ZM 85/2 user, please post ur pics :)

[V_kids]

Advertisement (gone after registration)

it's really hard to find pictures that taken with this lens on M9

I only managed to look few of them on Flickr.com

I hope anyone here can post some pics from it

Still confused which one to get...APO 75/2 or ZM 85/2

 

Thank You

 

Andree

[Doc_P]

Andree,

 

Zeiss ZM lenses are a fascinating alternative if there's a significant price gap to the second-to-none Leica lenses (e.g. ZM 4/18 Distagon vs. 3.8/18 Elmar)...

 

Since both lenses you are interested in are built in Germany there is no significant price difference... My best shots ever are made with my 2/75 'cron (I can't post them because neither my father nor my wife like to see their pictures on the net...). If i would have only one lens, the 2/75 'cron would be it... But be carefull with this lens: it's tack sharp, cruelly sharp PERIOD so sharp and clean that i use sometimes the oldstyle ZM 1.5/50 Sonnar (with tons of aberrations of all orders and more) for people shots because it's more forgiving ...

 

Just to help you: Erwin Puts (probably the living authority on Leica lenses) and Steve Huff have interesting reviews, c.f. Apo-Summicron-M 2/75 asph and The Leica 75 Summicron Lens Review | STEVE HUFF PHOTOS

 

Summary: you can#t go wrong with both lenses, but in case of doubt it's the 2/75 'cron ...

 

Best regards

 

Axel

[Advertisement]

The Leica Q3 is available for pre-order at B&H Photo Video and Adorama

[V_kids]

Hi Axel.

 

Thank you for the information.

Yes, I agree with you, 2/75 cron is a very nice lens. I have seen a lot of sample pictures taken with this lens. I'm sure if i buy this lens, I wont be disappointed with the result.

I just really curious, is there some specific reasons why people choose ZM 85/2 over Cron 75 or 90 ?

[rljones]

Andree,

 

I too mulled over the 75/2 or the Zeiss 85/2, as well as the 90/2 APO. I eventually went with the Zeiss and truly like it. Puts' article listed above is very useful. ReidReviews (paid site) has reviewed it too.

 

I posted one image using this lens with the M9 on this forum:

http://www.l-camera-forum.com/leica-forum/leica-m9-forum/126578-so-what-lens-m9-your-bokeh-2.html

 

BTW, I did not buy the stock lens hood, but instead use a 58mm metal hood with pinch-on cap as the latter hood is much smaller.

[Clandrel]

Here is one with my favorite lense, ever...

The 75/2 APO ASPH. Go for it!

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!

[Guest]

Maybe ask Zeiss? They might have one.

 

Serious: this one and the 2.8/15 are hard to find.

 

I'll have a 2.8/16 soon . It's cheap, tiny, unavailable and not that great but it already wrote history before reaching the market: a senior Japanese executive publicly apologized because of it. Anyway, it blocks the delivery of my new cam. Wish MF of the X1 did deploy en equally brave change of it's success.

[richard_man]

Advertisement (gone after registration)

it's really hard to find pictures that taken with this lens on M9

I only managed to look few of them on Flickr.com

I hope anyone here can post some pics from it

Still confused which one to get...APO 75/2 or ZM 85/2

 

Thank You

 

Andree

 

I love the 85/2. It has nice bokeh and sharpness. Here are some pics:

 

http://www.5pmlight.com/wp-content/uploads/2010/06/L9998732.jpg

http://www.5pmlight.com/wp-content/uploads/2010/06/L9998779.jpg

http://www.5pmlight.com/wp-content/uploads/2010/06/L9998741.jpg

 

all at F2.

[V_kids]

Thx Guys!

the bokeh from ZM 85/2 is really nice....

This is really tempting, however, what tri said is true.

This lens is not easy to find one.

No one sells this lens in Indonesia

[rljones]

I picked mine up used from a dealer in Japan off eBay.

[richard_man]

Someone from Singapore was selling it and I grabbed it. The Zeiss vs. Leica thing is tricky - in most cases, the Leica equivalence holds an upper hand in image quality but IMHO, the 85/2 is sharper than the 90/'2AA (which I used to own) at F2 close distance and has some of the nice bokeh characteristic of a softer lens like the 75 Summilux but with the longer reach for portraits. i.e. ideal for me :-) YMMV.

