Re: Zeiss 35mm f1.4 ZM or Voigtlander 35mm f1.7 Ultron for La...
Rich, they are both very good lenses, but the ZM35/1.4 is designed to go head to head with the $4500 Leica FLE, and by most reports it\'s a tossup. That is some seriously tall cotton.
The only weakness of the ZM35 I saw on a thin stack is that bright lights take different shapes across the frame wide open. It\'s not the same lens on the stock sonys, but usable for some, because naturally the centers are great. Most Sony shooters seem to prefer the FE 35/1.4, which is telling.
Phillip: check me here, did I hear you sent the CV 35/1.7 back because of some decentering? Both are Cosina lenses but the CV do have a reputation for copy variation, at least with some lenses.
For me the only reason to prefer the Ultron over the Distagon, I think, is money. In this case, I think you get what you pay for
The talk about wide open rendering is interesting but personal. What I\'ve seen from Edward and others, the Distagon is fine WO. More than fine, excepting the bokeh, but few 35s do that very well. Maybe the Sony/Zeiss does, the Rx1, but most of the great M 35s can be harsh in certain situations (please tell me the exceptions).
Also for you I think the speed is a real plus, like having an extra lens. Your priority may be the landscapes, but the A7r is not fantastic with high ISO, and F/1.4 with the 35 FL DOF would be socially useful.
A true all around great lens.
PS Tariq has a great post up there. SteveDK sounds like he has had a very close look and the green fringing at f/8 is surprising to me. I saw wonderful long landscapes by Edward, with no hint of this, but I did not peep.
So maybe it\'s not so simple after all
Nov 09, 2015 at 06:15 PM
Previous versions of uhoh7's message #13281759 « Zeiss 35mm f1.4 ZM or Voigtlander 35mm f1.7 Ultron for Landscape with deep DOF for A7rM and A7rII »
