Jump to content
🇩🇪 Neu: Leica SL3 Reporter ×
🇺🇸🇬🇧 New: Leica SL3 Reporter ×

Zeiss has a new 35mm 1.4 ZM

gberger

By gberger
in Leica M Lenses

Recommended Posts

horosu

horosu

Posted
Posted

Advertisement (gone after registration)

Why ?

The lens may have a very different vignetting signature.

 

Very true. However, I have always used the code that it closest to the given lens: eg. the Biogon 35/2 with the Summicron 35/2 pre-asph, etc.

 

I know that Zeiss, for instance, recommends other codes (for the Zeiss 25/2.8, I think) and you may be right that if you wish complete vignetting control other codes might work better. We shall see.

Link to post
Share on other sites
  • Replies 167
  • Created
  • Last Reply
jaapv

jaapv

Posted
Posted

Grab shot. No extreme vignetting, despite no in-camera corrections (nor in PP)

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
sdk

sdk

Posted
Posted

I’ve gone to not bothering to code or choose profiles for non-Leica lenses on my M9P, and instead use EXIF Editor to add lens data before importing my files into Lightroom 5. In post processing in LR5, I use the Adobe DNG Flat Feld Correction plugin, usually with an interleaved flatfield correction image shot on location through a credit card sized piece of white, opaque Plexiglas. This corrects vignetting and color errors in the corners and edges far better than farting around with Leica profiles, but does require a bit more work in post.

 

I actually do flatfield correction with all my Leica wideangles too, though I leave the camera lens coding set to automatic. I find the Leica profiles unfortunately don’t correct ray angle induced color errors well enough for critical work for my 24mm/3.8, 28mm/2 or 28mm/2.8 ASPH lenses.

Link to post
Share on other sites
01af

01af

Posted
Posted
The Summilux-M 35 mm Asph FLE has a design focal length of 35.6 mm.

And the Distagon T* 35 mm 1:1.4 ZM has a design focal length of 36.5 mm.

So if delta f = 0.9 mm —> 2.5 % we need not to worry, that is hardly noticeable if at all.

Whoa! You'd be surprised! The difference in the fields-of-view is substantial. As a matter of fact, I was very surprised to find the difference is just 0.9 mm ... from the look of the pictures, I had estimated a difference of at least 2 mm.

 

 

... it was mentioned in the thread Zeiss managed to make the lens better than FLE because its focal length was larger than FLE's ...

No-one mentioned that. It's you who is making up this causality out of thin air.

 

 

Like I said: Can we please get real?

Seems your sense of reality is, uh ... out of focus.

 

 

The other factor which has been cited is that it is, I quote: "More retrofocus than the FLE".

Which is a funny thing to say because neither lens is retrofocus at all. Still there's a grain (really just a grain) of truth in that statement because the Distagon's back-focus distance is a tad longer than the Summilux's (by approx. 2.5 - 3 mm).

 

 

If it is then this may indeed be significant ...

No, it isn't.

 

 

... because of the pupil magnification effect in most "retrofocus" lenses the depth-of-field may be larger.

First—the Distagon's longer back-focus distance may or may not mean a larger exit pupil ... because for a given entry pupil size, the exit pupil's size depends on the exit pupil's position, not on the back-focus distance.

 

Second—as the Distagon has an effective lens speed that is closer to 1:1.5 rather than 1:1.4, the exit pupil might as well be smaller than the Summilux's.

 

Third—for a given entry pupil size, a larger exit pupil, which is typical for retrofocus lenses, would mean smaller depth-of-field, not larger ... but then, this would make a significant difference only at very close distances (closer than 0.7 m).

Link to post
Share on other sites
wattsy

wattsy

Posted
Posted
In the UK Robert White now lists this at £1680 incl VAT (stock not in yet).

Substantially more expensive than in the US, $2290 at B&H (£0.62 = $1, so £1420 equivalent) according to posting no.9 in the thread, unless UK taxes have to be taken into the calculation.

 

Well they do if you want to make a fair comparison. The Robert White price is pretty much exactly the same as the US price.

 

Might be a long wait, I have read that Zeiss are suggesting next March as a realistic shipping date.

Link to post
Share on other sites
sdk

sdk

Posted
Posted

Zeiss was answering inquiries about 35mm/1.4 ZM availability on Facebook as 4th Quarter 2014, so let’s hope that it’s not March, 2015, which is a whole lot later. It would be nice if Cosina & CZ can get me one before Christmas break at work. But I’d rather they not do a rush job and put out sub-par lenses. It’s hard to be patient.

