MarkP Posted September 20, 2014 Share #61 Â Posted September 20, 2014 Advertisement (gone after registration) Yes. I'm starting to think that way. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Advertisement Posted September 20, 2014 Posted September 20, 2014 Hi MarkP, Take a look here Zeiss has a new 35mm 1.4 ZM. I'm sure you'll find what you were looking for!
01af Posted September 20, 2014 Share #62 Â Posted September 20, 2014 Lloyd states that the Zeiss is the best M-mount 35mm lens, period. Beating the Summilux-M 35 Asph in every way. Lloyd is right. The new Zeiss Distagon T* 35 mm 1:1.4 ZM blows the Leica Summilux-M 35 mm 1:1.4 Asph out of the water. It's bigger, it has unusual filter threads of 49 mm, and it isn't 6-bit-coded ... but that completes the list of negative points. The positive points are: better contrast and sharpness at full aperture form center to edge, less purple fringing (none actually) at full aperture, less distortion, and better bokeh. The Zeiss clearly is the better lens, at half the price. However it has a considerably smaller angle-of-view than the Summilux ... it's more like a 36 or 37 mm lens. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
tookaphotoof Posted September 20, 2014 Share #63 Â Posted September 20, 2014 The 49mm thread however could be a big negative point for people like me who also shoot film. New color filters, new nd filters which is quite costly and it adds weight in the bag. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
MarkP Posted September 20, 2014 Share #64  Posted September 20, 2014 The new Zeiss Distagon T* 35 mm 1:1.4 ZM blows the Leica Summilux-M 35 mm 1:1.4 Asph out of the water...better contrast and sharpness at full aperture form center to edge, less purple fringing (none actually) at full aperture, less distortion, and better bokeh. The Zeiss clearly is the better lens...  I've already contacted my dealer to take one for a test drive as soon as they arrive to compare with my 35 Summilux FLE and see for myself.   The positive points are: better contrast and sharpness at full aperture form center to edge, less purple fringing (none actually) at full aperture, less distortion, and better bokeh.  Which is, in the end, what it's all about - the final image quality.   It's bigger  Main downside.   it has unusual filter threads of 49 mm  Lots of my Leica lenses use 49mm filters so I'm covered here.   and it isn't 6-bit-coded  Hopefully the mount has that small flange to allow pen coding.   it has a considerably smaller angle-of-view than the Summilux ... it's more like a 36 or 37 mm lens.  I can live with that.   less purple fringing (none actually) at full aperture  I'll believe that there's no purple fringing when I see it (or don't see it).   it has unusual filter threads of 49 mm  Not that unusual - plenty of Leica lenses I own use 49mm filters so I already have a range of them.   ...at half the price.  The icing on the cake . Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
mirekti Posted September 21, 2014 Share #65 Â Posted September 21, 2014 The positive points are: better contrast and sharpness at full aperture form center to edge, less purple fringing (none actually) at full aperture, less distortion, and better bokeh. The Zeiss clearly is the better lens, at half the price. Â I own a 35 FLE, like the lens and I won't change it for the Zeiss one. It can produce some really nice photos, and it servers me well. However, the facts you wrote hurt, and they hurt double the usual on a dollar scale. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
SiriusLux Posted September 21, 2014 Share #66 Â Posted September 21, 2014 Well, Â mine was ordered last Wednesday, so let's see how long it takes to get it. The dealer already got confirmation. Â Joerg Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Sileem Posted September 21, 2014 Share #67 Â Posted September 21, 2014 Advertisement (gone after registration) Well at least the aperture ring is clearly visible (not like at Otus 85mm on d810) Â Â And the lens shade is so much nicer compared to standard lens hood of CV 35mm 1.2 Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
jaapv Posted September 21, 2014 Share #68 Â Posted September 21, 2014 Lloyd is right. The new Zeiss Distagon T* 35 mm 1:1.4 ZM blows the Leica Summilux-M 35 mm 1:1.4 Asph out of the water. It's bigger, it has unusual filter threads of 49 mm, and it isn't 6-bit-coded ... but that completes the list of negative points. The positive points are: better contrast and sharpness at full aperture form center to edge, less purple fringing (none actually) at full aperture, less distortion, and better bokeh. The Zeiss clearly is the better lens, at half the price. However it has a considerably smaller angle-of-view than the Summilux ... it's more like a 36 or 37 mm lens. Â Having shot one yesterday I would say Lloyd is indeed right. The results look more than excellent on my screen with a native clarity that is amazing. Â The compromises have clearly been shifted to the size and the focal length. Which they would have to be to get this quality. Â I must say the balance on the camera is good, it is not too heavy, but the viewfinder intrusion is bothersome. Â I think i will not buy, as the focal length gets it too close to my Summilux 50 asph and I like to see more of the lower righthand corner with a 35. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