[gpwhite]

V_kids, this query about the 85 Sonnar ZM is similar to a post from a few weeks ago, but I thought I would post three shots taken with my Sonnar on my early M8 that might be helpful for you (who knows if and when a steel gray M9 will arrive for me!). Some of this is redundant with my prior post, sorry.

 

I had a 75 Summicron-APO-ASPH, which I thought was an excellent lens. However, I find my images from the Sonnar to have even more life and contrast that the 75 f/2. Drawbacks of the Sonnar include chromatic aberrations at dark edges (shadows) in the periphery and flare. The former will require more post-processing of M9 images, I imagine, because the M9 captures more of the image circle from any lens. I want to emphasize that I find the color reproduction of the Sonnar to be at least equal to the 75 f/2, but you will need to touch up the edges of your full frame images shot wider than f/4.

 

Image 1 is at a distance of close to 100 yds, f/4 with moderate sharpening; color was perfect with slight total levels adjustment...Note the brilliance of the thin metal tubing and black straps on the "watercraft."

 

Image 2 is at a distance of about 5 feet, f/4.5; sharpening had zero effect! and levels adjustment was very slight...Note the rendering of the shape and metallic color of the food bowl, let alone the feathers and beak of the bird.

 

Image 3 is at a distance of about 12 feet, f/2.5; cropped a bit, modest sharpening, levels adjustment to get the contrast up in the clothing...I was under instructions to keep the lady's skin soft, hence the critical focus on the nearer plane of the clothing... but you can see the sharpness even at less than f/2.8 with nice bokeh too!

 

Much of the saturation and fine detail of these images are lost in the on-line resolution here. But based on my experience with the Summicron, I would need to close down at least 1, and perhaps 1.5 stops, to achieve results similar to these. So the Sonnar is effectively faster, which is quite important for sharpness as focal length increases. I prefer the 85mm framing. I also feel that the Summicron did not render depth as well... I have couple of nice examples of that, but they were shot on my RD-1, so it is not a fair comparison to the M8 or M9.

 

My recommendation is strongly in favor of the Sonnar ZM, but I also have a 50 f/1.4 -ASPH. The images from my 50 SX at f/3.5 are worlds apart from the 75 SM at f/3.5. So I sold my 75 SM without regrets. Have fun!

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!

[V_kids]

Thx a lot for all the sample images and advices!!

it's really helpful for me

[Guest]

85 ZM Sonnar winning against CronA 75&90?

That's why it sells like crazy, being on the market for a couple of years now .

 

But the 50LuxA outperforming also such a very fine lens as the 75Cron, that I can confirm. With a M9 (which I can't afford yet, but I borrowed for this test also) and a 50LuxA and occasional cropping, a recent Leica 90mm would be my set of choice.

 

ZM I have one, the 28mm on the M8, because (RF uncoupled and stopped down) it can focus very close and gives good results. And the 2.8/21 all are happy with.

 

Cheers!

[ohnri]

Much of the saturation and fine detail of these images are lost in the on-line resolution here. But based on my experience with the Summicron, I would need to close down at least 1, and perhaps 1.5 stops, to achieve results similar to these. So the Sonnar is effectively faster, which is quite important for sharpness as focal length increases.

 

The Sonnar is excellent without question but your experience of sharpness versus the Summicron is contrary to those of E. Puts or Steve Huff and would seem very unlikely, especially at close range.

 

I would suggest that your Summicron was not well matched with your camera and this may have accounted for your finding of a lack of sharpness in a lens which is considered beyond reproach in that area.

 

Personally, I far prefer the look from my Nikon 85 f/1.4 to my Leica 75mm f/2 but I cannot fault the Leica for sharpness.

 

I may pick up a Zeiss 85m to see if I prefer it to the 75 'cron as well.

 

Best,

 

Bill

[rljones]

The MTFs on the 85 Sonnar are better than any 85mm range by any manufacturer that I've seen. Specifically, the 40cps line at f2.0 is more like you'd see with most teles at f4.0, yet the bokeh seems more like 85/1.4 lenses that I've used. I assume this behavior is due to the Sonnar design (modified, however, from the 1940-60 era Sonnars).

 

The plane of sharpness and OOF images reminds me of the Leica R-series 180/2.8 APO when I use it at f2.8. The quality of the 85 Sonnar extends to the edges of the M9 frame.

