Sony A7R with CV 35F2 APO - one of the sharpest 35mm lens ever used comparable to Tamron SP 35mm F1.4 Nikon that I used.
ZM 35mm F1.4 - more classic, while CV 35mm F2 APO - modern style
This one above, what was your focus point and aperture please? The 35/2 and 50/2 both deliver perceptual high DOF from what I've seen, the images tend to look deep.
'similar corner performance are the Sony 35/1.4 GM and Leica SL 35/2 APO.'
The one for you maybe is the new APO-Summicron-M 35mm f2 ASPH ;-) I don't feel I've missed too much without the f2 Leica lenses, SLs are too heavy for my carry, M lenses are not too different from the CVs, but this one looks special. 90 degrees of focus ring turn to 0.7m, the rest of 200 degrees (!) for 0.3m.
junglialoh wrote:
Sony A7R with CV 35F2 APO - one of the sharpest 35mm lens ever used comparable to Tamron SP 35mm F1.4 Nikon that I used.
ZM 35mm F1.4 - more classic, while CV 35mm F2 APO - modern style
How much sharpening did you add? Looks cranked way up.
nehemiahphoto wrote:
Why do you prefer the ZM over the CV (if aside from f1.4 vs f2).
I mostly shoot the ZM wide open or stopped down just slightly. It's very sharp wide open with smooth bokeh. I love the colors, the microcontrast, and the rendering overall. The PCM helps a lot in the extreme periphery. Although there is a mid-field dip on my Sonys up to about f/8 (at which you don't need the PCM), I never notice it in shots.
The CV is weird because there is nothing wrong with it, but it does not wow me. My copy is well centered and very sharp. It takes competent shots, but I don't notice the colors, details, or other attributes that get me excited. In comparison, the CV 65 wows me virtually every time I shoot it. I really want to love the CV 35, but I don't.
It's highly subjective. I find myself gravitate toward a lens and I cannot fully articulate why.
BTW, the images in the immediate post above (from Malabito) captures the look of the 35 ZM. That is precisely how my lens renders on my Sonys. Those are the types of shots I would use it for, too.
scrappydog wrote:
I mostly shoot the ZM wide open or stopped down just slightly. It's very sharp wide open with smooth bokeh. I love the colors, the microcontrast, and the rendering overall. The PCM helps a lot in the extreme periphery. Although there is a mid-field dip on my Sonys up to about f/8 (at which you don't need the PCM), I never notice it in shots.
The CV is weird because there is nothing wrong with it, but it does not wow me. My copy is well centered and very sharp. It takes competent shots, but I don't notice the colors, details, or other attributes that get me excited. In comparison, the CV 65 wows me virtually every time I shoot it. I really want to love the CV 35, but I don't.
It's highly subjective. I find myself gravitate toward a lens and I cannot fully articulate why.
BTW, the images in the immediate post above (from Malabito) captures the look of the 35 ZM. That is precisely how my lens renders on my Sonys. Those are the types of shots I would use it for, too. ...Show more →
Thanks fo the input. I used the ZM 35/1.4 extensively for about 2 years. I liked it very much for the most part, and still miss it at times. I think I will try a GM 35/1.4 now though. I haven't yet shot the 35 APO, but have been watching it. Always curious to hear people's thoughts, beyond the standard testing (which is helpful as well).
At close distance the high amount of blur will make things smooth but once we start seeing the focus transition zone in the background with a subject focused at mid or long distance, things get a bit nervous to my taste.
I consider the Zeiss 35/1.4 ZM an amazing lens in terms of resolution, contrast and color rendering but I dislike the way it draws other than at close distance.
Here are a few samples from the Zeiss 35mm f/1.4 ZM wide open at mid-distance showing a rather harsh bokeh. (Leica M240)
scrappydog wrote:
BTW, the images in the immediate post above (from Malabito) captures the look of the 35 ZM. That is precisely how my lens renders on my Sonys. Those are the types of shots I would use it for, too.
I'd like to see the processing settings before drawing a conclusion about the ZM's character from Malabito's images (which do look great).