holgerf Posted September 21, 2014 Share #69  Posted September 21, 2014 Having shot one yesterday I would say Lloyd is indeed right. The results look more than excellent on my screen with a native clarity that is amazing. The compromises have clearly been shifted to the size and the focal length. Which they would have to be to get this quality.  I must say the balance on the camera is good, it is not too heavy, but the viewfinder intrusion is bothersome.  I think iI will not buy, as the focal length gets it too close to my Summilux 50 asph and I like to see more of the lower righthand corner with a 35.  Exactly my own observation trying it on Photokina. What really impressed my was the very buttery function of focusing, just a dream. Size is the killer… Best Holger Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
mmradman Posted September 21, 2014 Share #70 Â Posted September 21, 2014 Â I must say the balance on the camera is good, it is not too heavy, but the viewfinder intrusion is bothersome. Â 35. Â VF blockage shouldn't be show stopper, apart from EVF there is also lovely looking external metal 35mm optical VF by Voightlander in the market. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
jaapv Posted September 21, 2014 Share #71 Â Posted September 21, 2014 Not very effective focusing at 1.4 with an external viewfinder, nor is the EVF precise enough at this focal length. Short and fast = Rangefinder in my book. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
mirekti Posted September 21, 2014 Share #72 Â Posted September 21, 2014 Does it intrude the 35mm VF frames more than Nocti does for 50? Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
horosu Posted September 21, 2014 Share #73 Â Posted September 21, 2014 Does it intrude the 35mm VF frames more than Nocti does for 50? Â I haven't had it in my hands, but I'm sure it must: the 35mm frame lines are just flush with the viewfinder margins. Even the 35 Summilux, which is quite smaller than the Distagon, intrudes in the 35mm frame lines. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
jaapv Posted September 21, 2014 Share #74 Â Posted September 21, 2014 Does it intrude the 35mm VF frames more than Nocti does for 50? Â I did no scientific measurement, we must wait for a reliable reviewer for that, but I would say yes, it does. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Peter Branch Posted September 21, 2014 Share #75 Â Posted September 21, 2014 Can we please get real. The 35mm Summilux FLE has a design focal length of 35.6 mm. Â It is simply not possible to distinguish this focal length from one of 36 mm or even 37 mm in a viewfinder. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
jaapv Posted September 21, 2014 Share #76 Â Posted September 21, 2014 That is true, I did not mean that small difference. I meant that it makes no sense to me to have a 35 and a 50 with essentially the same usage. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
lct Posted September 22, 2014 Share #77 Â Posted September 22, 2014 VF blockage is not caused by the actual focal length of a lens but by its physical length and width. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
stephen.w Posted September 22, 2014 Share #78 Â Posted September 22, 2014 I wonder how many people making a fuss about the size of this new Zeiss lens and viewfinder blockage will be queuing up to buy the new 28mm Summilux? Â I have just a few weeks ago bought a new 35 FLE and feel a bit sheepish that I didn't know beforehand that Zeiss were going to release this lens. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
jaapv Posted September 22, 2014 Share #79 Â Posted September 22, 2014 VF blockage is not caused by the actual focal length of a lens but by its physical length and width. Yes, of course. I don't think anybody on this thread was confusing this. However, the focal length does affect the size of the framelines. A 35 mm lens will block more of the frame than a 90 mm one, obviously. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
jaapv Posted September 22, 2014 Share #80 Â Posted September 22, 2014 I wonder how many people making a fuss about the size of this new Zeiss lens and viewfinder blockage will be queuing up to buy the new 28mm Summilux? Â I'll bring them coffee whilst they are waiting 28 - I find I hardly ever use it. Mostly 24-35. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Archived
This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.