Jump to content

Biogon 25mm or 28mm?


setuporg

Recommended Posts

Advertisement (gone after registration)

I'm thoroughly enjoying my new M10 with the 35mm & 50mm Summiluxes, a 90mm/f2.0 and 135mm Telyt Leica lenses.  To cover the wide end for architecture/landscape, I got a Voigtlander Ultron 21mm/f1.8.  I'm used to fast lenses from Fuji X.  Since I love landscapes, and am curious about Zeiss lenses, I've found there are two interesting options, Biogon 25mm/f2.8 and Biogon 28mm/f2.8. What do you guys think of those as filling the 21-35mm gap?  How do you feel about the relative slowness at 2.8?  How's the rendering compared to the Luxes?  And which one makes more sense, 25 or 28mm?  I see that 21mm is quite fish-eye-y and would like a bit straighter lines...
 
A+

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

My experience.....

 

I have both. ZM25/2.8 is excellent for landscapes. ZM28/2.8 wide open renders as my Summiluxes 28mm, 35mm and 50mm do, in that the object is very 3D with rapid drop off to the corners. It is slower though. Both ZM's have different uses. I find no performance difference between the ZM25/2.8 and Leica 24/3.4. The Leica 21SEM betters both ZM's and the Leica 24mm/3.4 but gives a wider view of the world.

 

Martin

Link to post
Share on other sites

To cover the wide end [...], I got a Voigtländer Ultron 21 mm 1:1.8.

That's a fine lens. Very good choice!

 

 

I see that 21 mm is quite fish-eye-y and would like a bit straighter lines.

Huh!?

 

The Ultron 21 mm is absolutely totally definitely nowhere near being fish-eye-y. Do you actually know that a fish-eye lens is?

 

 

What do you guys think of those as filling the 21-35 mm gap?

There is absolutely no need to fill this gap. 21+35+50+90 is a perfectly fine line-up. And carrying too many lenses is a hindrance to creativity and productivity more than it helps.

 

That said, there's no reason to not fill this gap if you feel like it. Do you often find the 21 mm too wide and the 35 mm too narrow? If so then go ahread.

 

 

How do you feel about the relative slowness at 1:2.8?

Not worth wasting any thoughts on.

 

 

And which one makes more sense, 25 mm or 28 mm?

The distance from 35 to 28 is small but still greater than from 25 to 21 (both arithmetically and geometrically). Furthermore, your camera's viewfinder has framelines for 28 mm but not for 25 mm. So I'd recommend 28 mm ... except when 24 or 25 mm happens to be your personal favourite focal length.

  • Like 1
Link to post
Share on other sites

 I see that 21mm is quite fish-eye-y and would like a bit straighter lines...

 

 

 

Need to check that eyesight, or you got a really, really bad version of that lens. Any 21mm, especially the CV 21mm f1.8, is nowhere near anything resembling a fisheye..

 

L1000440-X2.jpg[/url]

 

L1000291-X2.jpg

 

Compared to an actual fisheye, I see NO comparison...

 

P3054281-X2.jpg

Edited by Gregm61
  • Like 4
Link to post
Share on other sites

Advertisement (gone after registration)

I also have them both, funny story how that happened, but not for now!  The 28 is very close to the 35, I wouldn't choose that one if I were you.  25mm with the Zeiss finder is excellent.  If you are using it for landscapes etc. then the 2.8 should never be an issue.  They are both great lenses, very sharp rendering, nice 3D when opened wide.  Reasonable cost, not too bulky.  

Link to post
Share on other sites

Thanks for all the insights!  Yes "fish-eye-ness" at 21mm was a slight exaggeration, I meant that I see some curvature in nearby objects, but that's expected.  The faraway scenes are excellent as in @01af photos.  Lots of food for thought!  Right now I'm already at the point where one of the tele lenses stays at home.  And @Idhrads, now you just got to tell the story how you got both!:)

