Jump to content
Leica M EV1: Die erste M mit EVF statt Messssucher ×
Leica M EV1: The first M with EVF instead of Rangefinder ×

35 Summilux FLE v. Zeiss 35 f1.4 ZM

LD_50

By LD_50
in Leica M Lenses

 Share

Recommended Posts

G3rald

G3rald

Posted
Posted

Advertisement (gone after registration)

The Zeiss does not require any corrections.

 

I will confirm this statement. Its hard to find flaws in this optic other than individual preferences of the lens rendering.

Also, this lens can resolve the Sony a7rm2 42 mp sensor, wide open at infinity very well when in fine details like trees, so i guess it is futureproof.

 

i have however no love for the front heaviness.

  • Like 1
Link to post
Share on other sites
  • Replies 113
  • Created
  • Last Reply

Top Posters In This Topic

Top Posters In This Topic

Popular Posts

horosu
horosu

The ZEISS has higher resolution wide-open and at every f-stop, less distortion and no focus-shift whatsoever (The FLE still has some)   Technically, it is clearly the better lens. However, that's no

colint544
colint544

Couldn't agree more, regarding build quality. I bought my 35mm Summilux FLE new in 2011, when it was a difficult lens to get a hold of. Paid the full list price of £3650.   Loved it, especially shoo

lct
lct

I would never use a 35 as big as a 90 but it's just me.

Posted Images

edwardkaraa

edwardkaraa

Posted
Posted

:):) Any lens has some amount of vignetting. Some wide-aperture lenses even quite a lot. Simply look at the data sheets if you do not believe me.

E.G. the Apo Macro Elmarit-R 100 is THE perfect lens, highest quality at all apertures at all distances. But it has some vignetting like ALL lenses.

You can call yourself very lucky if this is the only fault a lens has ! :):):)

 

Maybe you do not care - but that is another story. And I agree in the R 4/280 the vignetting is small. So you can find exceptions ...

 

See Diglloyd about the Zeiss lens: http://diglloyd.com/prem/s/LEICA/LeicaM9/lens-ZeissZM-35f1_4-vignetting.html So not my imagination.

The wiki has the data for the Leica lens.

Correction profiles are for the red borders and vignetting. The Zeiss has no red borders and the vignetting is quite negligible. Anyway this is something I would rather deal with in post rather than permanently affecting the raw file.

Link to post
Share on other sites
steppenw0lf

steppenw0lf

Posted
Posted (edited)

You call 3 full aperture stops negligible. Are you blind ? Look at the picture in the link.

If you don't mind, that is no problem, but simply denying it is foolish/absurd.

This is about finding the reality, not some fool's garden. I agree that it is not necessary to take it serious. On film we did that for many decades.

But the problem exists, no denying that.

Edited by steppenw0lf
Link to post
Share on other sites
edwardkaraa

edwardkaraa

Posted
Posted

You call 3 full aperture stops negligible. Are you blind ? Look at the picture in the link.

If you don't mind, that is no problem, but simply denying it is foolish/absurd.

This about finding the reality, not some fool's garden. I agree that it is not necessary to take it serious. In film we did that for many decades.

But the problem exists, no denying that.

I'm not blind, but thank you for asking. Three stops in the extreme corners at f/1.4 is negligible, and in actual usage, I have never noticed it. If you like flat images, then by all means use all the corrections you need/want, but I personally don't mind the natural vignetting that occurs at wide apertures.

Link to post
Share on other sites
yeeper

yeeper

Posted
Posted

I really enjoyed using the FLE, but the price was out of my current budget.  I tried the Distagon, but it was just too big.  The largest lens I like to have on my M is my 75 'Cron.

 

I decided on a 35mm f2 Biogon.  Can't wait to receive it. 

  • Like 1
Link to post
Share on other sites
steppenw0lf

steppenw0lf

Posted
Posted

Advertisement (gone after registration)

The classic 35mm is the Summicron-M 35 (iV). It is tiny and unobtrusive and has excellent IQ. Maybe give it a try before you decide for a non-Leica lens ?

Most of the time you will not use aperture 1.4 anyway - at least that is the typical scenario for me.

Link to post
Share on other sites
michaelwj

michaelwj

Posted
Posted

For me size is important, just doesn't seem right for a 35 to be that large, the perfect 35 size is the summicron mkIV IMO.

 

 

But thats only f/2, you'd expect an f/1.4 to be bigger. The pre-asph summilux is the perfect sized 35/1.4  :D

Link to post
Share on other sites
Peoplewing

Peoplewing

Posted
Posted

I owned the three Zeiss 35 ZM, 1.4, 2.0 and 2.8.

The 1.4 is my "King of IQ", although it is quite big and heavy. I would prefer the lighter an smaller (not better, IMO) Leica FLE on my M246, but it's too expensive for my budget. Actually the Zeiss is "only" 1620.- Euro...

 

When I need a tiny 35, I take the ZM 2.8, it has nearly the same IQ as the 1.4 at 2.0, and again, it is more budget-friendly than the Leica 2.8 counterpart.

 

Now, I'm using these two lenses. The first one if I need the 1.4, the second if I mind the weight.

 

The ZM 2.0 is a very nice lens, but I sold it because it is a compromise between the 1.4 and 2.8 in terms of size/IQ.

 

If I win in lottery, I'll buy the FLE, but only because of the small size. Finder blockage with the ZM 1.4 is there, but for me it's not a problem.

  • Like 5
Link to post
Share on other sites
matlep

matlep

Posted
Posted

 

When I need a tiny 35, I take the ZM 2.8, it has nearly the same IQ as the 1.4 at 2.0, and again, it is more budget-friendly than the Leica 2.8 counterpart.

