35mm Lens for M9, which one to choose?

[skuromis]

Advertisement (gone after registration)

Hi there, I own a Zeiss 35/2.8 which in general is fine. However, 95% of the pictures are under-exposed all the time. Which is the only reason I want to change it.

I'd also expect some improvements in handling, as the Zeiss lens is not so smooth compared to other Leica lenses I have. But this should be more a side effect

 

On the other hand, the size of the lens (the Zeiss) is fantastic, sharpness, contrast and colors are great. It would be great to keep those advantages.

Lens speed is ok, too.

 

Do you have any recommendation/ thought'/ idea for another 35mm lens?

[Advertisement]

The Leica Q3 is available for pre-order at B&H Photo Video and Adorama

[NightSun]

The closest one (size/speed/performance/cost) you could choose as a substitute is Leica Summarit 35 (f/2.5 or f/2.4, the new one), which is also an outstanding all-round performer and with some more gentle rendering than the Zeiss. Although Summarits occasionally get bashing that in terms of mechanics they don't live up to other Leica lenses, but compared to the Zeiss you would get at least slightly better handling IMHO.

 

Alternatively, you might want to consider faster alternatives, a Summicron 35, or a Zeiss 35/2, if you still need that Zeiss pop (however, the Zeiss 35/2.8 is actually a better performer than that except for distortion). And of course there are many others, the question is your main preference of usage, if other than simply substituting the C-Biogon 35/2.8.

[jankap]

Before buying new stuff, it should discussed how to get correct exposures with your lens!

A new lens will not help you.

 

Sorry I don´t have an M camera, so no direct help from me.

Look for an overexposure setting, so tell your camera to overexpose every picture in order to get a correct picture. Try one stop first.

Or perhaps the camera has the function bracketing (3 pictures with different stops).

Jan

[pop]

Using another lens will not improve the exposure of your images. If they are really underexposed, increase the exposure.

 

Are you sure they are underexposed?

[skuromis]

Thanks for your thoughts so far!

 

Jan, the problem with adjusting camera settings is, that the moment I switch the lens, I will have distorted settings. And knowing myself, it will take me a couple of shots to remember that... So, yes, I can do it but it seems like a work around. (Plus I don't like using settings from the menu, e.g. adjusting ISO settings on the M9 is already too much for my liking)

 

Why is it under exposing anyway, all other lenses are fine?

[skuromis]

Are you sure they are underexposed?

Well, let's put it that way: pictures are mostly too dark, and darker compared to other lenses. I could run a batch job in aperture: if lens=Zeiss 35 -> expose 1 stop longer

[pop]

Advertisement (gone after registration)

How do you measure your exposure?

 

The 35mm Summarit is, BTW, a lovely lens which I can recommend.

[jankap]

OK, I see. You have 28, 50 and 90 M´s and a 35er Zeiss.

 

I believe Zeiss lenses turn in the opposite direction, when you set the distance.

A different stable.

 

NightSun proposed a Summarit 35, that would also be my choice.

You could have a look at Voigtländer too.

Jan

[pico]

Hi there, I own a Zeiss 35/2.8 which in general is fine. However, 95% of the pictures are under-exposed all the time. Which is the only reason I want to change it.

 

Do you use any other lenses that under-expose so often?

 

On the other hand, the size of the lens (the Zeiss) is fantastic, sharpness, contrast and colors are great. It would be great to keep those advantages.

Lens speed is ok, too.

 

If an F/2.8 lens is fine, then consider a Leica Summarit-M.

[pico]

Are you setting the lens detection manually? Or using whatever lens was detected before mounting the Zeiss?

[james.liam]

Your best options are well outlined by the crowd-sourced opinions above. You really need to check the settings and the camera. The 35C is a stellar performer already at ƒ/2.8, and in terms of sheer resolution outdoes existing slower Leicas and Voigtländers at that aperture. That said, the high-contrast and Zeiss colors may not be to your liking. The 35 Summarit renders in a gentler fashion reminiscent of older Summicrons and shares one attribute with the 35C that is more critical on digital than film; an absence of discernible focus shift.

 

A radical option for you might be the 35 Summaron ƒ/2.8. Sharper than the much-lauded (?overhyped) 8-element Summicron at ƒ/2.8-4, it costs less than 1/2 the price of the Summicron and gives you the Mandler-look while retaining a compact size and high performance. Lower contrast than the modern lenses but may be desirable in the appropriate settings.

[IWC Doppel]

I'd change your lens for other reasons than under exposure.

[skuromis]

Thanks for all the input.

 

I measure usually by center weighted average, and use both, automatic shutter speed and manual set (with the help of the camera indicator).

 

I don't select any lens in particular for the profile, and my lens isn't in the list anyway. I don't know what the camera will choose then, to be honest.

 

The Summarit seems to be a good option, I will try it.

