You guys motivated me to research, and I found the older thread here where Denior explains why he loves the zm 35/2 over the 2.8
He notes wavy curves, but more to my own priorities, he lauds the ZM 35/2 performance stopped down at/near infinity.
That's totally crucial to me, and a subject which I'm surprised is not more often discussed. I'm learning performance at f/16 varies more than I thought, and is sort of unpredictable. Only since I got my M9 have I realized the 28 cron is really good at f/16
For backcountry landscapes I want max dof on many shots. Light is usually not a problem.
Anyway, I think I'll take Denior's word for it, and start looking for a zm 35/2. Even if it's a bit big
You guys motivated me to research, and I found the older thread here where Denior explains why he loves the zm 35/2 over the 2.8
He notes wavy curves, but more to my own priorities, he lauds the ZM 35/2 performance stopped down at/near infinity.
That's totally crucial to me, and a subject which I'm surprised is not more often discussed. I'm learning performance at f/16 varies more than I thought, and is sort of unpredictable. Only since I got my M9 have I realized the 28 cron is really good at f/16
For backcountry landscapes I want max dof on many shots. Light is usually not a problem.
Anyway, I think I'll take Denior's word for it, and start looking for a zm 35/2. Even if it's a bit big ...Show more →
it's important to note that the infinity performance of the zm 35/2 seems to come at the cost of pretty crazy bokeh (not in a good way imho). the 35 cron is much better controlled in that aspect (though still a ways behind the rx1).
KatieInTexas wrote:
So tell me: would the pre-asph 50 lux impress me over the CV nokton 50 1.5?
the cv has a lot more bite and contrast at large aperture while the pre-asph has a healthy dose of spherical aberration. this gives the pre-asph a very special look though and i would say that i liked it better for portraits than any other lens on an aps-c NEX, i imagine i would like it even more in that capacity on FF. i didn't really care for it for anything other than portraits and occasional bokeh shots though.
KatieInTexas wrote:
So tell me: would the pre-asph 50 lux impress me over the CV nokton 50 1.5?
that depends on what you're looking for.
at 100%, no I don't think so. when you hold the print in your hand, and you see how special that lens is, maybe. not everyone does, even then. I will absolutely give my vote to 50Lux with .7 MFD over CV50/1.5.
I dont know what your budget is or why you're asking, but if you're thinking about changing, you should probably just do it as you can get a good deal. eventually you will go there but if you admit that up front you can keep yourself from being too impulsive and getting hosed.
luckily for me my entire collection is only worth half of the lens I really want so I keep those demons at bay
p.s. it's the 50f1 noctlux
p.s.2 I bet I just gave sebboh the surprise of his life
Be sure to place the photo you want to share in your Dropbox Public folder;
Then just right click the file and choose "Copy Public Link";
Paste the link on the Insert Image box (the little landscape botton) and you're done!
Adam, I think you're right. Unfortunately for me to justify spending $3K+ on a lens, I'd need to sell all my medium format film stuff including all My film and probably my darkroom stuff as well... And although I haven't been in there this year much, I am not ready to give up my tranquil alone time creating prints in the darkroom.
Also, and I'm not sure it's practical or if I even care if it's practical, but I have my eye on a '68 vette convertible that would really bring out my eyes, if you know what I mean... And it matches my Leica camera bag perfectly.
KatieInTexas wrote:
Adam, I think you're right. Unfortunately for me to justify spending $3K+ on a lens, I'd need to sell all my medium format film stuff including all My film and probably my darkroom stuff as well... And although I haven't been in there this year much, I am not ready to give up my tranquil alone time creating prints in the darkroom.
Yes that solitude is one thing I really missed after losing my darkroom. That and the process of making prints, which I really enjoyed. So I totally get why you don't want to give that up....
KatieInTexas wrote:
Also, and I'm not sure it's practical or if I even care if it's practical, but I have my eye on a '68 vette convertible that would really bring out my eyes, if you know what I mean... And it matches my Leica camera bag perfectly.
In a previous life I had a 75 Vette convertible. All #s matched and it was completely restored to original. Also had a 73 T top which we were in the process of restoring when the dreaded divorce hit...LoL...THats the same thing that took my darkroom. Small condo now and no room for one..Go for the 68. That is a very good year...
sebboh wrote:
it's important to note that the infinity performance of the zm 35/2 seems to come at the cost of pretty crazy bokeh (not in a good way imho). the 35 cron is much better controlled in that aspect (though still a ways behind the rx1).
Hi Sebboh,
TY for chiming in, as I know you love 35 and good 35s.
Funny, you are the first to point this out. more common are comments like:
"I own a 35mm Summicron (circa 1978), 35mm ASPH Summicron and the 35mm F2 Biogon. The Biogon has become my favorite 35mm lens, simply for its contrast and how it renders out of focus objects, in plain English, bokeh."
John Kwok at photo.net
you are telling me the 35/2 bokeh is as bad as the 45 contax G? or our lovely 42mm Pen F lenses?
I have not noticed that yet, but you have good eyes, so I look more
The smaller C biogon seems to be the superior "people" lens, and at 2.8 and f/4. folks rave about it. As you know, I like the smaller lenses, so I was really going that way, or 35 cron asph, which has a lot of fans also, until I read denoir:
The 35 biogon isn't soft wide open. It just has some "Leica glow" due to some under corrected spherical aberrations. The bokeh can be a bit funky wide open, but only at certain distances. When you own the lens for a while, you will instinctively know when and stop down a bit. It's not good at all on the A7 for landscapes, but produces nice very high resolution results at closer distances.
