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

Zeiss Distagon T* 1.4/35 ZM availability? Has anyone gotten a serial version yet?

SiriusLux

By SiriusLux
in Leica M Lenses

Recommended Posts

  • Replies 139
  • Created
  • Last Reply
TheGodParticle/Hari

TheGodParticle/Hari

Posted
Posted
Lens was just delivered, unboxing pictures here ->

 

 

Will shoot some size comparison images in a short while and post them here

 

Added images for size comparison into the folder hyperlinked above.

 

ZM 35/1.4 vs 35LuxASPH-FLE vs 35LuxASPH.

 

For those who have older LTM/LSM gear and are interested in a size comparison, I included the ubiquitous Summitar 50/f2

 

First impressions -

 

1. Beautiful build quality. Probably the best ZM lens i've handled so far, possibly because all my ZM lenses are black and this is the first silver/chrome ZM lens I handled.

 

2. No 6-bit coding grooves on the flange. I've been shootign with lens detection turned off but no funky colors on the edges. Or anywhere.

 

3. Well dampened Focus movement, the throw is short - which is to my taste. The lens does not extend/contract while focusing.

 

4. Aperture mechanism is also a pleasure to use. I am subconsciously in tune with Leica's 1/2 stop increments, the 1/3 stop increments screw with my brain.

 

5. Not front heavy on the M240, feels well balanced. Does not tip over when left on a table.

 

6. VF blockage is more than with my 35Luxes (i haven't mounted the ZM hood on to the lens yet) but since i'm used to shooting with the Noctiluxes / 90 crons / 75Lux, this does not bother me.

 

7. Zeiss included a distinct bump on the focus wheel. Took a minute to get used to but now I like it, it lets me know where i am (distance) simply by feeling the bump.

 

8. Both the front and back elements are concave, like the 35LuxASPH v1 and v2

 

9. The length difference between the 35Luxes and the ZM35/1.4 is more pronounced without the hoods on the Leicas. With the hoods on the Leicas, the length difference seems trivial. The width difference is also clear but i like the Zeiss Bump and the focus throw is short so the increased difference is not bad.

 

10. To my eyes, there is a slight difference in color between the chrome M240 body and the chrome ZM 35/1.4 lens. The M240 seems a few shades colder whereas the lens seems a few shades warmer.

 

11. Whatever images I took around the house were impressive. High contrast, saturation, sharpness, neutral bokeh at short distances and the legendary T* coating needs no introduction. The first thing that came to my mind was how similar this lens performance appears to be to my favorite APO50/f2.

 

12. The dreafully cheap Zeiss front cap hasn't changed. I'm sure Zeiss can allocate Cosina a few extra pennies to improve the quality.

 

13. I miss a leather carry pouch for the lens. I take good care of my equipment and I wouldn't want bits and pieces inside my bag scraping against each other.

 

14. The filter size is 49mm which is great news! My APO75/2 also has a 49mm filter size and 35-75 happens to be my fav combo so I can carry single set of filters and use on both the lenses.

 

15. The T* coating is simply incredible. Reduced flare, ghosting, improved contrast even shot contre-jour. This has tangible benefits in the form of better light transmission, thereby slightly faster shutter speeds. This is the first ZM lens made for Digital cameras but I have a feeling this lens will rock with Film too. I bought a few rolls of Delta400 and Portra400, waiting for an opportunity to get out and shoot.

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
TheGodParticle/Hari

TheGodParticle/Hari

Posted
Posted

A closer look at the lens

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
TheGodParticle/Hari

TheGodParticle/Hari

Posted
Posted

And an even closer look at the bump

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
TheGodParticle/Hari

TheGodParticle/Hari

Posted
Posted

Mounted on the M240

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
TheGodParticle/Hari

TheGodParticle/Hari

Posted
Posted

Compared vs

 

Summilux 35ASPH-FLE (black)

 

Summilux 35ASPH (chrome)

 

Summitar 50/f2 (overarching comparison for legacy lens owners/shooters)

 

Bear with the iphone picture for the moment, will shoot and upload better quality images tomorrow - heading out for dinner now

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
Keith (M)

Keith (M)

Posted
Posted

Advertisement (gone after registration)

The Distagon is an impressive looking beast. However, at twice the price and with considerable additional bulk, weight & diameter, methinks the potential attraction of an additional stop is not going to be enough to persuade me to part-ex my Biogon f2 (which is illustrated with a B+W filter fitted).

