Jump to content

Zeiss Distagon T* 2,8/15 ZM on M9?


lmenzel

Recommended Posts

  • 2 weeks later...

Hi,

 

is there nobody out, who can help me with this?

I am considering to buy a M9 for my Distagon, soon.

But I want to know, whether it works fine or not, first.

 

@Sean Reid: I thought you've testet it on M8. Do you have some experiences in M9?

 

Thanks a lot!

 

Menzel-PHOTOGRAPHY.COM/blog - panorama + portrait + dance + special

Link to post
Share on other sites

I think very few people buy this lens, because it has narrow enough depth of field wide open to make focusing crucial, but it is not rangefinder-coupled, i.e. you have to guess focus. Combine that with the weight, size and price (!) of this lens, and the total package is just not attractive.

 

If you don't use it wide open, just get one of the two great 18mm lenses, or the WATE.

Link to post
Share on other sites

Agree with Carsten. I used the lens on the M8 on interior photos of the Cologne Cathedral, trying to capture the rainbow- coloured reflections on the pillars cast by the Richter window. The results are excellent on the M8, however, focus at closer distances was hit or miss at full aperture. I ended up using the WATE at 16mm.

I do not have an M9 (yet?) and therefore can't report.

Teddy

Link to post
Share on other sites

Agreed...for not much more (used), the WATE or 18 super-elmar are there for your choosing...

 

The lack of RF coupling with this lens, coupled with the size, makes it unattractive to me...Best of luck with your decision...

Link to post
Share on other sites

Advertisement (gone after registration)

Compliments: your site displays many splendid pictures: if you already have the lens, well the best thing is going to a shop which has a significant turnover of M cameras (and I don't think this is a problem in Germany) : in these days, is rather probable they have a M9 "open for show and test" : I did so in Paris some days ago... I hadn't a lens of my own with me, but I could handle the camera, mount & dismount lenses, inserting a SD card, shooting...

Link to post
Share on other sites

I consider to buy a M9, if it works fine together.

 

Lars,

 

if the lack of RF coupling does not bother you, I would not have ANY hesitation to use the lens on an M9. On the other hand, why don't you go to the next dealer and check it out first? I am sure they will let you do that. I would specify the Distagon as a 16mm Wate in the M9 software, and I am pretty confident the results will be just fine.

 

Andy

Link to post
Share on other sites

Hi,

 

is there nobody out, who can help me with this?

I am considering to buy a M9 for my Distagon, soon.

But I want to know, whether it works fine or not, first.

 

@Sean Reid: I thought you've testet it on M8. Do you have some experiences in M9?

 

Thanks a lot!

 

Menzel-PHOTOGRAPHY.COM/blog - panorama + portrait + dance + special

 

Not yet.

 

Cheers,

Link to post
Share on other sites

  • 2 weeks later...

@luigi

thank you for the Compliments. Mongolia is a very beautifull countryside, by the way. I have enjoyed my trip there greatly.

At the moment it is very hard to find a shop with an available M9, even in Germany.

But my retailer has guaranteed me a test with my Distagon and the M9 by the time one M9 arrives.

So I can't wait to test it

 

@sean

that's a pity, I have enjoyed your reviews.

 

@wizard

the lack of RF coupling does not bother me. I usually don't use it in the very close distance.

you are right. My dealer will let me test this combination.

 

thank's so far!

 

Lars

 

Menzel-PHOTOGRAPHY.COM/blog - panorama + portrait + dance + special

Link to post
Share on other sites

@sean

that's a pity, I have enjoyed your reviews.

 

Thanks. Over time, I will be testing most (maybe all) current production RF lenses on the M9. That will include the Zeiss 15. The fact that this lens is not coupled, however, is not be overlooked. If one likes the drawing of the Zeiss ZM wides I think the 18 is worth considering carefully.

 

There's a myth that DOF makes RF coupling on a 15 superfluous. That's not the case at all *unless* one is not particularly concerned about resolution peaking at a chosen distance.

 

Cheers,

 

Sean

Link to post
Share on other sites

@sean

Oh that's really good news.

 

For my there was no problem to guess the distance for this lens, till now.

I alway have to work slower with this lens (take more time to do all right),

because of the large coverage. (metering, alignment, composing).

But you are right, its more convenient with coupling.