TY for chiming in, as I know you love 35 and good 35s.
Funny, you are the first to point this out. more common are comments like:
"I own a 35mm Summicron (circa 1978), 35mm ASPH Summicron and the 35mm F2 Biogon. The Biogon has become my favorite 35mm lens, simply for its contrast and how it renders out of focus objects, in plain English, bokeh."
John Kwok at photo.net
you are telling me the 35/2 bokeh is as bad as the 45 contax G? or our lovely 42mm Pen F lenses?
I have not noticed that yet, but you have good eyes, so I look more ...Show more →
you should note that luka says: "When travelling I usually bring along two 35mm lenses - the 35/2 Biogon for stopped down landscape photography and the 35 Lux ASPH for all the rest."
hopefully luka won't mind me posting his worst case scenerio with the zm 35/2:
everybody's entitled to there own opinion and rangefinder users tend to have different opinions regarding bokeh than slr and mirrorless users because many of them shoot mostly b&w and they never shoot up close. also, many like to continue calling the cron version IV the king of bokeh.
the zm 35/2 has better bokeh than the pen f 42/1.2 and noticeably worse bokeh than the g45 (which i still think has mediocre bokeh).
it'll be a great lens for landscape and bokeh at a long distance is ok, so i think you'll probably like it. for portraits it makes me cringe.
redisburning wrote:
luckily for me my entire collection is only worth half of the lens I really want so I keep those demons at bay
p.s. it's the 50f1 noctlux
p.s.2 I bet I just gave sebboh the surprise of his life
i just can't reconcile this with you're preferences for the lenses you have owned.
Allen - very cool!
Joakim - interesting!
Enjoyed your last couple sets Charlie!
At least it's not like the CV35/1.2... which I think is one of the better all-around 35s I've tried.
The ZM35/2.8 was one of my first lenses with the M9... I think it's decent, but in my recent RF shootout on the a7R compared against the M9, I didn't think it was all that hot for technical performance (on the M9) in the outer zone of near infinity scenes until it was well stopped down. While the ZM35/2 seems to have some SA, or some kind of slight haziness wide open (as Edward mentioned), by around f/4-5.6 it's really good (at near infinity). The 35/2.8 does seem to have nice bokeh at nearer distances wide open..., which reminds me that the 35 Summarit is complemented for the same thing. And is a lens I'd like to try. Would also be interesting to compare it against the Cron ASPH.
I have very little experience with the 35 Cron ASPH, therefore can't really comment on it. One of the subconscious problems I think I have with it, is spending ~$3K for a 'normal' lens that doesn't really push any limits... Not all that wide, not all that fast... I have the same feelings about the 50 Cron non-AA. 28 Cron was worth it to me because it's pretty slim pickings for high performing 28mm RF lenses at wider apertures... 50 Lux ASPH for the speed and across frame performance wide open... or so I tell myself.
With the ZM lenses you're going to get some of that Zeiss rendering. Not a bad thing at all. It's just somewhat bolder/harder than Leica or CV.
quote]sebboh wrote:
you should note that luka says: "When travelling I usually bring along two 35mm lenses - the 35/2 Biogon for stopped down landscape photography and the 35 Lux ASPH for all the rest."...Show more →
I remember that! Funny thing is that's exactly how I feel about 21mm... It's the focal length for which I often carry two lenses, the SEM and Lux.
I'd like to see Leica address some of the moderate speed lenses with mid zone dips. But if the 50 Cron AA is an example of how they're going to do it, I doubt I'll be able to afford it...
KatieInTexas wrote:
So tell me: would the pre-asph 50 lux impress me over the CV nokton 50 1.5?
I believe Gary might still have this lens, but not sure if he remembers much about the CV.
The pre-ASPH is another lens which I had too brief of an opportunity to try. I think Derek is pretty spot on, as portraiture is what I imagined to be a good application. My understanding is it needs some stopping down for good across frame sharpness for whenever you need that. I think the CV is somewhat similar, with a central sweet spot at wider apertures. Where there is likely some difference is bokeh... the pre-ASPH is a bit more lively than the ASPH and the CV might sit between the two. Also, the CV has a tendency to purple fringe in high contrast scenes at wider apertures... not sure about the Leica, but would be surprised if it did, at least to the same extent. My impression is also the pre-ASPH will be a bit richer, at least in similar front-lit scenes, though my copy of the CV is the older version which apparently has less effective coatings than the new one (but same optics).
I think the CV might even be slightly sharper than the ASPH centrally and wide open... at least at nearer distances where I see a bit of glow with the ASPH.
The ASPH is also not as simple a lens to shoot with as one might expect, in part due to its mid zone sharpness dip at moderate apertures. It's great wide open, or well stopped down... but I have a difficult time getting focus in the right place, or even decent sharpness, with subjects placed in the rule of thirds areas and at around f/2.8... an application where a 'perfect' lens like the 50AA or Otus would likely be much better, but also $$$$.
Still milking the ice storm... but this is the last of it. I should get out and shoot some spring scenes, as it's finally turning green here too, and also very quickly.
Edward, you mentioned the last set I posted had less sparkle... It's probably because the sun had set, or was very close to it...
In my second week at Fort Leonard Wood, Missouri for training, and took a walk this evening around the nearby town of Waynesville.
Leica M9 with 50mm f/2 Summicron (v5) and 3 stop ND filter. All shots at ISO 160 and most of them wide-open. As always, I try to get it right in the camera as I despise working at the computer, so minimal post.
The M9 is very new to me, bought it right here on the FM forum right before I left. This is my third outing with the camera.