Some aspects of lens character is independent of post processing, such as the form/shape of OOF highlights. But other aspects are altered by tuning images according to personal taste. I have nothing against that other than if we're to judge rendering/character, I would like to know how much post production was a factor in achieving a certain look.
nehemiahphoto wrote:
Thanks fo the input. I used the ZM 35/1.4 extensively for about 2 years. I liked it very much for the most part, and still miss it at times. I think I will try a GM 35/1.4 now though. I haven't yet shot the 35 APO, but have been watching it. Always curious to hear people's thoughts, beyond the standard testing (which is helpful as well).
I really want to try the 35GM to see how it renders. I am impressed by the smooth bokeh of the 24GM.
Fred Miranda wrote:
At close distance the high amount of blur will make things smooth but once we start seeing the focus transition zone in the background with a subject focused at mid or long distance, things get a bit nervous to my taste.
I consider the Zeiss 35/1.4 ZM an amazing lens in terms of resolution, contrast and color rendering but I dislike the way it draws other than at close distance.
Here are a few samples from the Zeiss 35mm f/1.4 ZM wide open at mid-distance showing a rather harsh bokeh. (Leica M240)
I can see your concern here. I guess it depends on how you shoot the lens. I usually use it in urban/city settings, so I haven't experienced the nervous bokeh, but it's clearly evident in your shots.
Another matter to keep in mind is that lens styles have moved on since the 2014 release of the ZM 35/1.4, even though it was the last of the ZMs, from memory. The wide open MTF show a long-established Zeiss pattern of keeping the resolution of medium-fine structures artificially low, by modern standards.
The ZM lens's sharpness jumps massively by f4. The f1.4 effect is very apparent in the hair and clothing fabrics of all wide open images on this page (where macro-contrast is not very high). Bokeh is a matter of taste. It's fair to say it also departs from modern practice, as a love-hate issue. The ZM 35/1.4 strikes me as a film era lens, with boldness a big feature (lots of blocked shadows/highlights). It looks like a less rebellious C-Sonnar, if I may say so.
Fred Miranda wrote:
At close distance the high amount of blur will make things smooth but once we start seeing the focus transition zone in the background with a subject focused at mid or long distance, things get a bit nervous to my taste.
I consider the Zeiss 35/1.4 ZM an amazing lens in terms of resolution, contrast and color rendering but I dislike the way it draws other than at close distance.
Here are a few samples from the Zeiss 35mm f/1.4 ZM wide open at mid-distance showing a rather harsh bokeh. (Leica M240)
Indeed, ZM 1.4/35 micro contrast can bring the best and the worst in specific situations. As much as I love this lens' pop, separation, sharpness across the frame at f/5.6-7.1 for landscapes, I learned to avoid busy backgrounds at mid distance. It looks rather awful, but like with any lens, avoid bad spots and use it for its virtues.
Not often mentioned or discussed is the need for consistency of highly acceptable results in our lenses' images. The potential for 'misfires' looms larger for some photographers than others. Those 'special somethings' may come at quite a high cost, if you only get 1/25 rather than 1/5 you are happy with.
Forgiveness of poor light, composition or shotmaking conditions might be high in the list of desirable traits. In my experience, lenses vary widely in this pattern of capricious behaviour and trustworthiness, reliability.
philip_pj wrote:
Not often mentioned or discussed is the need for consistency of highly acceptable results in our lenses' images. The potential for 'misfires' looms larger for some photographers than others. Those 'special somethings' may come at quite a high cost, if you only get 1/25 rather than 1/5 you are happy with.
Forgiveness of poor light, composition or shotmaking conditions might be high in the list of desirable traits. In my experience, lenses vary widely in this pattern of capricious behaviour and trustworthiness, reliability.
I think people long enough in the game would prefer a lens with a bit of bite, some character as to how it’s best used. A subtle learning curve that doesn’t make the lens unenjoyable to use but rather gets you closer to synergy as you start shooting more with it.
Used with Panasonic S1R
Milliken Park in January 24, 2021
ZM 35/1.4 is one of the finest lens ever used and
display distinctive contrast and color rendition
