Thinking of Getting A Different Lens - Please Help Me

[bmag]

Advertisement (gone after registration)

I am a Leica M8 user who's come out of the Canon world. I love my Leica M8 (can't afford the M9) and have Voigtlander lenses. My favorite is the 28mm f2 Ultron which I use almost 100% of the time. Lately I've been reviewing photos and see that Leica and Zeiss lenses seem to have better micro contrast. The result, I think, is a better rendition of the famous Leica glow. I was hoping that a few folks out there who have used both the CV 28mm f2 Ultron and the Zeiss Biogon 28mm f2.8 can tell me if there is indeed a significant difference between these two lenses. I can't afford the Leica. I would very much appreciate any information / advise you can give me. Thanks so much. Bob.

[Advertisement]

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

[alun]

I'm afraid you'll probably (eventually) end up with as many replies as there are users. I can't speak for the VC 28mm because the only VC lens I have used was a Snapshot 25mm. It's true, however, that I did think the rendering of that lens looked a bit crude by comparison with Leica lenses, but if VC lenses were all I could afford (right now, they would be!), then that's what I would use.

 

I have in the past used Zeiss lenses for the Contax G2 system and thought them superb.

 

If I wanted to upgrade from VC without incurring Leica prices then I wouldn't hesitate with Zeiss.

[schmolinski]

My recommendation is save your money for the Leica lens. Keep your lens you already have, and at least shoot one year with it to get acquainted with the rangefinder. Don't worry to much for micro contrast or rendition of the lens you already have as long as you don't have to print xxl size images.

 

What I have learned after starting my Leica life very early I wanted the original Leica lenses since all the other forum member seemed obviously had better images than me since they are using the original. Thus I was concerned whether I should have a Leica for better imagery but that was totally wrong.

 

I started with a M8.2 with one lens for one year than bought more. I had the Zeiss 25mm lens and can says it is great. I suppose the 28mm lens performs as good as the 25mm lens. And as you use it with the M8 you use the sweet spot of the lens which is an advantage and you don't have to worry too much about the corner performance.

 

So don't care to much about lenses as long as you do not have your M8 down cold.

 

Here are some examples of the 25mm Zeiss lens. Sorry for the poor technical quality. But these are the remainder I found in lightroom. Hope this helps.

 

wide open

[ATTACH]280687[/ATTACH]

 

100% crop wide open, center

[ATTACH]280689[/ATTACH]

 

100% crop wide open top right

[ATTACH]280688[/ATTACH]

 

b/w conversion f/11

[ATTACH]280686[/ATTACH]

 

100% crop center

[ATTACH]280691[/ATTACH]

[jaapv]

Maybe it is time to start looking at older Leica lenses. Still a bit more expensive than a new CV, a version III Elmarit 28 with traces of use won't break the bank and would be a considerable step upwards.

[NZDavid]

I agree, the Elmarit 2.8/28 is an excellent Leica lens. If you don't mind a little less wide, check out a 35 Summaron. "Leica glow" is a pretty meaningless term really. The aberrations in older lenses may be responsible for perceived "glow". Good glass has high resolution, contrast, and gives your images a 3D look. Getting the best out of your lenses also depends a lot on the recording medium, whether sensor or film.

[IkarusJohn]

There's a 28 Elmarit for sale here - looks in good condition.

 

PM me if you would like further information. It is through a Leica authorised dealer.

 

Cheers

John