Link to post
Share on other sites

I purchased a used Biogon 25 on the Bay from a private seller.  When I received it, I used it and noticed that the focusing helicoid was a bit loose, but nothing too concerning especially since I had nothing to compare it to.  I later turned around and sold it because I wasn't using it much and had it returned to me because of the same problem.  This time I sent it to Zeiss, they told me that they could not fix it, but offered me a replacement at dealer cost.  They sent the 25 back to me with a brand new Biogon 28 in a box.  I called them and reported the mistake which they very nicely offered to exchange, but at that price I asked if I kept the 28, would they send me a 25 at cost which they did.  I then sold the original 25 again with the clear stipulation that while it focused fine, the focusing helicoid was a bit loose which could not be fixed by Zeiss.  I sold it at the same cost that I paid for the other one.  So in the end, I have the pair 25 and 28 for the retail cost of either one and sold the original 25 for a few bucks less than I originally paid for it.  I like the 25, it's a good angle.  The 28 is great as well, but very close to my 35Cron ASPH which I love, so it get's less use.

  • Like 2
Link to post
Share on other sites

I purchased a used Biogon 25 on the Bay from a private seller.  When I received it, I used it and noticed that the focusing helicoid was a bit loose, but nothing too concerning especially since I had nothing to compare it to.  I later turned around and sold it because I wasn't using it much and had it returned to me because of the same problem.  This time I sent it to Zeiss, they told me that they could not fix it, but offered me a replacement at dealer cost.  They sent the 25 back to me with a brand new Biogon 28 in a box.  I called them and reported the mistake which they very nicely offered to exchange, but at that price I asked if I kept the 28, would they send me a 25 at cost which they did.  I then sold the original 25 again with the clear stipulation that while it focused fine, the focusing helicoid was a bit loose which could not be fixed by Zeiss.  I sold it at the same cost that I paid for the other one.  So in the end, I have the pair 25 and 28 for the retail cost of either one and sold the original 25 for a few bucks less than I originally paid for it.  I like the 25, it's a good angle.  The 28 is great as well, but very close to my 35Cron ASPH which I love, so it get's less use.

 

 

This actually reflects very well on Zeiss and only reinforces an idea to try it out.:)

  • Like 1
Link to post
Share on other sites

I like the 25 mm, it's a good angle.  The 28 mm is great as well, but very close to my Summicron-M 35 mm Asph which I love, so it gets less use.

So you have a 35 mm lens but no 21 mm, right? So it's only natural that you consider the 25 mm more useful than the 28 mm. But 25 mm is closer to 21 mm than 28 mm is close to 35 mm. Hence, for someone who already owns 35 mm and 21 mm lenses, an additional 28 mm will make more sense than a 25 mm.

  • Like 2
Link to post
Share on other sites

  • 3 weeks later...

I have enjoyed my Biogon 25/2.8 for several years now, from an M8 to M9 to M240.  It is the original version that brings up the appropriate frame line on the M8 and the 35mm set on the M9 and M240.  I like this as it allows me to more clearly define the edges of the frame without having the 28mm frame line confusing the view.  I don't use a separate viewfinder, I have become accustomed to anticipating the slightly larger coverage of the lens as shown in the finder.  For shots that are aimed up or down, for instance tall buildings like a cathedral or castle, the tilt due to perspective can be substantial.  If you keep the subject well within the viewfinder frame, the tilt can be easily altered in photoshop without losing the edges of the subject.  Works great once you get used to it.  The sharpness and contrast of the lens allow nice 16x20 prints.  Erwin Puts reviewed it on the M8, look in his archived reviews.  The 'slow f2.8' is moot on the newer cameras, I have no issues with it shooting handheld in low light even with my M9 at ISO 640 plus.

I am considering purchasing an M10 and wonder, with the enlarged viewfinder magnification, if the 28 frame lines are closer to the edge of the finder frame than on the previous M9 and M240.  Will I lose that small area outside the 28 lines that I find advantageous when using the 25/2.8 Biogon?

I really like this lens.  It is great for travel and landscapes and the only lens that I have kept on my pilgrimage from M8 to M9/M240.

I have also been the beneficiary of great Zeiss customer service, although not with this particular lens, and can recommend without reservation.

Link to post
Share on other sites

  • 4 months later...

I was also vacillating between the Elmarit 24mm and the Biogon 25mm and read every review and every comparison on the web.

