fredmiranda.com
Login

  

  Previous versions of scrappydog's message #15820835 « Zeiss 35mm 1.4 ZM Tests »

  

scrappydog
Online
Upload & Sell: Off
Re: Zeiss 35mm 1.4 ZM Tests


nehemiahphoto wrote:
scrappydog wrote:
nehemiahphoto wrote:
scrappydog wrote:
Fred Miranda wrote:
rscheffler wrote:
derKoekje wrote:
Oof, 50 pages is a lot of discussion. Has anyone found the perfect filter to make this lens usable on E-mount bodies yet? I'm picking this lens up either way, but I'd love to have decent performance on two systems.


This might be helpful: https://phillipreeve.net/blog/35mm-comparison-voigtlander-zeiss-leica/

Apparently it's the 5m PCX filter. There is a PCX mega thread here on FM:

https://www.fredmiranda.com/forum/topic/1453834/

I quickly scanned through the last few pages and someone mentioned they also used the 5m PCX on the ZM35/1.4.


Yes, I confirm it's the 5m PCX (plano-convex lens). It can even be used with the hood:
https://www.fredmiranda.com/forum/topic/1453834/52#13935599

I still remember how shocked I was when I tested the ZM 35/1.4 on my M10-R for the first time. This lens is outstanding across the field from wide open on the Leica M or Sony UT Kolari. The PCX front lens significantly reduces induced field curvature when used on the stock Sony but it's still not perfect.

Now we have the Voigtlander 35/2 APO M performing just as good though.


I have the 35 APO and 35/1.4 ZM. I still prefer the ZM + PCX over the 35 APO despite the latter being native mount and optically excellent.


Why do you prefer the ZM over the CV (if aside from f1.4 vs f2).


I mostly shoot the ZM wide open or stopped down just slightly. It's very sharp wide open with smooth bokeh. I love the colors, the microcontrast, and the rendering overall. The PCM helps a lot in the extreme periphery. Although there is a mid-field dip on my Sonys up to about f/8 (at which you don't need the PCM), I never notice it in shots.

The CV is weird because there is nothing wrong with it, but it does not wow me. My copy is well centered and very sharp. It takes competent shots, but I don't notice the colors, details, or other attributes that get me excited. In comparison, the CV 65 wows me virtually every time I shoot it. I really want to love the CV 35, but I don't.

It's highly subjective. I find myself gravitate toward a lens and I cannot fully articulate why.

BTW, the images in the immediate post above (from Malabito) captures the look of the 35 ZM. That is precisely how my lens renders on my Sonys. Those are the types of shots I would use it for, too.


Thanks fo the input. I used the ZM 35/1.4 extensively for about 2 years. I liked it very much for the most part, and still miss it at times. I think I will try a GM 35/1.4 now though. I haven't yet shot the 35 APO, but have been watching it. Always curious to hear people's thoughts, beyond the standard testing (which is helpful as well).

I really want to try the lens to see how it renders. I am impressed by the smooth bokeh of the 24GM.



Jan 06, 2022 at 11:47 PM





  Previous versions of scrappydog's message #15820835 « Zeiss 35mm 1.4 ZM Tests »