35mm option: (Zeiss f2+Voigtlander f1.2ii) OR Zeiss f1.4 OR Leica f1.4 FLE

[Mornnb]

Advertisement (gone after registration)

Leica 35 FLE is the best choice, it's very impressive lens and the price is reasonable now.

Good Luck,

Leica Frog.

 

In terms of optical performance, the Zeiss Distagon 1.4 has less focus shift and smoother bokeh, in terms of contrast and sharpness it's about the same.

The Distagon is the better lens, however the Summilux can do what it does with a more compact size (and much higher price).

 

I had the Distagon, I replaced it with the Summilux due to some technical issues. (Mount was too tight, it was brassing and marking the mount on the camera)

[Ai_Print]

I'll see if I can get a product code for you, it is actually clear grip material I got from the local hardware store. The reason I use clear is that I wrap the entire ring including over the distance numbers to make it a seamless transition from the tab to the grip.

 

It has seriously transformed every tab only Leica lens I have used.

 

Cheap too.

 

Thanks for that suggestion. I'll give the Griptac a go.

Other than the finger tab, the lack of any grip, on the 35 Summilux ASPH FLE focus ring has been my biggest gripe with this lens.

 

It is beyond me why Leica doesn't knurl the focus rings on more of it's lenses. The finger grip certainly has it's uses, particularly for prefocusing, but it would be nice to have the choice (especially with FLE lenses which have a slightly heavier focus action) rather than use dictated by limited options.

[Chronomania]

I had the summilux Fle and hated it. The focus plane is like a cone, you really cannot predict what will be in focus and what won't be. Very expensive for an unpredictable lens. I sold it and bought a voigt VII, could not be happier ! And I carry a summarit 35 when I need to travel light (this is a little gem which largely outperforms the summicron and the biogon c).

[horosu]

 And I carry a summarit 35 when I need to travel light (this is a little gem which largely outperforms the summicron and the biogon c).

 

 

Had both (the C-Biogon and the Summarit). To me it was exactly the opposite (To Sean Reid also). Kept the C-Biogon, which is just fabulous

[tobey bilek]

Some report I have read shows how the in focus area bends around depending on aperture and distance.   It is very annoying.  My old floating element 24 R did similar and I sold it for that reason.

 

I bought a 35 2.0 ASPH instead.  Will not consider third part lenses.  Too many bad experiences.  Unless you really need 1.4,  consider the Summicron.

[Ai_Print]

The FLE does indeed have some remarkable curvature of field. It has shown up in odd ways in some images when focused wide open at medium distance and far land features are in the background.

 

The thing that is making it hard to decide to get one or not at this point is how distracting some of the out of focus areas can be, really sharp rings around things that usually fall well out of focus.

 

I'll have the lens for another week and my non-FLE asph comes back tonight so that will help me decide.

[Leica Frog]

Advertisement (gone after registration)

I'd like to explain my word about "reasonable price now" for 35 FLE., I mean to its price that come down from the last year and when compare to the previous version of Leica such as 35 Cron 8E, 35 Cron V.4, 35 Cron Asph, 35 Lux Steel-rim, 35 Lux AA. or 35 Lux Asph (non FLE)

 

IMHO, 35 Lux FLE may be more high price after discontinued, that's the characteristic of Leica lens in the high favorite version.

[Mornnb]

The FLE does indeed have some remarkable curvature of field. It has shown up in odd ways in some images when focused wide open at medium distance and far land features are in the background.

 

The thing that is making it hard to decide to get one or not at this point is how distracting some of the out of focus areas can be, really sharp rings around things that usually fall well out of focus.

 

I'll have the lens for another week and my non-FLE asph comes back tonight so that will help me decide.

 

The Zeiss Distagon 35mm 1.4 solves both of these problems.

It has no focus shift, it is completely flat. And the bokeh is smoother, no sharp rings.

Had I not issues with Zeiss's mount design, I would have kept the Distagon. It is optically the best 35mm lens I've ever used.

