I believe the ZM 35/1.4 was one of the lenses the late Dr Hubert Nasse of Zeiss called out as an excellent performing lens along with the Zeiss 15, 21, 100/2 and 135/2 in an interview back in 2014 with Matt Granger.
I think many users are still skeptical adding the PCX front lens and having to modify the lens by removing one or two shims from it.
If Zeiss could somehow tweak and port this lens to the E-mount, I think it would be an instant success.
Both offer great performance, can be really good tool for pretty much everything however both lack pretty or smooth rendering. They can definitely produce beautiful images with nice enough bokeh under certain condition, but most of cases seems too neutral that hard to put word together to describe them. But both do have flaw, 90APO sharpness at close distance is not good, overall contrast is also not as good as latest offer such as 85loxia. ZM35 has CA problem.
I know many people love it and still do. I’d say this is very personal maybe even biased view.
Fred Miranda wrote:
Not long ago, the ZM 35/1.4 + 5m PCX was a favorite here at FM. Somehow this changed and I still don't know for sure what caused the exodus.
For me, I have a Kolari V3 thin sensor modified A7r that I use with my 35mm f1.4 ZM Distagon lens which is normally used for landscape. But, it does require the usage of Corner Fix to remove the purple color issues and vignetting for the edges and corners. I could also use the lens with my stock A7rIII and live with stopping the lens down more.
As an option, when I want a tiny very light lens, I still have my Minolta CLE MC 40mm f2 Rokkor-M that does not require any usage of Corner Fix and color change and it performs a little better on the Kolari V3 thin sensor modified A7r than my stock A7r or my A7rIII. But, it is not as good a lens as the Zeiss 35mm ZM.
Check this thread. member Luvwine had both at the same time. I never used 85mm Loxia but I wouldn't expect anything less stellar from that lens though I need really use it to form an opinion. I have 90AA and have no plan to replace it with others.
Fred Miranda wrote:
Not long ago, the ZM 35/1.4 + 5m PCX was a favorite here at FM. Somehow this changed and I still don't know for sure what caused the exodus.
I got the NKIR thin sensor mod instead. It was worth it just for this lens alone. I'm not even sure where my PCX filter even is anymore...probably in a drawer.
Fred Miranda wrote:
I think many users are still skeptical adding the PCX front lens and having to modify the lens by removing one or two shims from it.
If Zeiss could somehow tweak and port this lens to the E-mount, I think it would be an instant success.
I think the cv 35 1.7 and even the ZM 50 1.5 would do very well as well.
The CV 35/1.7 also needs a 5m PCX front lens to tame the insane field curvature induced by the Sony sensor stack and there is no easy way to adjust it for infinity. (no shims)
So, one has to get lucky and find a shorter adapter for the lens to reach infinity with the PCX. I agree, it's a great lens but extreme corners never really get excellent.
The CV 35/1.7 also needs a 5m PCX front lens to tame the insane field curvature induced by the Sony sensor stack and there is no easy way to adjust it for infinity. (no shims)
So, one has to get lucky and find a shorter adapter for the lens to reach infinity with the PCX. I agree, it's a great lens but extreme corners never really get excellent.
Until you print it big! My father had a zoom lens and print he kept in the studio and every time anyone would bring up using zooms for *anything* he would bring it and the print out. Ranting about how he could never enter this shot into whatever competition he was planning because the corners were so bad. I admit his opinion was rather extreme and this was the 80's and zooms are better now than they were then for sure
Fred Miranda wrote:
Not long ago, the ZM 35/1.4 + 5m PCX was a favorite here at FM. Somehow this changed and I still don't know for sure what caused the exodus.
Well, looked really long at the lens to tell the truth, considering both the rendering and the reduced size vs other 35/1.4 options around (apart being really a looker, especially in silver finish.. ).
But then:
- price: really sky high, cannot justify it
- fuss: I do not like the idea to having to fumble with PCX filters
lead me to settle for a C/Y 35 F1.4, which is quite bulkier but a lot cheaper and has a lovely rendering wide open nonetheless (and seems to go along pretty well with Sony sensor being a reflex lens).
The CV 35/1.7 also needs a 5m PCX front lens to tame the insane field curvature induced by the Sony sensor stack and there is no easy way to adjust it for infinity. (no shims)
So, one has to get lucky and find a shorter adapter for the lens to reach infinity with the PCX. I agree, it's a great lens but extreme corners never really get excellent.
I really loved my zm 50 1.5. I sold it to make way for my cv 40 1.2 after having it a couple years. I found it quite hard to focus using shimmering, but for portraits it was terrific. And yes, I used my naked cv 35 1.7 just tonight. Yeah, corners are never so superb, and they are quite dark. But I still like the lens. For my style of shooting the size works well.
Aside from the shimming and PCX on the ZM 35 1.4, I find it hard to focus--very thin focus zone when shooting WO, and brutal lens if missed it's so sharp with quick fall off. If shooting landscapes or something, no biggie. But between the size and difficulty focusing, I usually use my other lenses. And it's close to the cv 40 1.2, which is cheaper, smaller, faster, close if FL and lower maintenance. Maybe that's why FM'ers have gravitated away. Or, maybe just GAS. That ZM sure is contrasty and zeiss-y right from wide open though, my goodness.
nehemiahphoto wrote:
I really loved my zm 50 1.5. I sold it to make way for my cv 40 1.2 after having it a couple years. I found it quite hard to focus using shimmering, but for portraits it was terrific. And yes, I used my naked cv 35 1.7 just tonight. Yeah, corners are never so superb, and they are quite dark. But I still like the lens. For my style of shooting the size works well.
Aside from the shimming and PCX on the ZM 35 1.4, I find it hard to focus--very thin focus zone when shooting WO, and brutal lens if missed it's so sharp with quick fall off. If shooting landscapes or something, no biggie. But between the size and difficulty focusing, I usually use my other lenses. And it's close to the cv 40 1.2, which is cheaper, smaller, faster, close if FL and lower maintenance. Maybe that's why FM'ers have gravitated away. Or, maybe just GAS. That ZM sure is contrasty and zeiss-y right from wide open though, my goodness. ...Show more →
Putting aside the technicals for a minute, beautiful ZM 35 1.4 landscape shot. Very interesting composition and really like the many brown tones against the blue 👍
tr0n wrote:
Just an FYI, I'll be putting my zm 35 up for sale on the forums this weekend, going back to all native 3 prime set.
Hi tr0n, did you remove any of the shims on your 35/1.4/ZM to adjust for infinity for use with the PCX front lens? If so which A7x did you adapt the the lens to and how did it perform with the Shim(s) removed? Did you notice any other side effects to removing the shims?
I didn't remove anything and thought the lens preformed beautiful as long as you don't have important detail in the corners, or I would just crop in a bit. I never saw the value added in the whole pcx business and I still use an a7rii
LBJ2 wrote:
Hi tr0n, did you remove any of the shims on your 35/1.4/ZM to adjust for infinity for use with the PCX front lens? If so which A7x did you adapt the the lens to and how did it perform with the Shim(s) removed? Did you notice any other side effects to removing the shims?
).