[richard_man]

The Sonnar is excellent without question but your experience of sharpness versus the Summicron is contrary to those of E. Puts or Steve Huff and would seem very unlikely, especially at close range.

 

I would suggest that your Summicron was not well matched with your camera and this may have accounted for your finding of a lack of sharpness in a lens which is considered beyond reproach in that area.

 

Personally, I far prefer the look from my Nikon 85 f/1.4 to my Leica 75mm f/2 but I cannot fault the Leica for sharpness.

 

I may pick up a Zeiss 85m to see if I prefer it to the 75 'cron as well.

 

Best,

 

Bill

 

It's always trouble to say any lens is better than Leica's on a Leica list :-)

 

Then again, a $200 Medium format lens would be "better" than a $7000 Leica lens :-)

 

Anyway, who care what Puts or Huff say? I have taken 15000 frames on my M9 and I can tell what I personally like. I would be a bit suspicious about the 75' cron being less sharp than the 85/2 myself, but hey, everyone has to make their own choices. I chose the 85/2 over the 75' cron because of the slight longer reach and IMO better bokeh, but the 75'cron should not lose in sharpness department.

[ohnri]

It's always trouble to say any lens is better than Leica's on a Leica list :-)

 

Then again, a $200 Medium format lens would be "better" than a $7000 Leica lens :-)

 

Anyway, who care what Puts or Huff say? I have taken 15000 frames on my M9 and I can tell what I personally like. I would be a bit suspicious about the 75' cron being less sharp than the 85/2 myself, but hey, everyone has to make their own choices. I chose the 85/2 over the 75' cron because of the slight longer reach and IMO better bokeh, but the 75'cron should not lose in sharpness department.

 

The MF lens would only be "better" on a big, beastly MF body.

 

I care what Puts and Huff say because they usually show images to back up their comments and I can't test everything myself.

 

Of course, I also use what I like as does most everyone I expect.

 

The 85/2 seems to have a nice combination of qualities that has me very interested in getting one. But, I don't for one second expect it to be sharper than my 75 'cron.

 

Sounds as if you are a happy owner. The bokeh does look very nice from what I have seen.

 

Personally, I would like a lens on my M9 that can come closer to my Nikon 85/1.4 or the astounding 135/2 DC.

 

Best,

 

Bill

[gpwhite]

It is so interesting to read how protective we are about Leica's preeminent reputation in small format optics! Obviously I am as much a Leica snob as the rest of the forum, but I think it is important to point out where other companies do well too.

 

I never said the 85 ZM was "sharper" overall than the 75 SM. I said that I prefer the ZM for several reasons. One reason is that although both lenses are exceptional at f/5.6, I find the ZM to be notably better in resolution (OK, like sharpness) and rendering of shapes at f/2 up to f/4. I never use f/5.6 on the ZM, but did all of the time on the 75 SM.

 

The point that my 75 SM may have been a relative dog and my 85 ZM a relative jewel is well taken. Perhaps Putts' 85 ZM was barking at him when he reviewed it, ...although I think he did acknowledge that the ZM was contrastier than the 75 SM.

 

I am pretty sure that you can order the 85 ZM directly from Zeiss, incidentally. I have noticed that they are available on their website store over the past year.

[richard_man]

The MF lens would only be "better" on a big, beastly MF body.

 

I care what Puts and Huff say because they usually show images to back up their comments and I can't test everything myself.

 

Of course, I also use what I like as does most everyone I expect.

 

The 85/2 seems to have a nice combination of qualities that has me very interested in getting one. But, I don't for one second expect it to be sharper than my 75 'cron.

 

Sounds as if you are a happy owner. The bokeh does look very nice from what I have seen.

 

Personally, I would like a lens on my M9 that can come closer to my Nikon 85/1.4 or the astounding 135/2 DC.

 

Best,

 

Bill

 

Puts may be a great optical analyst (I am not qualified to say), but I have more photos of real subjects on one blog entry than his entire review site :-)

 

Anyway, yes, they are all good lens, great even. My 21 Summilux is my favorite. 95%+ of my recent photos are done with it. THAT has no peer :-) Anyway, back to 75'cron vs. 85/2 ZM...

[Advertisement]

Hallo,

Look here: Leica M

[horosu]

I had a 75/2 Cron and it didn't impress me much. I sold it thinking it was far too close to the 50 Lux ASPH that is my most used lens. A 85/2 would be a different story....