bill Posted April 10, 2012 Share #21  Posted April 10, 2012 Advertisement (gone after registration) Juha you will not regret your choice. Sorry I am late to this thread! I have the 50 Sonnar and 35 Biogon from Zeiss; bought them both new to complement my MP4 and I have not regretted the decision for a moment. I also use them both on the GXR with the A12 Module M and they are superb. I have never used the Summarit, but I have used (and still use) a range of Leica glass; the Zeiss lenses hold their own in spades. Incidentally, I too have the 90mm Elmarit-M; it makes a good partner to the Zeiss "twins"  You may want, in the future, to consider a 50mm Elmar too...  Anyway, what's missing from this thread is a Biogon shot or two:  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!   Regards,  Bill Link to post Share on other sites Simply register for free here – We are always happy to welcome new members!   Regards,  Bill ' data-webShareUrl='https://www.l-camera-forum.com/topic/176590-352-biogon-or-35-summarit/?do=findComment&comment=1979477'>More sharing options...
Advertisement Posted April 10, 2012 Posted April 10, 2012 Hi bill, Take a look here 35/2 biogon or 35 summarit?. I'm sure you'll find what you were looking for!
jlindstrom Posted April 10, 2012 Author Share #22  Posted April 10, 2012 Thanks Bill. And you're absolutely right, that we needed a couple of shots with Biogon. I'm hoping to add some of mine soon.. leaving on a roadtrip with an RV by the end of this week. Intend to put these lenses to good use  Btw, surprisingly the biogon signature in your pics is immediately recognisible in my quick test shots.. your shots are million miles a part from my shots of piles of things around the house, but the lens character is seen immediately. Wasn't really expecting the signature to be that strong. Luckily in very positive way!  --Juha Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
jdlaing Posted April 12, 2012 Share #23  Posted April 12, 2012 I like the Biogon f/2.  A very nice quality lens. Sharp! 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! Link to post Share on other sites Simply register for free here – We are always happy to welcome new members! ' data-webShareUrl='https://www.l-camera-forum.com/topic/176590-352-biogon-or-35-summarit/?do=findComment&comment=1981380'>More sharing options...
gjames9142 Posted April 13, 2012 Share #24  Posted April 13, 2012 I got the 35 2.8 Biogon, partly as a result of Sean Reid's comments about its technical competence. While the jury is still out, I am getting the feeling that it is too sharp -- it has a slightly industrial view camera look some times. And once in a while I get artefacts, which I have never experienced with Leica glass. Admittedly JPEG's are useless, but this gives some idea of the look. 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! Link to post Share on other sites Simply register for free here – We are always happy to welcome new members! ' data-webShareUrl='https://www.l-camera-forum.com/topic/176590-352-biogon-or-35-summarit/?do=findComment&comment=1982318'>More sharing options...
gjames9142 Posted April 13, 2012 Share #25  Posted April 13, 2012 And here is an artefact at very high enlargement 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! Link to post Share on other sites Simply register for free here – We are always happy to welcome new members! ' data-webShareUrl='https://www.l-camera-forum.com/topic/176590-352-biogon-or-35-summarit/?do=findComment&comment=1982323'>More sharing options...
sdk Posted April 13, 2012 Share #26 Â Posted April 13, 2012 I noticed in my evaluation of the 35mm/2.8 Biogon and 35mm/2.5 Summarit that the Biogon was more likely to cause moire artifacts on the M9P. I decided to give it to my nephew with my old Hexar RF, as he is studying B&W film photography in high school. The Summarit is also good enough to cause moire in most of the same situations. In the end, I preferred the out of focus character of the Summarit and the fact that it was 6bit coded. Maybe when we get a 96MP digital body the phenomenon will no longer occur. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Double Negative Posted April 14, 2012 Share #27 Â Posted April 14, 2012 Advertisement (gone after registration) That moire is showing you just how sharp the Biogon is... So take some comfort. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
jlindstrom Posted April 14, 2012 Author Share #28 Â Posted April 14, 2012 I noticed in my evaluation of the 35mm/2.8 Biogon and 35mm/2.5 Summarit that the Biogon was more likely to cause moire artifacts on the M9P. I decided to give it to my nephew with my old Hexar RF, as he is studying B&W film photography in high school. The Summarit is also good enough to cause moire in most of the same situations. In the end, I preferred the out of focus character of the Summarit and the fact that it was 6bit coded. Maybe when we get a 96MP digital body the phenomenon will no longer occur. Â reg. 6-bit coding, recent Zeiss lenses have a groove in the mount which makes self coding a breeze. The groove changes the game for the sharpie coding in that you don't have to recode every 2-3 lens changes. works great as I just did it for my new 35/2 biogon. Â -- Juha Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
euston Posted April 14, 2012 Share #29  Posted April 14, 2012 I’ve never been keen on the 35mm focal length, so I didn’t want to fork out for a Leica lens. I got the Zeiss Biogon 35/2 instead. I like the sharpness and its way with colour very much but I don’t think its handling of very out-of-focus areas matches up to the Leica alternatives. It’s not a lens I would use where that really mattered. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
LotharZhou Posted April 14, 2012 Share #30 Â Posted April 14, 2012 35/2 biogon all the way for me. The summarit is very nice, but the F2 is very necessary compare to F2.5, I sold my 35 cron to get the biogon without the slightest regret. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
chrism Posted April 14, 2012 Share #31 Â Posted April 14, 2012 My example of the Summarit 35 is very sharp and easy and quick to focus. I'm keeping it even though I am lucky enough to have a Summilux 35 ASPH (not FLE) that doesn't have much focus shift. It's smaller and lighter and does what I want, except for those occasions when low light or restricted DOF requires the 1.4 lens. I have had, and sold, two CV 35/1.2 lenses but found them too soft for me. If I want something wider I use the Elmarit 24 which always gives a sharp result. I have had two 28 Crons and passed them on as they were not so reliable at focussing and both kept getting some play in the filter ring. I did have a 35 Cron which most people find very sharp, but mine didn't agree with the adjustment of the rangefinders in my camera bodies. It seems that there is a good deal of variation between bodies and lenses when it comes to focussing, and when I find an example of a lens that agrees with my bodies I keep it! Â Chris Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
gjames9142 Posted April 15, 2012 Share #32  Posted April 15, 2012 That moire is showing you just how sharp the Biogon is... So take some comfort. [/quote Trouble is I don't like the look of the lens -- it looks too clinical, or digital. I figured out long time ago when shooting 8x10 that the "drawing" of a lens is far more important to me than technical questions of resolution and contrast. The V4 crons and 28 elmarit are both perfect for me. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
jlindstrom Posted April 27, 2012 Author Share #33 Â Posted April 27, 2012 Having had the 35/2 Biogon now for a couple of weeks, I have to say it works great. It's everything I was hoping for it to be. Â Here are a couple of samples: Â Â Â Both staright from camera and if I recall correctly, the first even straight out of camera jpg from the M9. Â //Juha Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
tobey bilek Posted April 27, 2012 Share #34 Â Posted April 27, 2012 My son needed a 35 and I debated an ASPH or Biogon. All the test s show the Biogon to have higher contrast. We decided the last thing need in a lens to be used for digital is more contrast. He ordered the ASPH. The wait list was around 3 months. Â When it came I compared it with my version iv 35. They are very similar, but the ASPH is sharper further into the corners at wide stops. Otherwise similar. Â No one seems to complain about the Zeiss contrast however. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
sksaito Posted April 27, 2012 Share #35 Â Posted April 27, 2012 I just waited and waited and saved and saved money and got the 35 Lux FLE. Nothing compares to this. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Archived
This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.