naturephoto1
Offline
Upload & Sell: Off
|
 Zeiss 35mm f1.4 ZM or Voigtlander 35mm f1.7 Ultron for Landscape with deep DOF for A7rM and A7rII | |
rscheffler wrote:
Steve Spencer wrote:
Rich,
Have you considered a Leica M 35 Summarit? It would be small and light and you it should produce colours very similar to your other Leica lenses. It also has an MTF very much like your Leica R 28 f/2.8 v. II, so very good performance stopped down to f/5.6 or narrower. It should be a very good option on a modified camera.
naturephoto1 wrote:
Hi Steve,
After reading some of the additional threads, I looked up the 35mm f2.5 Summarit on ebay. I would have to check more sources as well as find a good price. But, it is probably a good mate with my 90mm Summarit, is quite small, and may do the trick.
FWIW, Leicashop has the 35/2.5 Summarit on clearance with a USD pre-VAT price of about $1250 (probably will ship slightly higher depending on how your credit card handles foreign exchange rates). This compares to $1715 currently at B&H. But it\'s still nearly double the Ultron and I\'m not sure it will be technically superior. I really have no qualms with the Ultron\'s mid zone capability, especially at wider apertures, which I would be more concerned about with the Summarit. Compared to all three ZMs, the Summarit definitely has a lot more mid zone dip (based on MTF comparison), particularly wide open. Anyhow, it\'s a lens I\'ve been curious about as well, and unfortunately have no hands-on experience with it on either M or Sony...
Guy, the Tamron is definitely an intriguing lens. As is their 45/1.8. But I have yet to see a review of either where I was blown away. Really difficult to put a finger on what I didn\'t like about it in addition to some of the wide open aberrations, but it just seemed to feel unsettled in the outer zones at wider apertures. It\'s promising to hear that it potentially holds up well stopped down a touch because I want to really like it for possible use on my Canon system (though the 35/2 IS is no slouch here, at a very similar price point). I think my perception of it has been colored by the few reviews I\'ve seen.
Regarding the three ZMs... I recall Luka\'s (denoir) preference at the time when only the f/2 and f/2.8 were available was the f/2 for the reasons Edward pointed out. IIRC he also generally preferred shooting at around f/5.6 when he didn\'t need depth of field, to minimize diffraction onset effects and preserve micro contrast. But he didn\'t like its busy near distance background rendering in specific situations. My guess is given the choice of the current three, he would get the Distagon and probably sell his 35 Lux ASPH. One of the lenses I started with on the M9 was the 35/2.8 and I shot it a lot stopped down around f/8 or f/11. I really had no qualms with it, other than being a bit slow on the ISO limited M9 for lower light use.
Re RX1\'s 35 Sonnar: I don\'t believe it\'s technically considerably better, if at all, than many other good 35s once stopped down for landscape applications. In fact, it does have a slight mid zone dip that might become more apparent with 42MP. Granted, this is pixel peeping, but I definitely noticed it when I tested the RX1. That said, its ultimate strength, IMO, is its rendering qualities at near and mid distances, particularly with relatively low background separation, which I believe is unique among ~35mm lenses. IMO it\'s biggest weakness is being attached to a Sony designed camera.
Hi Ron,
Lots of options at this point and unfortunately we do not have the data that I would like to make my decision any easier. The advantage of either the Leica M 35mm f2.5 or 2.4 Summarit lenses are their size and weight and the fact that all of my other lenses from 16mm to 280mm (plus extenders) are either Leica M or Leica R lenses (with the exception of my Minolta CLE MC 40mm f2 M-Rokkor which is basically a Leica lens). I can purchase the M Summarit f2.5 either new as you have mentioned or used for even less money. The lens uses 39mm filters and the big issue is to get the expensive hood. Then there is the new 35mm f2.4 which uses 46mm filters and it includes the hood. I would only get the new version used due to the cost at this point. Both are tiny with the a length of only 34mm. The f2.5 version weighs in at 7.8 oz (220g) and the newer f2.4 version weighs in at only 6.9 oz (197g) which is close to half the weight of the Zeiss 35mm f1.4 ZM which weighs 13.4 oz (381g). We know that on a stock A7r that these lenses do not do well. But we do not know their performance on either a modded A7r or on a stock A7rII. There was one person in one of the threads that indicated that he was using one of these 35mm Summarit lenses on a stock A7rII.
Then we have both the Zeiss 35mm f2.8 C and the Zeiss 35mm f2 ZM lenses and again, most of the information that we have for these lenses are on Leica M cameras with little or no information about them on either the modded A7r or the stock A7rII.
Next we have the new Voigtlander 35mm f1.7 Ultron. We have a fair amount of information at this point on a Leica M240 and some on the stock A7 and less on the stock A7r cameras. I am waiting to hear from Mike (mcbroomf) who just took receipt of one of these lenses and is going to report back on its performance on a stock A7r, modded A7r, and a stock A7rII. This is going to provide me with a lot of valuable information.
Finally we have a fair amount of data and information about the Zeiss 35mm f1.4 ZM. Much of the data is in regards to using this lens on the Leica M240 with Edward and several others. Then we have a bit of information with people like Jack using the lens primarily on a stock A7rII who also has a modded A7rl. Jack has indicated that the lens performs better on the modded A7rII but he seldom bothers and uses it on the stock A7rII. Then we also have the reports and the information about using it on the stock A7r which I believe Philipe (Philber) whose partner wrote up the report about the lens. And I believe that Gregg is using the lens on his modded A7r. Unfortunately for me, no one has made a comparison between the modded A7r and the stock A7rII.
A big issue unfortunately at this point appears that no one has made any direct comparisons between the new Voigtlander Ultron and the Zeiss 35mm f1.4 ZM. Taking things further we have little or no comparisons with all 3 Zeiss 35mm ZM lenses much less a comparison with the Voightlander Ultron and the Leica M 35mm Summarit lenses.
This is going to be a difficult decision. But, first, I am waiting to hear what Mike reports back on the performance of the Ultron on all 3 A7r/A7rII cameras.
Rich
|
