:
I was using this lens for about a year on the Sony A7rII, along with a Novoflex adapter and a Optosigma PCX 5000 filter. After much consideration I recently traded in the Sony for a Leica M-P (typ 240), and I am absolutely blown away with the image quality of the Distagon on the Leica. Infinity focus is located exactly at the hard stop, and landscapes are acceptable (to me) already at an aperture value of 1.4. At this aperture, there is only a slight sharpness falloff from the center. This level of detail required stopping down to about f/4...Show more →
This matches my experience very closely. I used the ZM 35 F/1.4 with a PCX 5000 filter on an A7ii for about a year and was quite happy with the results. Then I bought a Leica SL and was amazed by how much better the images looked (without the PCX, of course.) This just confirms what everyone already knows: M lenses perform best on Leica cameras.
Jan 28, 2018 at 11:24 AM
p.40 #10Zeiss ZM 35 1.4
robgo2 wrote:
For Sony shooters, I sincerely hope that Zeiss makes a version which natively designed for the Sony flange distance and cover glass, in order to get the best of this optical formula.This matches my experience very closely. I used the ZM 35 F/1.4 with a PCX 5000 filter on an A7ii for about a year and was quite happy with the results. Then I bought a Leica SL and was amazed by how much better the images looked (without the PCX, of course.) This just confirms what everyone already knows: M lenses perform best on Leica cameras.
I have also found the lens is much better on my Leica M10 than on my Sony A7rII. I don't use it on Sony anymore and just on the Leica.
andersd wrote
I was using this lens for about a year on the Sony A7rII, along with a Novoflex adapter and a Optosigma PCX 5000 filter. After much consideration I recently traded in the Sony for a Leica M-P (typ 240), and I am absolutely blown away with the image quality of the Distagon on the Leica. Infinity focus is located exactly at the hard stop, and landscapes are acceptable (to me) already at an aperture value of 1.4. At this aperture, there is only a slight sharpness falloff from the center. This level of detail required stopping down to about f/4 on the Sony with the PCX filter. Of course, the lower pixel density of 24 MP helps with the apparent resolution. However, this is still a fantastic optic, and the Leica brings out the best of it.For Sony shooters, I sincerely hope that Zeiss makes a version which natively designed for the Sony flange distance and cover glass, in order to get the best of this optical formula.
I have also found the lens is much better on my Leica M10 than on my Sony A7rII. I don't use it on Sony anymore and just on the Leica.
Jan 28, 2018 at 12:03 PM