Desmolicious Online Upload & Sell: Off
|
rscheffler wrote:
https://i.postimg.cc/RCT36gVX/Screen-Shot-2022-12-01-at-01-35-36.jpg
https://i.postimg.cc/sxK1kg0t/Screen-Shot-2022-12-01-at-01-35-46.jpg
https://i.postimg.cc/fTTVxYVZ/Screen-Shot-2022-12-01-at-01-36-51.jpg
I can live with the humorous English. I can't quite understand why they made the lens so wide in diameter. Look at the front and most of it is lens body relative to the small size of the optical elements. Plus it's 58mm long, which again for a 35/2 rangefinder lens is too long. And the large diameter just exacerbates whatever viewfinder blockage there is. Exceptions can potentially be made for high optical quality, such as the VM35 APO or ZM35/1.4, but even those are pushing it.
I read Bastian's review and have to say I agree that its rendering is pretty decent for 35mm... now it's got me thinking about it.
I have the older version 7A 35/2 that's based on the Sonnar design (apparently). Never really bonded with it in part due to poor veiling flare resistance that would suck the life out of the image. Some lenses can flare in a charming way, even veiling flare. But it doesn't, IMO. This new one has some pretty funky flare, which maybe could be used to effect in some instances. But I agree, why is it so difficult for these new lens companies to design even just normal flare resistance?...Show more →
The MrLeica review, to me, is more relevant. I really like the results but he does point out some really weird design flaws. The unnecessarily large body - perhaps big lenses seem more impressive? - results the lens in fouling the lens release button on a few Leica M bodies.
Such a bizarre oversight. You would think they would test an M mount lens on a variety of M mount bodies that they just keep to make sure the most basic stuff is ok.
Some of the flare patterns IMO are super! I have a bunch of 35s that already handle flare well, so this would be used for effect. Plus it ships with a hood if needed.
Only $250 on sale....
|