I suggest you try the Zeiss, I believe you'll find it superior to both the Leica options. If you can stand the larger size.

[Ai_Print]

It's simply too big. Even the FLE is larger than I would like but the sharpness is great. The curvature does not bother me, it does not really affect the genre of images I use it for.

 

Leica equipment plays a small to medium sized role in my photography needs so I can live with that shortcoming if I decide to buy an FLE.

 

The Zeiss Distagon 35mm 1.4 solves both of these problems.

It has no focus shift, it is completely flat. And the bokeh is smoother, no sharp rings.

Had I not issues with Zeiss's mount design, I would have kept the Distagon. It is optically the best 35mm lens I've ever used.

I suggest you try the Zeiss, I believe you'll find it superior to both the Leica options. If you can stand the larger size.

[sdk]

My ZM 35 1.4 has stronger barrel distortion than my Summilux 35 Asph (non-FLE)

This should not be so. The published distortion graph of the Summilux 35mm ASPH FLE and previous version ASPH are pretty much the same, and both have c. 1.5% barrel distortion, while the Zeiss 35mm Distagon ZM has only 0.5% barrel distortion, about 1/3 the amount of the Leicas. Something's not right.

[sdk]

The size of the 35mm/1.4 Distagon ZM is pretty large for an RF lens, nearly as long as the 75mm/2 Apo ASPH, and the same filter size. It does block quite a bit of the lower left of the viewfinder. The viewfinder blockage can be more problematic, but the Summilux ASPH lenses block almost as much VF corner. But with either you can compensate somewhat by panning the camera to get an idea of what will be in the corner as you compose. Or on the M240 you can use the EVF or Live View. The 35 C-Biogon is where it's at if you really want minimal finder blockage, and you don't need f/1.4 or f/2.

For size & weight I don't mind the size that much, even hiking up mountains. It's still a more portable kit than a Nikon DSLR and 35mm lens, even toting the heavier 75/2 with me as a second lens. Your mileage may vary.

[MarkP]

My 1.4/35 Summilux FLE is the best compromise for me for a 35mm lens.  It is not my most used FL but I take a 35 if I want a single, versatile, general-purpose, fast, high-quality lens.   Focus shift is a non-issue but I did send it back to Solms within six months of purchase because of uneven focus across the field, I assumed due to a misaligned element. I don't know what they did but I really don't have focus problems with this lens. Bokeh is ho-hum and as mentioned above a knurled focus ring would be nice.

 

The 1.4/35 Distagon is just too big for what I would want as a general purpose lens and I don't like 1/3 stop aperture intervals (especially working opposite 1/2 stop detents on my shutter speed dial).

 

The 35 Summarit was way too mushy on the corners for my liking but was otherwise an impressive lens. I temporarily had one (specifically chosen over the Summicron) as a lightweight option to the Summilux but I just didn't need two 35mm lenses.

 

The 2.8/35 ZM C-Biogon is way too contrasty and the 2.0/35 too large (i.e. might as well have the extra stop of the Summilux) and again the 1/3 stop intervals on the aperture ring don't suit me.

[Ai_Print]

I think I am going to get the 35 FLE, it just sings and the backgrounds are bothering me less and less. I return the rental tomorrow, sans my slick clear griptac.

 

A candid frame of a well known asian fashion designer from tonight....

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!

[colonel]

Thanks for the advice.

 

I decided to buy the Zeiss 35mm f1.4.

It felt fine on the M240, and has a welcome 90g reduction from the Voigtlander

The cheapest second hand FLE I could get was still double the price of the cheapest new Zeiss but to  be honest the attraction of zero focus shift and sharp corners was also important.

I have used the FLE before and love it. I think the handling is superior to the Zeiss, however the Zeiss is actually not that bad. I was surprised by how well it balances on the camera and the focus ring is super smooth, although quite firm. The Aperture dial is however less firm then I expect from Leica.

