The ergo does not bother me. In fact, although the tabs are great, Tabs work horribly with stiff lenses. The ZF knurl / tab give the option of having something to push against while maintaining an actual focus ring as well.
My version has a buttery smooth ring. Not stiff at all. Even in cold climate. I was snowmobiling the other day in 14 degree weather and the lens had no side affects due to the cold climate.
Have you thought about having zeiss service it for you ?
Jorge Torralba wrote:
The ergo does not bother me. In fact, although the tabs are great, Tabs work horribly with stiff lenses. The ZF knurl / tab give the option of having something to push against while maintaining an actual focus ring as well.
My version has a buttery smooth ring. Not stiff at all. Even in cold climate. I was snowmobiling the other day in 14 degree weather and the lens had no side affects due to the cold climate.
Have you thought about having zeiss service it for you ?
I have owned four copies, all in good condition, and the resistance is the same on all of them. All of them have been smooth—no issues there. Just too hard to turn IMO. I think it’s a relatively common complaint about the lens:
Obviously, ergo are generally a preferential thing. But I’ve never heard anybody say it is too light with resistance, but many people say it is too heavy.
Still a great lens and I can see why people still favor it.
The one I use the most is the CV 35 1.4II.
Perfect combo of size/speed/image quality.
Ultimate optical quality is a trade off between the Zeiss' goofy size vs the Leica FLE's inability to handle flare - which could be considered an issue seeing they charge $4k for it:
Then again, if you like this kind of flare, the Leica FLE is your lens! Both images shot with an M6 and the FLE.
Kinda reminds me of the Otus size differential ... "glass rules", and when you use more glass, you can achieve more performance potential.
Always a quid pro quo on where to land things. Some folks want a dump truck that can haul 10 tons of dirt. Other folks want a hatchback that fits in the parking space, when hauling a loaf of bread.
If you look at the ZM vs. Lux vs. VM (f/1.4 lenses) ... you can clearly see the Papa Bear / Momma Bear / Baby Bear relationship of those three. Goldilocks has some options.
Don’t get me wrong, I’m not saying the CV is better optically than the ZM. I’m just saying it’s a super lens and it’s size/speed/optics/price combo is killer.
I have both and the only thing I like about the ZM are the optics. I don’t like the size, nor the focus ring that feels like Zeiss used molasses as a lubricant.
Leica M cameras are meant to be used with compact lenses, that is part of the whole design philosophy. I think the ZM is far better suited to mirrorless cameras.
And don’t forget, my images are shot on film. On digital there is more resolution so images can appear sharper if correctly focused! I’ll add some ZM pics in a little while
Agree. I have the 50 apo lanthar which i just love to death. Those optics are hard to beat even by the best leica and zeiss otus and it is slightly longer than the Leica. Once again, the size / res trade off is worth it for me. But that's just me. The only drawback for me is the f2 limit. I like shooting wide open for that subject separation. This has lead me to shoot with the 1.2 nokton more than the lanthar. Now, that's a bigger lens but boy, what a charm
Jorge Torralba wrote:
Agree. I have the 50 apo lanthar which i just love to death. Those optics are hard to beat even by the best leica and zeiss otus .......only drawback for me is the f2 limit. I like shooting wide open for that subject separation...
Woa ..... There are limits that are even too much for me. The 55 1.4 Otus is insanely big and HEAVY. Nikon makes a 50 that is even bigger. In fact, I have the 50 Otus for the Z which I am trying to sell. And that is substantially smaller than the original 55.
Here it is side by side with the nokton 1.0 and apo lanthar
Jorge Torralba wrote:
Woa ..... There are limits that are even too much for me. The 55 1.4 Otus is insanely big and HEAVY. Nikon makes a 50 that is even bigger. In fact, I have the 50 Otus for the Z which I am trying to sell. And that is substantially smaller than the original 55.
Here it is side by side with the nokton 1.0 and apo lanthar
yes indeed its heavy...but not as heavy as my 28 Otus :0
I dont mind extra wt on trails (ie flat ones only)...calories go down faster
On a slightly different tangent...I have V35 Apo-Lanthar and Milvus 35 1.4 ZE(big as well)...do I need Zeiss 35 1.4 ZM? (good deals can be found) ...the itch is there, but brain says don't do it
Lovely photos. Do you have a photo of the lens mounted on your SL2-S? It looks way too big to me on an M camera, but I suspect it would balance just fine on a mirrorless like yours.
