For anyone who is interested, here\'s my current thinking on the ZM 35 for my needs (yours may be similar, but then maybe not.
Currently I run three 35s.
(1)The ZA 1.4/35 for portraits,
(2) the Loxia 2/35 for landscape and similar,
(3) the ZA 2.8/35 as a pancake on hiking trips for use while hiking (the other hiking lenses stay in the pack for use in the best light before and after walking).
The ZM 1.4/35 has potential to replace all three.
(1) Combined with the Techart it should do well for wide portraiture.
(2) It is, (thanks Fred for the samples) a bit better in the corners than the Loxia stopped down, while having otherwise a very similar look: super contrasty with great ten pointed sunstars, performing well against the light (though I haven\'t seen samples of the sunstar)
(3) Not sure it really can replace the ZA pancake as the \"adds no weight to the hiking kit\" lens: it\'s a lot heavier adapted that the ZA, and native AF is a good thing to have on the move. But it might.
Of these advantages, I\'m pretty sure that (2) is the real deal. It\'s an even better Loxia with two more stops of aperture, and much nicer at the shared wide ones - especially f2.
Problem is, for my needs I\'m not convinced about (1) and (3). The bokeh on the ZA FE 1.4/35 is just drop dead gorgeous. Nicer than I\'ve ever seen elsewhere. My copy is plenty sharp in a fairly wide central area, and sharp enough wide open for portrait subjects into the periphery. I haven\'t seen exact a/b comparisons, but while i think the ZM might be sharper centrally, it\'s mid distance bokeh I frankly don\'t like (you might not mind however this is a matter of taste after all!). The ZA is big; but I never take it hiking.
And I\'m not sure that the ZA can play the hiking role (3) above.
So that leaves me thinking that if I got one, it\'d be essentially a Loxia replacement. Yes it\'s better. But I\'m not sure it\'s a thousand dollars and the hassle of adapters better. I\'m getting stunning results from the Lox. I can see changing to a Lox version of the ZM (or if I got a windfall). Or an FE mount version of the CV 1.7 with less field curvature. But that\'s for the future.
So in sum, I guess for the while I\'m sitting on my hands. I can only justify the ZM if it replaced everything, and I\'m not sure it could (and I also think that selling off a centred ZA 1.4/35 is asking for trouble).
Of course your mileage *will* vary, but maybe these thoughts might help anyone in a similar position. And of course I know that all of this is not super relevant to getting great images.!
