CheshireCat Posted September 4, 2014 Share #121 Posted September 4, 2014 Advertisement (gone after registration) I thought some photoshopping could help. I guessed the relative dimensions based on the mount size, but nodoby's perfect 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/217212-what-happened-to-the-%E2%80%9Csurprise%E2%80%9D-zeiss-zm-lens/?do=findComment&comment=2663972'>More sharing options...
Advertisement Posted September 4, 2014 Posted September 4, 2014 Hi CheshireCat, Take a look here What happened to the “surprise” Zeiss ZM Lens. I'm sure you'll find what you were looking for!
james.liam Posted September 4, 2014 Share #122 Posted September 4, 2014 There are already too many good 35mm lenses for M mount, and unless it utterly bashes the 35 FLE (which is unlikely), or it is a f/1 lens, I won't buy. There is already a relatively cheap alternative to the Leica lens, and this is the Nokton 35/1.2 (great lens). If Zeiss wants a big piece of the 35mm cake, it must be as small as the 35 FLE, and as good&cheap as the Nokton (great lens... did I say that already ?). It doesn't need to bash the 35 FLE. If it gets you 90-95% of the way to the FLE, shows no focus shift, is roughly the same size and costs 50% less, it will have many buyers. The 2/35 and 2,8/35 Biogons are in many respects superior to the 35 Summicron ASPH so I doubt Zeiss would go through the effort designing a dud. In fact, this is their first ZM lens that should be optimized for digital sensors, all the others having been designed for film M's and the Ikon. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
349A Posted September 4, 2014 Share #123 Posted September 4, 2014 It doesn't need to bash the 35 FLE. If it gets you 90-95% of the way to the FLE, shows no focus shift, is roughly the same size and costs 50% less, it will have many buyers. The 2/35 and 2,8/35 Biogons are in many respects superior to the 35 Summicron ASPH so I doubt Zeiss would go through the effort designing a dud. In fact, this is their first ZM lens that should be optimized for digital sensors, all the others having been designed for film M's and the Ikon. It will hopefully be better than the FLE... I just can't get into how the FLE draws, personally. Too harsh, too cold, too clinical in its tendencies. Yes, I've seen some nice images taken with it, the bulk of them look like the structure slider is set to 100.... Or maybe it is. I love my 35/1.4 Asph, if the Zeiss can better that or be on par, its a winner. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
mirekti Posted September 5, 2014 Share #124 Posted September 5, 2014 It will hopefully be better than the FLE... I just can't get into how the FLE draws, personally. Too harsh, too cold, too clinical in its tendencies. Yes, I've seen some nice images taken with it, the bulk of them look like the structure slider is set to 100.... Or maybe it is. I love my 35/1.4 Asph, if the Zeiss can better that or be on par, its a winner. At first I couldn't get used to the OOF area of FLE, but with time I learned to love this lens. Here are few shots which were processed with only Basic sliders in LR, and Clarity set to +2. If Zeiss manages to get this kind of rendering for half the price, we can only congratulate them. Edit: I noticed the photos look way oversaturated in IE, but if one opens them in Firefox they look as in LR. 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/217212-what-happened-to-the-%E2%80%9Csurprise%E2%80%9D-zeiss-zm-lens/?do=findComment&comment=2664131'>More sharing options...
mirekti Posted September 5, 2014 Share #125 Posted September 5, 2014 ...what I've learned is that I could easily fix the OOF area by reducing sharpness and clarity, while the in focus area remains fabulous. Here is a slightly cropped image, post processed and OOF area fixed (which wasn't busy and looked fine anyway). 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/217212-what-happened-to-the-%E2%80%9Csurprise%E2%80%9D-zeiss-zm-lens/?do=findComment&comment=2664134'>More sharing options...
CheshireCat Posted September 5, 2014 Share #126 Posted September 5, 2014 Notice how in the last shot (baby), the focus field bends outward at the sides of the frame. This makes the subject pop out with a nice 3D look, while the environment at the sides is preserved. I love this lens. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
jaapv Posted September 5, 2014 Share #127 Posted September 5, 2014 Advertisement (gone after registration) Edit: I noticed the photos look way oversaturated in IE, but if one opens them in Firefox they look as in LR. That won't happen if you save them as sRGB without embedded colour profile. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
mirekti Posted September 5, 2014 Share #128 Posted September 5, 2014 That won't happen if you save them as sRGB without embedded colour profile. How can I exclude the color profile in sRGB LR? It seems I cannot find that option. I checked here http://regex.info/exif.cgi and it looks fine i.e. no ICC or Camera profile included. What might have happened is the fact I have a calibrated wide gamut monitor, and when I use the IE it doesn't use the monitor's ICC profile, hence the colors look funny. Not sure if others see the difference in IE and Firefox for those photos. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
SiriusLux Posted September 16, 2014 Share #129 Posted September 16, 2014 We finally got the full information about the Distagon T* 1.4/35 ZM See: ZEISS precision for friends of the rangefinder camera | Camera Lens Blog The MTF diagrams look better compared to the SX 1.4/35 asph. and the MTF diagram at 1.4 of the Distagon looks better then the MTF diagram of the Biogon T* 2.0/35 ZM at 2.0 Zeiss say the lens should be available in the 4th Quarter 2014, let's see. Best Regards, Jorg Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
CheshireCat Posted September 16, 2014 Share #130 Posted September 16, 2014 $2300 without hood. And the lens is huge. At almost twice the price of the CV 35/1.2 it'd better be awesome. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
