I already own the C/Y Zeiss 35-70/3.4, wonderful. Just got the Leica R 35-70/4 but am returning it as it is defective. Was not able to try it out even, eBay seller says they never said it would focus past 30 feet, only that it works properly. Save me some money perhaps. Tell me the Zeiss is all I need. I am a Leica fan but also a Zeiss fan.
I like the look and feel of the leica lens over the Zeiss but when i compared the two, the zeiss was much better. I wanted to like the Leica more... as it was a better looking lens and felt a bit better when shooting with it. However the overall sharpness including the corners on a full frame sensor went to Zeiss. I also thought the macro was better on the zeiss. I sold my leica and never looked back. Now one issue is that it could have been my adapter... Should have possibly looked into that more but -- this was in the earlier days where there was only one or two places to get the adapters
There are so many great alternative mid-range zooms. Among them, I've used C/Y 35-70/3.4, Leica 35-70/4, OM 35-80/2.8, and N24-85. I still have all of them except the Leica, which I sold long ago. Briefly, my favourite is the C/Y.
The zeiss 35-70 is special in that all focal lenghts are on a performance level of primes and also very compact. It is not very userfriendly though and I also would recommend to rather pair it up with an AF lens, like the N or the 2.8/24-70.
Andi speaks the truth. The 35-70 is a special zoom. Very nice macro mode as well.
It is not the easiest zoom to use, since the push-pull mechanism makes it difficult to not
mess up focus when changing focal length even a small amount. Also, focus is not so
easy in lower light, because of the relatively small max aperture. An AF zoom with
auto aperture will be quicker and easier to use when under rapid shooting conditions.
However, if you have time to set up your composition and want superior edge to edge
sharpness over all focal lengths, this zoom is hard to beat when stopped down to f/8.
Very nice glass, with good color performance and just the right amount of contrast
retained in the images.
OK, you convinced me. Seller is taking the Leica 35-70 back and I will not get another. But, that leaves me with only 3 Leica lenses. Need to do some research on what else I could get.
I agree with all of this but would want to add while as good as many of the best primes-- the statement is valid realizing that the best primes are much faster. IN addition, I think the 35-70 wide open at 35mm and 70mm wide open would not be as good as the lets say the canon 35mm L at f3.5 or 4. So in my mind the caveat is that this is true at apertures 5.6 or 8 and perhaps 11 Andi Dietrich wrote:
The zeiss 35-70 is special in that all focal lenghts are on a performance level of primes and also very compact. It is not very userfriendly though and I also would recommend to rather pair it up with an AF lens, like the N or the 2.8/24-70.
mark1958 wrote:
I agree with all of this but would want to add while as good as many of the best primes-- the statement is valid realizing that the best primes are much faster. IN addition, I think the 35-70 wide open at 35mm and 70mm wide open would not be as good as the lets say the canon 35mm L at f3.5 or 4. So in my mind the caveat is that this is true at apertures 5.6 or 8 and perhaps 11
Agreed! Good point, Mark. If you need great performance at f/3.5, a prime will still be preferable.
mark1958 wrote:
I agree with all of this but would want to add while as good as many of the best primes-- the statement is valid realizing that the best primes are much faster. IN addition, I think the 35-70 wide open at 35mm and 70mm wide open would not be as good as the lets say the canon 35mm L at f3.5 or 4. So in my mind the caveat is that this is true at apertures 5.6 or 8 and perhaps 11
you are right, it's not the fastest lens, but then even the Z 1.4/50 needs f 5.6 to fully resolve the corners