 

 

The 35 2.8 from Zeiss has really become my favourite lens. After using the Summilux 35 (FLE) extensively for the last 4 years I have discovered that this little cheap bastard is really, really good.

Link to post
Share on other sites
edwardkaraa

edwardkaraa

Posted
Posted

I owned the three Zeiss 35 ZM, 1.4, 2.0 and 2.8.

The 1.4 is my "King of IQ", although it is quite big and heavy. I would prefer the lighter an smaller (not better, IMO) Leica FLE on my M246, but it's too expensive for my budget. Actually the Zeiss is "only" 1620.- Euro...

 

When I need a tiny 35, I take the ZM 2.8, it has nearly the same IQ as the 1.4 at 2.0, and again, it is more budget-friendly than the Leica 2.8 counterpart.

 

Now, I'm using these two lenses. The first one if I need the 1.4, the second if I mind the weight.

 

The ZM 2.0 is a very nice lens, but I sold it because it is a compromise between the 1.4 and 2.8 in terms of size/IQ.

 

If I win in lottery, I'll buy the FLE, but only because of the small size. Finder blockage with the ZM 1.4 is there, but for me it's not a problem.

That is exactly what I'm doing at this time.

Link to post
Share on other sites
Rus

Rus

Posted
Posted (edited)

If I win in lottery, I'll buy the FLE, but only because of the small size. Finder blockage with the ZM 1.4 is there, but for me it's not a problem.

Not meaning to stir up any GAS cloud...but the price of the two zeiss 35 combined should be quite close to a lux 35 FLE in ok 2nd hand condition. so even w/out winning the lottery.. ;-)

Edited by Rus
  • Like 1
Link to post
Share on other sites
Peoplewing

Peoplewing

Posted
Posted

@ Rus:

A splendit idea!  

But:

The FLE is - in good 2nd hand condition and with dealer guarantee - about 3600.- Euro. May be, I could find one for 3.300 or 3.400 €

I got the ZM 35/1.4 plus the ZM 35/2.8, new, with full Zeiss-guarantee - for 2.319.-€.

So I still have to wait, at least for a small lottery winning :-))

Or a big Leica "Sale".

The lottery seems to have the better success probability...

Link to post
Share on other sites
Rus

Rus

Posted
Posted (edited)

@ Rus:

A splendit idea!  

But:

The FLE is - in good 2nd hand condition and with dealer guarantee - about 3600.- Euro. May be, I could find one for 3.300 or 3.400 €

I got the ZM 35/1.4 plus the ZM 35/2.8, new, with full Zeiss-guarantee - for 2.319.-€.

So I still have to wait, at least for a small lottery winning :-))

Or a big Leica "Sale".

The lottery seems to have the better success probability...

 

Ditto to the "Leica Sale" :p

There might be some FLEs around being sold for a bit cheaper actually~~ I got the FLE not long ago off uk ebay for 2350 pounds~ or about 2810 euro~~ I remember seeing one sold by apertureuk for about the same price~~ Mine was in near mint condition, so I'm actually very happy about the price~~ I'm sure there are more out there :)

Edited by Rus
Link to post
Share on other sites
IWC Doppel

IWC Doppel

Posted
Posted

I owned the three Zeiss 35 ZM, 1.4, 2.0 and 2.8.

The 1.4 is my "King of IQ", although it is quite big and heavy. I would prefer the lighter an smaller (not better, IMO) Leica FLE on my M246, but it's too expensive for my budget. Actually the Zeiss is "only" 1620.- Euro...

 

When I need a tiny 35, I take the ZM 2.8, it has nearly the same IQ as the 1.4 at 2.0, and again, it is more budget-friendly than the Leica 2.8 counterpart.

 

Now, I'm using these two lenses. The first one if I need the 1.4, the second if I mind the weight.

 

The ZM 2.0 is a very nice lens, but I sold it because it is a compromise between the 1.4 and 2.8 in terms of size/IQ.

 

If I win in lottery, I'll buy the FLE, but only because of the small size. Finder blockage with the ZM 1.4 is there, but for me it's not a problem.

 

Surely you'd look at the earlier Aspherical (AA) if money wasnt a factor ;) , it's a stellar lens, shame they didnt make many and it became collectable

Link to post
Share on other sites
  • 1 month later...
james.liam

james.liam

Posted
Posted (edited)

Not meaning to stir up any GAS cloud...but the price of the two zeiss 35 combined should be quite close to a lux 35 FLE in ok 2nd hand condition. so even w/out winning the lottery.. ;-)

 

 

In the US, a used FLE can be found for ~ US$3500. A new ZM 1,4 with rebates ~$1800; a 2,8, ~$700. Still a grand left over for a VM 4,5/15. Or a new-old stock 75 Summarit from PhotoAlps with a few dollars left in your pocket.

 

I just spent 2 weeks with a ZM 35 C only and an M9M. How much "sharper" the 1,4 can get seems almost meaningless in practice; the Biogon C is already tack-sharp, high contrast and über flare-resistent @ ƒ/2,8, clearly out-resolving my now-sold 35 Summicron ASPH and without the dread focus shift some/many have noted.

 

The ƒ/1.4's extra 2-stops is another matter....

Edited by james.liam
  • Like 1
Link to post
Share on other sites

Create an account or sign in to comment

You need to be a member in order to leave a comment

Create an account

Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!

Register a new account

Sign in

Already have an account? Sign in here.

Sign In Now
 Share
Go to topic listing

  • Recently Browsing   0 members

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