mirekti Posted September 16, 2014 Share #131 Posted September 16, 2014 The MTF diagrams look better compared to the SX 1.4/35 asph. and the MTF diagram at 1.4 of the Distagon looks better then the MTF diagram of the Biogon T* 2.0/35 ZM at 2.0 This really looks impressive on the paper. I can't wait to see direct comparison to the 35mm FLE. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
CheshireCat Posted September 16, 2014 Share #132 Posted September 16, 2014 This really looks impressive on the paper. I can't wait to see direct comparison to the 35mm FLE. The design seems to be derived from the Leica 35 FLE. Zeiss probably recomputed the design and added one element. The increased lens size (especially with the optional hood) suggests this lens has to be as good or better than the 35 FLE. Waiting for the comparisons, especially as far as the bokeh is concerned. The retrofocus design should maximize corners performance especially on other cameras (thinking about the A7r). Very interesting nonetheless. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
farnz Posted September 16, 2014 Share #133 Posted September 16, 2014 …. The increased lens size (especially with the optional hood) suggests this lens has to be as good or better than the 35 FLE. .... Sorry I don't see how this follows. In terms of lens design, larger doesn't necessarily equate to improved image quality (which I assume is what you're referring to). Certainly larger makes it easier to correct for aberrations but the computation, quality of grinding (or pressing), coatings, and construction precision will have significant impact on the final image quality. It's relatively easy to make a large, poor optic - just ask the people who made Hubble. Pete. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
CheshireCat Posted September 16, 2014 Share #134 Posted September 16, 2014 Sorry I don't see how this follows. In terms of lens design, larger doesn't necessarily equate to improved image quality (which I assume is what you're referring to). Certainly larger makes it easier to correct for aberrations but the computation, quality of grinding (or pressing), coatings, and construction precision will have significant impact on the final image quality. It's relatively easy to make a large, poor optic - just ask the people who made Hubble. Indeed. But I assume the Zeiss guys are no idiots. The lens is priced on the high side for a third-party lens, and at double the price of the really good CV lens it has to be amazing. I am really eager to see the actual tests, especially about bokeh. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
james.liam Posted September 16, 2014 Share #135 Posted September 16, 2014 Wondering what direction they'll take with its overall rendering. The 35 Biogon M's are pretty high contrast lenses, as is the ZE/F 2/35. Yet the ZE/F 1,4/35's design favored a particularly sumptuous bokeh over resolution & contrast wide-open (in fact, to f/2.8). A charming look with well-corrected color that I really preferred on my D700 over other, more recent DSLR 35’s. But from the MTF graphs (IIRC, Zeiss publishes the actual and not calculated #'s) it suggests pin-sharp resolution right out of the aperture gate. A delight to see Zeiss hasn't abandoned the ZM line. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
wlaidlaw Posted September 17, 2014 Author Share #136 Posted September 17, 2014 Clever pricing, right in the middle between the CV lenses and the Leica FLE. This looks a much more sophisticated design from Zeiss, with unusually for them, aspheric and anomalous dispersion elements, so inevitably more pricey than their regular ZM lenses. I had the Biogon 35/2 and felt that taking it to F2, was maybe a step too far, with a big jump in resolution from f2 to f2,8. I was always surprised they did not develop their 35/f2 Planar G, which other than odd bokeh was very sharp at f2, rather than go for a new Biogon design for the 35/2 ZM. I too will be interested to see comparisons, from someone I trust, like Sean Reid. However no matter how good it is, I don’t see myself exchanging my 35 ASPH Summilux for the new ZM, as my 35 Summilux does everything I need from a 35mm lens. The new Zeiss is a bit larger than my 35 ASPH Summilux, if a little lighter at 380 gr. against the 450 gr. of my chrome/brass Lux. Wilson Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
lct Posted September 17, 2014 Share #137 Posted September 17, 2014 [...] The new Zeiss is a bit larger than my 35 ASPH Summilux [...] But a lot taller if i understand well. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
wlaidlaw Posted September 17, 2014 Author Share #138 Posted September 17, 2014 But a lot taller if i understand well. To some extent, it depends on which lens hood you use. I use a metal Contax GG2 hood on my ASPH 35 Summilux, which is quite neat and in this combination, I would agree much shorter than than the new Distagon. I got fed up with the original flimsy hood with its “self-detaching” lens cap but found the alternative 35 Summilux/28 Summicron hood just too bulky and which would bring the lens size to close to that of the Distagon. I also use a Contax GG1 hood on my 28 Summicron. One area where I feel Leica could imitate Zeiss is in the bayonet ventilated hoods that Zeiss use. I think that these are excellent. The only hoods I prefer are the built in ones on my 50 Noctilux and 90 Elmarit-M. However, I hate the horrible pinch in lens caps Zeiss use on their ZM’s, with the grip lines in the wrong direction, so that they squirt out of your fingers like a wet bar of soap, when you squeeze the tabs. I usually stick on the hook side of Velcro over the pinch tabs, so that I can grip them to remove once squeezed. Reviewers have been complaining about them for over ten years now, so I cannot understand why Zeiss have not changed the design. I use a Hama pinch-in lens cap on my MATE, which is far better than the Leica design, where you have to remove the hood to get it off. The Hama has grip slots in the correct direction, so it does not squirt out of your fingers when you squeeze the tabs. Wilson Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
MarkP Posted September 17, 2014 Share #139 Posted September 17, 2014 I agree with you about the excellent Zeiss bayonet-mount hoods and the pthetic pinch lens caps. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Archived
This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.