Hi Everyone, I feel very lucky I have discovered this forum on 35mm f1.4. There are so much information here to read on all kind zeiss 35mm f1.4 and lots of pictures too. Can someone please tell me the difference between Zeiss 35mm f1.4 in Contax ZM and Sony FE when used on Sony A7. Thank you in advance
Let me try to help, though some here are far more knowledgeable than I.
Contax was a camera division of Zeiss, there are 2 ranges of Contax lenses: Contax/Yashica, or C/Y, and G. There is no 35 f:1.4 in the G series so it is not a concern of yours.
The Contax/Yashica lenses were the predecessors to the ZE/ZF family, and now the Milvus family. Designed for SLRs, now DSLRs. The 35 f:1.4 in C/Y mount is a classic. Well known and admired for its rendering, the lens is not without weaknesses on the side. But, for the fans, the qualities outweigh the penalties.
Successor to the C/Y line, there is a 35mm f:1.4 in ZE/ZF mounts for Canon and Nikon. Different design from the C/Y sibling, it was a turning point in Zeiss design IMHO. But still not good enough apparently for Zeiss, who chose to issue another new design of 35 f:1.4 for their Milvus line (also for Canon and Nikon DSLRs) rather than "just" port the ZE/ZF design. Though, right now the ZE/ZF design may be found at far reduced prices in some parts of the world to clear inventories of the no-longer-current lens.
The Milvus 35 f:1.4 is a very recent design (released in 2017), also for Canon and Nikon DSLRs.
The ZM line of lenses fits rangefinder cameras with Leica M mount. To the best of my knowledge, there never was a Zeiss ZM 35mm f:1.4.
The Sony-Zeiss 35 f:1.4 is a lens designed and marketed by Sony for Sony cameras (FE mount). Unlike most Zeiss lenses, which need focusing manually, it is an AF lens. While Zeiss have "some input" on the design and QC, I regard them as Sony lenses rather than Zeiss.
Hope this helps.
Tana P wrote:
Hi Everyone, I feel very lucky I have discovered this forum on 35mm f1.4. There are so much information here to read on all kind zeiss 35mm f1.4 and lots of pictures too. Can someone please tell me the difference between Zeiss 35mm f1.4 in Contax ZM and Sony FE when used on Sony A7. Thank you in advance
the zm is much smaller (but not much lighter) and manual focus (though you can get AF using the TAP adapter), while the FE is big plasticky and AF.
the zm is a better landscape lens stopped down, but has outward field curvature on sony cameras that make landscape shots difficult at large apertures. the FE has weaker midzones but flat field and is a very competent landscape lens at any aperture.
the FE has smoother bokeh especially at longer subject differences. the zm has a contrastier look.
twoeye wrote:
Great overview, but I guess the Zeiss 35 1.4 Distagon ZM slipped your radar as it is much more recent than the rest of he ZM line, released in 2014
Indeed! My mistake, and thanks for correcting it. This is all the more bizarre, as I owned a copy of the lens, and reviewed it. Ah, well...
Thanks Philber for a very informative response to my question. Im on a split decision between the FE 35mm f1.4 and Contax 35mm F1.4. On the 2nd hand market in Asia, both of these lenses are about the same price. What are the pros and cons of both lenses? I have tried Sony Zeiss 16-35, fe35mm f2.8 and fe55mm f2.8 and sold all for the Contax 21, 28f2.8 and 50 f1.7 and more. Is this 35mm f1.4 similar to other Zeiss FE lenses ( creazy sharp, contrasty but poor rendering and microcontrast)...^^
Tana P wrote:
Thanks Philber for a very informative response to my question. Im on a split decision between the FE 35mm f1.4 and Contax 35mm F1.4. On the 2nd hand market in Asia, both of these lenses are about the same price. What are the pros and cons of both lenses? I have tried Sony Zeiss 16-35, fe35mm f2.8 and fe55mm f2.8 and sold all for the Contax 21, 28f2.8 and 50 f1.7 and more. Is this 35mm f1.4 similar to other Zeiss FE lenses ( creazy sharp, contrasty but poor rendering and microcontrast)...^^
poor rendering is subjective, but if you prefer the c/y 50/1.7 to FE 55/1.8 you'll almost certainly prefer the c/y 35/1.4 to the FE 35/1.4. the c/y has more microcontrast and pop. the FE has smoother bokeh towards the corners (the c/y actually has smoother bokeh in the center), especially at a distance. the c/y is also smaller but heavier on camera.
i don't have any direct comparisons of the 2 lenses, but here's the closest i could find.
philber wrote:
Let me try to help, though some here are far more knowledgeable than I.
Contax was a camera division of Zeiss, there are 2 ranges of Contax lenses: Contax/Yashica, or C/Y, and G. There is no 35 f:1.4 in the G series so it is not a concern of yours.
The Contax/Yashica lenses were the predecessors to the ZE/ZF family, and now the Milvus family. Designed for SLRs, now DSLRs. The 35 f:1.4 in C/Y mount is a classic. Well known and admired for its rendering, the lens is not without weaknesses on the side. But, for the fans, the qualities outweigh the penalties.
Successor to the C/Y line, there is a 35mm f:1.4 in ZE/ZF mounts for Canon and Nikon. Different design from the C/Y sibling, it was a turning point in Zeiss design IMHO. But still not good enough apparently for Zeiss, who chose to issue another new design of 35 f:1.4 for their Milvus line (also for Canon and Nikon DSLRs) rather than "just" port the ZE/ZF design. Though, right now the ZE/ZF design may be found at far reduced prices in some parts of the world to clear inventories of the no-longer-current lens.
The Milvus 35 f:1.4 is a very recent design (released in 2017), also for Canon and Nikon DSLRs.
The ZM line of lenses fits rangefinder cameras with Leica M mount. To the best of my knowledge, there never was a Zeiss ZM 35mm f:1.4.
The Sony-Zeiss 35 f:1.4 is a lens designed and marketed by Sony for Sony cameras (FE mount). Unlike most Zeiss lenses, which need focusing manually, it is an AF lens. While Zeiss have "some input" on the design and QC, I regard them as Sony lenses rather than Zeiss.
Hope this helps....Show more →
CY 35 has loads more personality and seems more magical to most people, though as Sebboh says, rendering, color and just about everything is "subjective."
Are you strictly interested in Zeiss 1.4 lenses? Because the CV 35 1.7, Rx1 Sonnar and Pentax 31 ltm are all terrific options, and I preferred each of these over the ZA 35.
Nice to be woken up to fredmiranda.com by this thread. This particular thread is one that originally got me interested in Contax CY lenses. I've traversed through quite a few fast 35mm lenses since then (2012 or so) but this is the one I still mount.
sebboh wrote:
poor rendering is subjective, but if you prefer the c/y 50/1.7 to FE 55/1.8 you'll almost certainly prefer the c/y 35/1.4 to the FE 35/1.4. the c/y has more microcontrast and pop. the FE has smoother bokeh towards the corners (the c/y actually has smoother bokeh in the center), especially at a distance. the c/y is also smaller but heavier on camera.
i don't have any direct comparisons of the 2 lenses, but here's the closest i could find.
Those are useful images. The corner leaves in each in the OoF transition zone shows the difference between busy and smooth quite well. Thanks for this!