I don't feel tied to Leica lenses, so eventually I ordered the Biogon which is my first Zeiss lens and, man, I'm rather disappointed.

 

Here are my thoughts. I manually coded it as 11809.

 

 

First of all, the ergonomics:

 

Having a 35 Cron Asph. and a 50 Lux Asph., I find the Biogon ergonomically quite odd.

 

Its focus ring is really stiff compared to the 50 Lux. As the Biogon lacks a focus tab (only has this little mound) focussing gets even harder to accomplish. Only between 0.5m and 0.7m it's slightly easier to move, but I think that's because of the Leica rangefinder mechanism.

 

Also the focus ring is out of metal with waferthin notches which feels not as comfortable as the Leica focus rings.

 

Secondly the aperture ring has 1/3 stops instead of 1/2 stops, which doesn't go well with the half-stops on the Leica M's shutter speed ring.

 

Viewfinder blockage is not a big problem though.

 

 

 

Image quality:

 

I found it hard to find any images that properly show the bokeh / out of focus area of both lenses.

 

Here is a shot with the Biogon 25mm. Not very interesting stuff going on there, just want to give you an example of the bokeh rendering. No editing. Focus is at 1.0m, shot wide-open. The sharpness is impressive indeed.

 

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!

 
 

I really don't like the doubling effect in the out of focus area. Makes me feel drunk.

 

 

 

Also there is a lot of chromatic aberration going on that I would not expect from a non-aspherical lens.

 

 

 

 

Overall I am not happy with the Biogon 25mm and will send it back.

 

Can anyone post some bokeh shots from the Elmarit 24?

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

I too have both the 25 and 28 Biogons. The 25 is a better performer and I can find no fault with it. I had the original 24/2.8 Elmarit ASPH and really loved that lens. It was outstanding in every way. I regret selling it, but maybe I am a bit sentimental!

I have the 28 Biogon as I do not own any other current Leica 28's. I do have the original Summaron.

I am expecting My M10 next week, so I'll see how they do with that.

If one were to take one over the other, I would go with the 25

Link to post
Share on other sites

  • 9 months later...

I too have both the 25 and 28 Biogons. . . . I am expecting My M10 next week, so I'll see how they do with that.

How are the Zeiss 25 & 28 doing on your M10?

 

Do you see the nervous out of focus rendering with the 25 mentioned earlier in this thread?

Link to post
Share on other sites

How are the Zeiss 25 & 28 doing on your M10?Do you see the nervous out of focus rendering with the 25 mentioned earlier in this thread?

Enjoying the hell out of my M10!

I sold the ZM28 since acquiring a nice used 28/2.8 ASPH. I feel the Leica 28 is better than the Zeiss lens, plus it is smaller. I still have the ZM 25 and it is a stellar performer on the M10. Quite sharp with great IQ. I also recently acquired a nice used 24/3.8 Elmar for a reasonable price. I used it along with the 28 Elmarit quite extensively on my trip to Leitz Park last month, although I used the 28 the most along with my WATE. The 28 is more intuitive in use because of the native 28 frame lines in the finder.

At this point, the jury is still out on how good the 24 is, as I haven't had enough experience with it. I feel the 24 and the 25 are very, very close in performance. I would say at this point you could not go wrong with either one. I am also very impressed with my WATE. What an incredible travel lens. I will be putting up my 21/2.8 ASPH up for sale as it is redundant at this point.

  • Like 2
Link to post
Share on other sites

  • 1 month later...

OK I'm happy to report that a year and a half later I just went out and got both and boy I'm glad I did.  They are tiny, solid, fantastic lenses.  The 25mm is served well by the Visoflex.  Very different from each other and the 21mm Voigtlander.

 

Now the question is, how do you code them?  Steve Huff reported that coding 25mm worked better as 28mm:

 

http://www.stevehuffphoto.com/2009/11/18/the-zeiss-zm-25-2-8-biogon-lens-review/

 

I did and then forgot which was which.  There are also 3 28mm/2.8 lenses in the list...  How do you code each and do I really have to manually enter a fake lens every time I put on a different Biogon?!

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.

×
×
  • Create New...