Jump to content
Steve McGarrett

Biogon-C 35/2.8 and Summarits 35

Recommended Posts

Advertisement (gone after registration)

Hi all,

 

How good is Biogon-C 35 2.8 on M240?
Being conceived for film / crop sensors, is there any color cast and/or corner smearing used on full frame digital?

 

And how is compared to Summarit 2.4/35 and 2.5/35?
By the way, I've seen MTF figures between 2.4 and 2.5 and they seem slight different, 2.4 seems to be less sharp in center but sharper in the corners than its 2.5 predecessor. Anyone who tried both? How they compares to last (v5/v6) Summicron, that I know quite well?

 

Thanks in advance

 

S.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I prefer to use it on my Monochrom, but have no issues on the M240.  I find it a bit contrasty but very sharp on the M240. Certainly an excellent choice.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

After using 35 Summicrons for decades on film, I moved to Biogon 35 f2 on digital (M9), and then to Summarit 35 f2.5. The Summarit 35 is now my favorite lens for the M9, and I'm sure would be if I moved to the M or its successor. I'll stay with the 2.5 for the 39mm filter size. The Biogon is great, but the f2 version is a larger lens than I like, and I find the Summarit images as pleasing. I know you asked about the 2.8 Biogon C, but both Biogons have similar family characteristics.

The focus on my Biogon was off a bit when I bought it new, making it seem slightly soft, but it has been great since I had DAG adjust it. 

Edited by TomB_tx

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I prefer to use it on my Monochrom, but have no issues on the M240.  I find it a bit contrasty but very sharp on the M240. Certainly an excellent choice.

 

Are you referring to C-Biogon or to 2.4/2.5 Summarit, Jaap?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

The C-Biogon is easily the sharpest, highest resolution and highest contrast of the lenses you mentioned.

 

It has absolutely no focus shift (all 35 Summicrons have it) and has zero distortion.

 

A fantastic lens. The only thing I dislike, sometimes, is the contrast, which I find quite high. (I have the Summicron 35 pre-asph and kept it because of its moderate contrast, in spite of the fact that it has quite imprtant focus shift). But then again, I also had the 50 APO Summicron and sold it. :-))

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
horosu, on 03 Jul 2016 - 18:44, said:

The C-Biogon is easily the sharpest, highest resolution and highest contrast of the lenses you mentioned.

 

It has absolutely no focus shift (all 35 Summicrons have it) and has zero distortion.

 

A fantastic lens. The only thing I dislike, sometimes, is the contrast, which I find quite high. (I have the Summicron 35 pre-asph and kept it because of its moderate contrast, in spite of the fact that it has quite imprtant focus shift). But then again, I also had the 50 APO Summicron and sold it. :-))

 

Thank you for your feedback, Horosu.

Do you ever notice any magenta cast or corner blur on full frame cameras like M or M9? Does it need a profile?

 

By the way, did you keep pre-asph. Summicron v4 or v3?

Edited by Steve McGarrett

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I have seen no cast, it is unlikely on a 35 anyway. I don't see a reason why it should need a profile.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Thank you for your feedback, Horosu.

Do you ever notice any magenta cast or corner blur on full frame cameras like M or M9? Does it need a profile?

 

By the way, did you keep pre-asph. Summicron v4 or v3?

 

 

No, it is perfect even without coding. Coding only improves light falloff at the edges. You'll be amazed at the resolution of this small lens on digital M bodies.

 

I kept a Summicron v.4. I found a chrome one in perfect shape, and I really like it, in spite of its shortcomings in the age of 24+ Megapixels (and who knows how many in the next M). But, perversely, in spite of the fact that its resolution is pushed to the limit by the M240, its contrast on digital bodies I find perfect.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

The Biogon 35/2.8 is my favorite 35 in good light. Compared to the Summarit 35/2.5 (no experience with 35/2.4) the Biogon is more contrasty and sharper on edges and comers below f/5.6. The Biogon has less CA and distortion as well but it vignettes significantly more than the Summarit. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I was in the same position a few months ago, and got the C-Biogon /2.8 to use on my M9. I did not ever notice any color shift even wide open.

 

My experience cannot be of much help to the poster of the thread since I do not have an M240 (sorry), but, I found this lens delightful in all respects (except the lens cap of course, since it is a Zeiss): the image quality is awesome (sharpness, color, contrast), the size and weight are as ideal for travel, and the build quality is great (I also have a Leica Summarit 75/2.5 and would rate their build quality about the same).

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

So C-Biogon seems to be a best buy, if one doesn't mind the high contrast.

 

Any Summarit user out there who prefers Summarit over Biogon?

 

@Edward: thanks, I'll look to Distagon too, even if it's a bit bulky.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Depends on what kind of pics you take. If you take mostly landscapes below f/8, the Biogon is the way to go due to the relative softness of the Summarit on edges and corners there. But if you shoot mainly landscapes at f/8 or above and/or portraits, the Summarit may be perfect for you.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I had both the c biogon and the 2.5 version summarit. I kept the summarit because I prefer the smaller size, 39mm filters, focus tab and the push-on pressed metal lens cap. That said, I would be happy with either and if you had the 4/85 tele-tessar then the c-biogon would make complete sense as both share 43mm filters. I think if you are worried about image quality difference between them, you are looking too closely. Both are more than adequate. If you are using in conjuntion with other 46 mm filter size lenses, then the 2.4 summarit would make complete sense.

Edited by Mark T

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Join the conversation

You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.
Note: Your post will require moderator approval before it will be visible.

Guest
Reply to this topic...

×   Pasted as rich text.   Paste as plain text instead

  Only 75 emoji are allowed.

×   Your link has been automatically embedded.   Display as a link instead

×   Your previous content has been restored.   Clear editor

×   You cannot paste images directly. Upload or insert images from URL.

Loading...

  • Recently Browsing   0 members

    No registered users viewing this page.

×
×
  • Create New...