Link to post
Share on other sites
indergaard

indergaard

Posted
Posted
There is a picture of it mounted on an M body on Leica Rumours. I think it looks HUGE for a 35mm lens. I dont like that for a focal length that I use so much. I will stick to my summilux, which I consider a stellar lens.

 

Same here. The 35 FLE without the hood is the perfect size and balances perfectly with the M240. If I were buying new however, it would be a difficult decision, mainly due to the cost difference... The size and weight savings is not worth twice the cost, especially considering the optical performance of the Zeiss is better.

Link to post
Share on other sites
stephen.w

stephen.w

Posted
Posted
Same here. The 35 FLE without the hood is the perfect size and balances perfectly with the M240. If I were buying new however, it would be a difficult decision, mainly due to the cost difference... The size and weight savings is not worth twice the cost, especially considering the optical performance of the Zeiss is better.

 

I agree about the size. Other big positives for me are the six-bit coding, the wonderful colour rendition (admittedly on the M-E sensor -- no experience of the typ 240) and complete lack of focus shift. These may not add up to double the value, in strictly monetary terms, but imo that is not how one should think about a lens like this.

Link to post
Share on other sites
CheshireCat

CheshireCat

Posted
Posted
Other big positives for me are the six-bit coding, the wonderful colour rendition (admittedly on the M-E sensor -- no experience of the typ 240) and complete lack of focus shift. These may not add up to double the value, in strictly monetary terms, but imo that is not how one should think about a lens like this.

 

6-bit coding apart, you are presuming that the Zeiss has worse color rendition and focus shift :confused:

Link to post
Share on other sites
horosu

horosu

Posted
Posted
I agree about the size. Other big positives for me are (...) complete lack of focus shift.

 

On this issue,as an owner of two Summilux 35 FLE lenses, I beg to disagree : the lens HAS focus shift, but it is not relevant in everyday practice.

 

This was true for me, in my humble practice, and others (Sein Reid, for example) have found the same. Focus shift occurs mainly at 2.8 and 4.0 but much reduced compared to the pre-FLE version.

 

The Nokton 1.2, on the other hand is free from focus shift.

 

However: I now own the 'Lux and not the Nokton, and the reason is mainly size and comfort in use. I find these to be very important for me, so, although I am quite curious about the Distagon's performance, the most important thing for me will be how "good" the lens will feel in my hands and in practical use.

Link to post
Share on other sites
gberger

gberger

Posted
  • Author
Posted

Looking through the Zeiss Camera Lens blog, I noticed that several people had inquired about asph and floating element lenses in the new Zeiss 35mm f1.4 Distagon ZM. The Zeiss Camera Lens crew came back, on several occasions, stating that the new 35 1.4 ZM has an aspheric lens as well as a floating lens element.

 

So, reviews of the new Zeiss and the inevitable comparisons between the new Zeiss and the Leica 35 Summilux ASPH (FLE) should be interesting - - - especially with the price point differential.

Link to post
Share on other sites
indergaard

indergaard

Posted
Posted
Looking through the Zeiss Camera Lens blog, I noticed that several people had inquired about asph and floating element lenses in the new Zeiss 35mm f1.4 Distagon ZM. The Zeiss Camera Lens crew came back, on several occasions, stating that the new 35 1.4 ZM has an aspheric lens as well as a floating lens element.

 

So, reviews of the new Zeiss and the inevitable comparisons between the new Zeiss and the Leica 35 Summilux ASPH (FLE) should be interesting - - - especially with the price point differential.

 

Well, after extensive use of the ZM 35/1.4 Distagon, Lloyd Chambers is selling his 35 Lux FLE without hesitation, and at the same time states that the following

Surely the ZM 35/1.4 Distagon is one of the finest lenses available for Leica M shooters.
Lot's of new example images up on his blog: diglloyd - Blog

 

I guess that says it all. Though the size of the 35 FLE without the hood is the key selling point for me. But I'm definitely gonna try the ZM 35/1.4 Distagon once my local dealer has it in stock... And if I don't mind the size, I would have no problems getting rid of the FLE.

Link to post
Share on other sites
sblitz

sblitz

Posted
Posted

Lloyd is not exactly in love with Leica Inc and visa versa, so I would take his claims of selling a Leica lens for a Zeiss with a grain of salt, so to speak. Doesn't mean it is isn't a good lens, and I am very interested in buying it myself, but his is not a voice I trust as being impartial. IMHO

Link to post
Share on other sites

Archived

This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.

Go to topic listing

  • Recently Browsing   0 members

    • No registered users viewing this page.
×
×
  • Create New...