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
TheGodParticle/Hari

TheGodParticle/Hari

Posted
Posted
The Distagon is an impressive looking beast. However, at twice the price and with considerable additional bulk, weight & diameter, methinks the potential attraction of an additional stop is not going to be enough to persuade me to part-ex my Biogon f2 (which is illustrated with a B+W filter fitted).

 

Agree Keith.

 

If that one extra stop is not a game-changer, the ZM 35/2 is indeed a better choice for size, weight and fantastic performance.

 

That said, I do prefer having the choice of going faster and don't mind paying the usual penalties of performance/size/weight/price.

Link to post
Share on other sites
TheGodParticle/Hari

TheGodParticle/Hari

Posted
Posted

DNG -> LR -> JPEG

 

No other tinkering

 

Stress test to accentuate fringing and aberrations

 

my conclusion - there is some typical zeiss PF but when the focus is accurate, it's negligible and easily corrected in LR

 

will email DNG's in full size if you want some samples to play around with

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
SiriusLux

SiriusLux

Posted
  • Author
Posted
DNG -> LR -> JPEG

 

No other tinkering

 

Stress test to accentuate fringing and aberrations

 

my conclusion - there is some typical zeiss PF but when the focus is accurate, it's negligible and easily corrected in LR

 

will email DNG's in full size if you want some samples to play around with

 

Hi Hari,

 

you're in HEIDELBERG, how nice, I was born there and live in Luxembourg.

 

Joerg

Link to post
Share on other sites
SiriusLux

SiriusLux

Posted
  • Author
Posted
Agree Keith.

 

If that one extra stop is not a game-changer, the ZM 35/2 is indeed a better choice for size, weight and fantastic performance.

 

That said, I do prefer having the choice of going faster and don't mind paying the usual penalties of performance/size/weight/price.

 

Hi both,

I slightly disagree.

I also have both lenses and am very fond of the Biogon T* 2.0/35 ZM as well, however this lens is really soft when using it wide-open at f=1/2 and gives you "the glow". I haven't notice this with the 1.4, even at 1.4 it is better than the Biogon at 2.0, which is quite amazing.

I like both and am not thinking of selling the Biogon.

 

Regards, Joerg

Link to post
Share on other sites
james.liam

james.liam

Posted
Posted
The biogon has focus shift and is usually calibrated by Zeiss at 2.8. When shot wide open it is front focusing so this gives the impression of being soft. However there is no denying the distagon is way sharper at f/1.4.

 

Interesting. Similar in this regard to the 50 Sonnar? Are other Zeiss ZM's similarly calibrated? I've owned 3 ZF's (21, 2/35, 1,4/35) and they were not calibrated thusly.

Link to post
Share on other sites
SiriusLux

SiriusLux

Posted
  • Author
Posted
I was just wondering where the photos were taken. Did you recognize the sculpture in the 2nd picture?

 

Yes, I did, it's on one end of the Alte Brücke, however even the first photograph made me think of Heidelberg, either Uniplatz or Rathaus but I wasn't sure, the third one then made it real easy to be 120% sure, above all I spent most of my school time in Heidelberg as well.

Link to post
Share on other sites
thighslapper

thighslapper

Posted
Posted

Replacement lens is spot on focussing at all apertures.

 

I would advise all purchasers to check carefully ...... calibrating fast lenses like these is not easy ...... and minor deviations from the midpoint of acceptable tolerances can cause issues with an M .....

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...