wattsy Posted September 22, 2014 Share #81 Â Posted September 22, 2014 Advertisement (gone after registration) 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. Â Yes, there has been chatter for years about Zeiss bringing out a ZM 35/F1.4 but I don't think anyone thought they were actually going to bother so it is a bit of a surprise. It's also a surprise that it is apparently so good. If it is indeed better than the 35 Summilux (and I guess we should wait until shipping products are evaluated rather than hand picked demo units before drawing too many conclusions) then it will be a great lens. If I didn't already have the Summilux I'd likely choose the Zeiss lens (it is, after all, less than half the price of the Leica) but I'm not sure I have any desire to replace my Summilux. The Leica lens has the size advantage (and is already quite large for my taste) and, in spite of an eccentric wavy field at middling apertures that can be irritating on occasions, the 35 Summilux is a pretty sensational lens. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Advertisement Posted September 22, 2014 Posted September 22, 2014 Hi wattsy, Take a look here Zeiss has a new 35mm 1.4 ZM. I'm sure you'll find what you were looking for!
jaapv Posted September 22, 2014 Share #82 Â Posted September 22, 2014 The guy at the Zeiss stand told me that it was even a bit of a surprise within the company that they decided to go through. Apparently there was a decision against it until a year ago, until somebody (presumably high up) said "why not". Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
stephen.w Posted September 22, 2014 Share #83 Â Posted September 22, 2014 The Leica lens has the size advantage (and is already quite large for my taste) and, in spite of an eccentric wavy field at middling apertures that can be irritating on occasions, the 35 Summilux is a pretty sensational lens.I completely agree, even given the limited time I have had with it. Really, stonkingly good. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
lct Posted September 22, 2014 Share #84 Â Posted September 22, 2014 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. Yes it is obvious indeed but i did not understand the discussion about the actual focal length of the Summilux FLE in this respect. I must have missed something i guess. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
01af Posted September 22, 2014 Share #85 Â Posted September 22, 2014 Can we please get real. Huh!? Â 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. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
SiriusLux Posted September 22, 2014 Share #86 Â Posted September 22, 2014 So if delta f = 0.9mm ==> 2.5% we need not to worry, that is hardly noticeable if at all. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
horosu Posted September 22, 2014 Share #87 Â Posted September 22, 2014 Advertisement (gone after registration) So if delta f = 0.9mm ==> 2.5% we need not to worry, that is hardly noticeable if at all. Â Guys, we're talking here viewfinder intrusion due to SIZE or am I all wrong here? Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
mirekti Posted September 22, 2014 Share #88 Â Posted September 22, 2014 Guys, we're talking here viewfinder intrusion due to SIZE or am I all wrong here? Â Yes, we talked about the viewfinder intrusion due to the lens physical size/dimensions. Apart from that it was mentioned in the thread Zeiss managed to make the lens better than FLE because it's focal length was larger than FLE's and the it's all put in a bigger package. I hope this clarify the confusion now. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Peter Branch Posted September 22, 2014 Share #89 Â Posted September 22, 2014 ...........Apart from that it was mentioned in the thread Zeiss managed to make the lens better than FLE because it's focal length was larger than FLE's ............ Â Indeed - by about 2.5%. Like I said: Can we please get real? Â The larger size is almost certainly significant, this is a well known and understood way to improve performance. The other factor which has been cited is that it is, I quote: "More retrofocus than the FLE". If it is then this may indeed be significant and because of the pupil magnification effect in most "retrofocus" lenses the Depth of Field may be larger. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
horosu Posted September 23, 2014 Share #90 Â Posted September 23, 2014 Zeiss has put up a Youtube video, for those interested: Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
lct Posted September 23, 2014 Share #91 Â Posted September 23, 2014 Quit tempting me please Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
horosu Posted September 23, 2014 Share #92  Posted September 23, 2014 Quit tempting me please  Well, that makes two of us Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
padam Posted September 23, 2014 Share #93 Â Posted September 23, 2014 Looking at some shots taken at the show, it is certainly very sharp but the bokeh does not look great wide open. It smooths out stepped down, but the whole point is using it wide open most of the time, doesn't it? Â More samples needed, but not too convinced at this point. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
349A Posted September 23, 2014 Share #94 Â Posted September 23, 2014 It smooths out stepped down, but the whole point is using it wide open most of the time, doesn't it? Â I sure hope not. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Sileem Posted September 23, 2014 Share #95 Â Posted September 23, 2014 Zeiss has put up a Youtube video, for those interested: Â From this video it looks thin and small. Sure it's no cron 35 asph size but it gives you good alternative when you come from zeiss SLR line. Â If i already had a lux 35mm asph, i wouldn't get it, but for the first lens after purchasing M body, i can't see how you can go wrong. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
mirekti Posted September 23, 2014 Share #96 Â Posted September 23, 2014 Here are few more samples Photokina 2014: First impressions of the Zeiss Distagon T* 35mm f/1.4 ZM for the M-mount system | MirrorLessons - The Best Mirrorless Camera Reviews It does look quite big in the first few photos, especially with the hood on. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
SiriusLux Posted September 23, 2014 Share #97 Â Posted September 23, 2014 Guys, we're talking here viewfinder intrusion due to SIZE or am I all wrong here? Â No Horea, not at all, I am not at all worried about viewfinder intrusion and was not commenting on that. Instead I was referring to an earlier statement where someone (I don't remember who) was saying the Distagon was more f= 37 mm to 39 mm. That statement was then later corrected resulting in the minor difference between the two lenses in delta f = 0.9 mm. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
sblitz Posted September 23, 2014 Share #98 Â Posted September 23, 2014 what code would you use? Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
horosu Posted September 23, 2014 Share #99 Â Posted September 23, 2014 what code would you use? Â 6-bit? The Summilux one, for sure Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
CheshireCat Posted September 23, 2014 Share #100  Posted September 23, 2014 6-bit? The Summilux one, for sure  Why ? The lens may have a very different vignetting signature. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Archived
This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.