 

Lars

 

Menzel-PHOTOGRAPHY.COM/blog - panorama + portrait + dance + special

Link to post
Share on other sites

Hi,

 

is there nobody out, who can help me with this?

I am considering to buy a M9 for my Distagon, soon.

But I want to know, whether it works fine or not, first.

 

@Sean Reid: I thought you've testet it on M8. Do you have some experiences in M9?

 

Thanks a lot!

 

Menzel-PHOTOGRAPHY.COM/blog - panorama + portrait + dance + special

 

Most people buy lenses for their cameras, you are looking to buy a camera for your lens. Unless you are really attached to this lens, I would sell it, otherwise get the M9 and accept the limitations of this lens on the M9 body. I have a 18mm Zeiss for my M8 and love it.

Link to post
Share on other sites

The 15mm Distagon was the second lens I bought specifically for the M8, after the 28mm Summicron.

 

Sean has highlighted the issue of a focus and maximum resolution with an uncoupled lens. However, Lars, the OP, has probably already grappled with this as he already has the lens.

 

I don't find this an issue. It's a special purpose lens. It's not a lens you use in a hurry.

 

On film, the depth of focus does cover most focusing errors. On digital, you have a screen for checking. Software is likely to correct anything else.

 

As for using it on the M9, the angle of view is going to be the main challenge for some people.

 

Regards,

Mark

Link to post
Share on other sites

It was to be expected that the FF M9 would trigger a wave of renewed interest in superwide lenses ('at last, a real 12mm!') But though I am a wide angle man, I am not superwide. In practice, lenses shorter than 21 or even 24mm prove to be 'stunt lenses' -- fun to play with at first, but the wow effect goes stale very quickly. Than you face the challenge of finding interesting subject matter.

 

This is not as easy as it seems. Most of the outer world is not visually structured in a way that makes it compositionally interesting. Baroque vistas of the more grandiose kind are an exception -- Bernini would have loved a 15mm lens -- but most of us outer barbarians do not live in them. The vastness of the ocean may exalt your soul as you stand on the beach, but try photographing it. No matter what you do, the horizon will never be more than 36mm long ... and a vast expanse of wet sand in the foreground will not make the image more gripping.

 

In fact, most extremely wide images fall flat unless you have personal experience of the space in which they were taken (in which case you can say, "wow, a four-by-four meter room looking that big!") Without this reference from outside the image, you cannot judge its relation to reality, and it does mostly look like nothing particular. The pictures I have seen, taken with new superwides, look very ordinary, unless the photographer or the editor carefully informs us about the amazing specs of the lens used. Without that input, the picture would have been pretty trivial.

 

The old man from the Age of the Zeiss Hologon

Link to post
Share on other sites

  • 10 months later...

I can second what lars said about super-wide angle lenses in general. But if you need it, you need it :-)

 

To speak about the Zeiss 15/2.8, it is an exceptional good lens on the M9, with the drawback of shading (don't know if this is the right word - maybe banding or so would be more apropriated) on one side of the frame. This can easily be corrected by software, but it has to be done or the picture has to be croped. I think that this effect was reported on several super-wide lenses allready.

 

Anyway, I think there is nothing bad about this lens, in contrary, just consider to use it as a 18 mm lens or so on the M9.

Link to post
Share on other sites

no problems what so ever, other than remembering to code it as the WATE 16

with this code the red corner problems are minimized

I have also profiled it with CornerFix which corrects the corner problems perfectly

here are some samples

a quick shot playing with my new lens taken at about f 3 against the light

 

Welcome, dear visitor! As registered member you'd see an image here…

Simply register for free here – We are always happy to welcome new members!

 

a favorite architectural site of mine in Houston

 

 

tight space, near wide open

 

more information on this along with a much larger version can be found here

Leica Digital Ms Photo Gallery by Artichoke Vinagrette at pbase.com

there are two other 15 f2.8 Distagon photographs on this page as well & one on the preceding page

I used the admirable CV 15 on my M8 & M9

as good as this little lens is, the Distagon is more than superior enough to warrant the extra space & weight it adds to my bag

it may well be the best ultra wide angle available for any mount & I thank my lucky stars I found a used one on KEH in excellent condition at a very good price

Link to post
Share on other sites

Archived

This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.

  • Recently Browsing   0 members

    • No registered users viewing this page.
×
×
  • Create New...