p.10 #1 · Zeiss 35mm f1.4 ZM or Voigtlander 35mm f1.7 Ultron for Landscape with deep DOF for A7rM and A7rII
I don't know if size is a major turn off its basically a 55mm 1.8 in size which is not big. It's a 49mm thread compared to a CV 35 1.7 which is 43mm I believe filter size. Also the field curvature on the CV 35 is quite big in real world. I think the ZM is a lot less and at least diffrent curvature more outward. They are both great lenses but I lean towards the ZM first it's faster but it has more pop wide open and more a Zeiss look. The CV just seems to have a softer draw to it. Build quality I have to give that to the ZM it's a brick in a good way. Really depends on what your looking for here. I like the CV a lot I actually bought it twice new and lost my shirt selling it used both times. I bought my ZM used for 1600 with hood no less. Outside the FE 35 which is a nice lens if you get a good copy of it. I think the ZM and CV are the best choices out their but the CV infinity is to hard stop and back off a touch at F8. I don't have to do that with the ZM. My first big bronco wall test which is about 50 feet for 35 the CV failed it bad until I went back and screwed around with the field curvature end of it than it did okay. It's a tricky lens you need to learn how to use but it has a very nice look to it as several folks here have posted some really nice imagery from it. Personally money is secondary consideration for me , I want top quality 1st and foremost than figure out if I can pull it off. Many have that reversed as money is primary which I think is a mistake. You have to get what you want first than save up for it. But hey that's me not everyone thinks like this.
The 35mm is my lens cap focal length so it's very important to me so that's a consideration folks have to look at . Is 35mm your very important focal length . For many it's a 50 so this plays a role on how much money you spend. If 35 is the be all end all lens than you have to take that as part of the buying process.
p.10 #2 · Zeiss 35mm f1.4 ZM or Voigtlander 35mm f1.7 Ultron for Landscape with deep DOF for A7rM and A7rII
naturephoto1 wrote:
I do not have the CV 35 f1.7 Ultron, but others have commented regarding the size and position, size, and feel of the focusing and aperture rings and that they were not as much to their liking as other M mount lens or were a bit awkward for operation. The Zeiss 35mm f1.4 ZM Distagon is quite straight forward for feel (focus is extremely smooth and well damped) and operation though it is relatively large as an M mount lens. However, compared to SLR/DSLR lenses it is small and relatively light. The lens balances well on my A7rM V3 camera with my RRS L bracket so it should balance well on A7 series cameras including the newer A7II and A7rII cameras.
Rich you bring up a good point here on the CV it is a little odd handling this lens . Not a big deal but it is diffrent than just a round barrel lens throughout. It's kind of a odd shape to it.
p.10 #4 · Zeiss 35mm f1.4 ZM or Voigtlander 35mm f1.7 Ultron for Landscape with deep DOF for A7rM and A7rII
That maybe true for sure. Im also not as sensitive to size and weight as some for sure. I have 3 monster Sony lenses.
But truly it maybe a hard call between the CV and ZM as really they are both very nice lenses. Its really going to come down to the look and character you are after. Having several Zeiss lenses the ZM matches them very well. The CV would take some work in a way but easily done in post.
Just for the record here is the VC 35mm 1.7 to compare the look of the lens itself
p.10 #5 · Zeiss 35mm f1.4 ZM or Voigtlander 35mm f1.7 Ultron for Landscape with deep DOF for A7rM and A7rII
Actually I don't mind carrrying bigger lenses for MILC's and DSLR's either. For rangefinders though, finder blockage must be taken into account. Especially for the wider (28-35mm) lenses.
p.10 #7 · Zeiss 35mm f1.4 ZM or Voigtlander 35mm f1.7 Ultron for Landscape with deep DOF for A7rM and A7rII
artur5 wrote:
Well, the current version of the Ultron 35 was released only last year, so it's quite unlikely that they release a new optical design anytime soon ( if ever ). Also, according to Cameraquest, this last version has an aspherical lens and "it's corrected for digital sensors and digital color shift". Whether they mean tweaked for Leica sensors or Sony or something in between, isn't clear..
I use the CV 35/1.7 Ultron VM on an A7ii, and I can tell you that vignetting and color shifting are significant on that camera. The situation might be better on an A7Rii, but I don't know for sure. My solution is to use CornerFix, which is simple to apply and produces even lighting and color across the frame. The results are outstanding. I believe that there is an Adobe Flat Field Correction plugin for Lightroom that does the same thing. I am not a LR user, so I have never investigated that option. Personally, I have not found field curvature to be much of a problem in real world use, and I think that the issue has been overrated by some. The ergonomics of the lens are indeed unique, but not hard to get used to. I love the build quality and overall feel.
The Ultron has replaced the Loxia 35 in my camera bag. Having never laid hands or eyes on the ZM 35/1.4, I cannot compare the two lenses. Perhaps the Zeiss is better is some respects, but if so, it can't be by much. The Ultron is considerably smaller and less expensive. Judging the quality of rendering is a subjective matter. Some users may prefer one, and some the other. Pick the one you like best, and pay the price.
p.10 #8 · Zeiss 35mm f1.4 ZM or Voigtlander 35mm f1.7 Ultron for Landscape with deep DOF for A7rM and A7rII
GMPhotography wrote:
As you can see the VC is kind of a odd shape. Some might find it hard to get used too compared to the ZM which is a more traditional shape to a lens
As I mentioned above, I just got the CV 35/1.7 VM. My biggest reservation was the ergonomics. Got the lens and I think I love it. The ergonomics are disappointing - the aperture ring has a great feel and the focus is smooth, but it's disappointing to think of how nice this lens could have been with a proper focus ring. I don't look forward to using it in the winter, but will cross that bridge when I come to it.
The focus ring reminds me a lot of the cheap Contax G adapter that I used to use. I upgraded to a Ulata Contax G adapter a while back and would say that I prefer the focus feel of that over the 35/1.7 VM. I won't let it get in my way, same with the Contax G lenses on adapter, but I can't imagine how they managed to get this wrong.
As an aside, why do they consider this kind of design "retro?" IMHO, their older lenses would get away with being called retro while the newer 50/1.5 and 35/1.7 VM are just weird.
p.10 #10 · Zeiss 35mm f1.4 ZM or Voigtlander 35mm f1.7 Ultron for Landscape with deep DOF for A7rM and A7rII
Congrats arduluth! I too was worried about using the focus ring in winter (on the Nokton 50/1.5 - I didn't yet have the 35mm last winter), but found that for me the knobbly ring was actually an advantage. Easier than "normal" rings to find and use with gloves on.
p.10 #11 · Zeiss 35mm f1.4 ZM or Voigtlander 35mm f1.7 Ultron for Landscape with deep DOF for A7rM and A7rII
HelenaN wrote:
Congrats arduluth! I too was worried about using the focus ring in winter (on the Nokton 50/1.5 - I didn't yet have the 35mm last winter), but found that for me the knobbly ring was actually an advantage. Easier than "normal" rings to find and use with gloves on.
Thank you! Your images are some of those that led me to that that lens, so doubly thanks! I usually wear pretty thin gloves (Outdoor Research PL-400) in all but the lowest of temperatures (and then usually wear large mits that I take on and off), but was concerned that the thin focus ring would be a problem. Good to know that it works OK with gloves!