I recall the MTA comparison of the FLE vs the Zeiss from that French site which showed that wide open the FLE was actually a smidgen sharper in the centre but not at the edges, where it never really catches up wit the Zeiss. I think that the sharpness of both is so high its not that much of an issue. The FLE has more of an enigmatic sharpness wave in the mid-zone which makes it a touch more exciting for people when they are in the centre but the Zeiss is more predictable.

I have been blown away by the contrast of the Zeiss at f1.4, the only lens I have used which I have seen this on before is the 50mm Summilux ASPH, which still remains my favourite 50mm of all time on any platform (although I must admit I have never used the APO).

 

I have been mostly taking testing photos with the Zeiss so far, here are a few examples:

 

 

 

 

I will hopefully get away to my 2 week holiday shortly so will have a full field test

 

Thanks again for all your opinions, and amongst all these lenses I really don't think there is a bad choice or a right choice

 

Rgds

[Ai_Print]

Well I'll be dipped and dunked, my new to me 35mm 1.4 FLE is actually better than the version I rented, high serial number too at 430XXXX. I'm stoked, and it is only 10 grams heavier than the non-FLE. 

[newnew]

Bottom line, the choice comes always down to the "drawing" of a lens versus its true optical qualities. I have longtime looked at examples from Zeiss Distagon 1.4 and Lux FLE. I went for the FLE because I liked its "drawing" more than Zeiss.

For me the problem with Zeiss is that it is too boringly sharp. I was afraid from a lack of signature, and therefore its ability to define and express the main subject .  Both photos above are stunningly sharp  across the frame, but where is the subject ?  I come to realize more and more that the "deficiencies" that might be the choice of the lens designer are the ones that give the specific character of a lens.

I have the FLE for the last 10 months now and I am fully satisfied , including the ergonomics and the way it "draws".

[Carduelis]

Bottom line, the choice comes always down to the "drawing" of a lens versus its true optical qualities. I have longtime looked at examples from Zeiss Distagon 1.4 and Lux FLE. I went for the FLE because I liked its "drawing" more than Zeiss.

For me the problem with Zeiss is that it is too boringly sharp. I was afraid from a lack of signature, and therefore its ability to define and express the main subject .  Both photos above are stunningly sharp  across the frame, but where is the subject ?  I come to realize more and more that the "deficiencies" that might be the choice of the lens designer are the ones that give the specific character of a lens.

I have the FLE for the last 10 months now and I am fully satisfied , including the ergonomics and the way it "draws".

 

I think you have raised a good point here and express it well.  Although my 35 ASPH Summilux (pre FLE) renders wonderfully, there is some field curvature which is not apparent when I once used the Zeiss 35 mm f2.8 Biogon lens.  However the images from Zeiss appear too clinical and do not have the textural character of the Summilux which I prefer.  I think an analogous comparison could be made between vinyl and CDs where the former seems to produce music with much more ambience and atmosphere, whereas CDs can produce more detailed sounds but sometimes at the expense of emotion to the music.

[Mornnb]

I think I am going to get the 35 FLE, it just sings and the backgrounds are bothering me less and less. I return the rental tomorrow, sans my slick clear griptac.

 

A candid frame of a well known asian fashion designer from tonight....

An example from the Zeiss Distagon 35mm 1.4 at Vivid Sydney.

 

Vivid Sydney 97 by mornnb, on Flickr

[horosu]

Bottom line, the choice comes always down to the "drawing" of a lens versus its true optical qualities. I have longtime looked at examples from Zeiss Distagon 1.4 and Lux FLE. I went for the FLE because I liked its "drawing" more than Zeiss(....)

 Both photos above are stunningly sharp  across the frame, but where is the subject ? 

 

Well, these are landscape shots, aren't they, so you shouldn't think it's a lens fault that the photo doesn't have a subject, IMHO. 

 

For what it's worth, I settled on the FLE due to the size difference, but my most used lens is the 35 C-Biogon

[Advertisement]

Hallo,

Look here: Leica M

[jrp]

Some examples:

 

Where was the first of these taken??  (I'm guessing that the 2nd is the shopping centre behind St Paul's?)