Jump to content

Leica / Zeiss: Who is better?


Hemry

Recommended Posts

  • Replies 195
  • Created
  • Last Reply

But if you prefer to compare M-mount lenses, just compare a Summilux 35 with the ZM 35/1.4.

I'm not sure that's a good example. This is a case where the Japanese made budget lens (by Leica pricing standards) outperforms the German made one on every aspect including resolution, control of aberrations, out of focus rendering, local contrast, field flatness, you name it.

Link to post
Share on other sites

It is a good example of compromises camera makers can avoid when size is not an issue.

While the distagon is undoubtedly larger than the lux, it cannot be considered a large lens, especially that it is relatively light and has a filter size of 49mm.

Link to post
Share on other sites

While the distagon is undoubtedly larger than the lux, it cannot be considered a large lens, especially that it is relatively light and has a filter size of 49mm.

 

Matter of tastes i guess. As much as i like my "C" Zeiss lenses, i will never use a 35 as bulky as a 90 on a rangefinder but it's just me.

Link to post
Share on other sites

Similar bulk to the Lux 21 and 24.

 

I will never use these otherwise superb monsters either. 

 

Or you can just think of it as a 90 with a bigger view in the VF...

 

Not that bigger given the VF blockage... ;) Thanks no thanks but it's just me again.

Link to post
Share on other sites

Zeiss lenses are outstanding... But most of the ZM lenses are made in Japan by Cosina. I can tell you from experience that quality control is hit or miss, and when your grease dries out two years after purchase, you have to pay for servicing. That left a bad taste in my mouth as far as the M mount Zeiss lenses are concerned...

This was my experience with a Zeiss 21 Biogon.

Link to post
Share on other sites

Obviously different priorities. Size vs performance and price. I went for performance and price.

 

So did I.

And regretted it because as BerndReini mentions above, the mechanical precision and quality control is lesser.

However, optically it renders nicer than the Summilux FLE. 

Link to post
Share on other sites

Leica make some of the few products that I still really love and that don't feel completely disposable. If a big part of it is myth, then so be it. I buy so much stuff that I do not feel any emotional attachment to, so I don't feel ripped off by Leica when I pay a premium over Zeiss's "Made in Japan" -line. I just had to spend a huge chunk of change on upgrading my Apple laptop and my iPhone 5 is on its last legs. You want to talk about a rip-off? Oh yeah, if you want to use iTunes, you have to upgrade your operating system. Nothing will actually work better, but your computer and phone will be slower. Anyway, I digress.

 

A good percentage of us buy Leica products because we can. They make wonderful products and I would much rather use a Leica lens on my Leica camera and support the only camera manufacturer that actually makes a digital rangefinder camera currently.

 

I did a shoot at a famous brewery once and I saw that they actually brewed beers from many other makers. I asked the brewmaster: "True or false, beer is all about marketing." He looked at me and answered: "Everything is all about marketing."

Link to post
Share on other sites

Do you mean it renders different than the Summilux?

No I mean the Distagon renders better.

It is flatter (fewer spherical aberrations, less distortion). The focus fall off is faster, and the bokeh is smoother and more pleasing.

Sharpness and contrast is about the same.

The Distagon is the best 35mm I've ever used. However I am using the Summilux, it's smaller. The Distagon had some mechanical issues, mount too tight it was brassing and marking the camera.

Link to post
Share on other sites

My distagon is mechanically fantastic. No such issues but it's true that on a couple of my ZM the mount is a touch too tight. I look at my ZM as disposable. They cost 1/3 the price of the equivalent Leica and often perform optically better. I've never had any mechanical issues with any, no wobble or front parts falling off like it often happens with the lux 50 or cron 28, but if I do I have no problem tossing the lens in the garbage and getting a new one.

Link to post
Share on other sites

Cosina makes lenses not only for Zeiss but for Voigtländer as well and some CV lenses are very good indeed. Great to have such a choice for sure. It is a major reason of the success of M bodies and Leica would better think twice before replacing the M mount by anything else IMHO. 

Link to post
Share on other sites

I replaced my two Zeiss lenses (50 and 35 f2) with leica's. Three reasons: light leakages with long exposures, size and handling. Optically the Zeiss lenses were great, but they felt 'cheap' when focussing or changing the aperture.

Link to post
Share on other sites

Archived

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

  • Recently Browsing   0 members

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