 

Just to clarify, I like the Zeiss lens, really. The pictures are great. It just gets on my nerves, that I need to touch almost every picture to correct the exposure (for 5 pictures it is ok, for sorting out 2k vacation pictures, not ok). And this is really the only lens, I'm having this problem with.

[uhoh7]

Don't listen to them LOL

 

Any reason is a good reason to get another lens!!!

 

Under 1K the ZM35/2 is unbeatable.

 

At around 2k I would try the new 35/2 ASPH Leica.

 

Obviously there are many many great 35s, I have 4.

 

The CV 35/1.2 is a lot of fun, but heavy. The CV 35/1.4 really quite excellent but does have considerable distortion.

[pop]

I measure usually by center weighted average, and use both, automatic shutter speed and manual set (with the help of the camera indicator).

 

I can conceive of no explanation which would lead to the camera to underexposing most or even a few frames under those circumstances. I can't see how replacing the lens will solve that problem.

[TRIago]

You can't go wrong with the 35 cron asph.

[MarkP]

A few points which have already been addressed, and I apologise in advance if some of these questions seem basic/obvious but we don't know your level of photographic expertise:

 

1. The 2.8/35 Zeiss is a high contrast lens - is that what you're seeing rather than underexposure?

 

2. Is the histogram confirming underexposure?

 

3. Have you compared exposure with any other lenses on the M9 or checked the accuracy of the M9 meter (perhaps it is faulty)?

 

4. I agree with the others regarding reviewing your exposure calculation and technique again.

 

5. Point and shoot with the camera on Auto does not guarantee the correct exposure, the meter will only ever guide your subsequent exposure setting.

 

6. Is the camera perchance set on a -EV setting?

 

7. Noo one needs an excuse to buy more lenses

 

Most importantly (and as stated before), unless the high contrast concerns you, replacing the lens will NOT improve the exposure problem you describe.

 

Regards,

Mark

[Jeff S]

I don't select any lens in particular for the profile….

 

So why not try some and see what happens.

 

Jeff

[Advertisement]

Hallo,

Look here: Leica M

[skuromis]

I can conceive of no explanation which would lead to the camera to underexposing most or even a few frames under those circumstances.

 

Yes, fully agree and yet it does.

 

1. The 2.8/35 Zeiss is a high contrast lens - is that what you're seeing rather than underexposure?

 

I don't think so, but yes it is a high contrast lens. Same as my Elmarit 28, which doesn't show the same dark picture.

 

2. Is the histogram confirming underexposure?

 

Sorry, will have to check, once I'm back home.

 

3. Have you compared exposure with any other lenses on the M9 or checked the accuracy of the M9 meter (perhaps it is faulty)?

 

Yes, I have 3 other lenses and they are all fine.

 

4. I agree with the others regarding reviewing your exposure calculation and technique again.

 

I will do it, but I returned from a trip to NYC recently and now seeing the pictures reveals some nasty, hair like marks on each picture (with any lens I used). It is not dust or smear on the sensor and rather looks like scratches, so the cam went to the service yesterday. I was promised only 3 month waiting time

 

5. Point and shoot with the camera on Auto does not guarantee the correct exposure, the meter will only ever guide your subsequent exposure setting.

 

Clear, I'm comparing the results with me shooting other lenses on the same camera.

 

6. Is the camera perchance set on a -EV setting?

 

I don't think so, as the other lenses work well. But once I have the camera back, I'll check.

 

7. Noo one needs an excuse to buy more lenses

 

Yeah, I love buying new toys. I love travelling too and, unfortunately, have only one pocket to finance all this

 

Thanks guys for all the inputs! I will first get my cam back, then check the settings (including other lens profiles) and try the Summarit. Let's see the outcome

[BjarniM]

I don't know your budget or what it specific should be used for, so my recommendation is from the point of view if you should get one single all purpose lens.

 

I own and use a Leica Summicron-M f/2 ASPH (the current version) and i just can't recommend it highly enough. Such a fantastic all round lens.

 

It's insanely sharp (even wide open) and tack sharp out to all edges from f/4, free of distortion, contrasty, has character, renders colors in a lovely way and is a small lens.

 

Prior to buying i did also test the Summilux-M f/1.4 FLE which is almost twice the price of the Summicron.

 

In my opinion the only thing you don't get with the Summicron is the extra f-stop, but if you are shooting digital you can compensate for this by turning the ISO up without suffering too much noise from high ISO.

 

Summicron vs Summilux: Maybe you can see some minor differences if you are pixel peeping with a structured test program viewed on a professional monitor but who is buying a lens just for test purpuses?

 

 

95% of the pictures are under-exposed all the time. Which is the only reason I want to change it.

 

I don't think you can blame your lens for this. Do yourself a favor, which you also can use to become a better photographer. Learn to measure light with your bare eye. It's difficult in the beginning, but you will learn if you just practice enough.

 

You will get better results when you have obtained these skills and you will feel much more confident when shooting, resulting in better pictures. With one source to errors out of the way you will be able put more energy in composing the single pictures.