albert Posted September 2, 2018 Share #21 Posted September 2, 2018 Advertisement (gone after registration) The last comparison does not even use the exact same frame. I just bought The Made in Germany CL 1.4 and I know that I will forever and ever believe it to be superior. Human beings perceptions are so variable that it’s sometimes hard to believe we are the same mammals. Quote Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Advertisement Posted September 2, 2018 Posted September 2, 2018 Hi albert, Take a look here Zeiss C Biogon 35mm 2.8 on APS-C. I'm sure you'll find what you were looking for!
albert Posted September 2, 2018 Share #22 Posted September 2, 2018 SIGHT) [ U ] the quality of being aware of things through the physical senses, especially sight: Drugs can alter your perception of reality. Quote Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
FrozenInTime Posted September 2, 2018 Share #23 Posted September 2, 2018 Beyond 9mm radius the MTF curves of the Zeiss look superior. However that does not account for sensor cover glass and other camera specifics. The CA of the TL 23/2 worried me greatly so i returned it; I hear similar of the TL 35/1.4 . I see no signs of this on the Zeiss ZM 35/2.8 which seems to be an excellent performer on the TL2. Quote Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
albert Posted September 2, 2018 Share #24 Posted September 2, 2018 Well I guess that I’ll just have to hang my head and live with my 1.4’s CA. Quote Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
FrozenInTime Posted September 2, 2018 Share #25 Posted September 2, 2018 I’m not trying to disrespect the TL 35/1.4: I do want one as a fast low light AF lens, but like many fast lenses, it might not be the ultimate for all uses. Quote Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
lct Posted September 2, 2018 Share #26 Posted September 2, 2018 Yes very little CA on the ZM 35/2.8 but vignetting is rather strong. Easy to adjust in PP though. 1 Quote Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
albert Posted September 2, 2018 Share #27 Posted September 2, 2018 Advertisement (gone after registration) FrozenInTime, I am a total amateur, and didn’t even know what CA was. Me and my new girl take no offense and appreciate your information. When she gets off The FedX truck next week I’ll run her through the paces. Thank you for the heads-up Quote Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
oldwino Posted September 4, 2018 Share #28 Posted September 4, 2018 Subjective gobbledegook . I have no idea what a 'modern, flat look' is .... or what 'showing depth' is either. I suspect in a blind testing with identical settings only some subtle differences in colour rendering, contrast and edge detail would be noticeable in lenses of this quality.... and then mostly dependent on processing for the former. From an optical point of view, the perfect lens should be completely free of aberrations and distortions. "character' is a term describing the degree of crappiness inherent in the lens, which is fine if you want to spend your money on crap. I'd prefer perfect rendering and the option to add crappiness in post processing. That's what Leics strive for and why the lenses cost so much. All of photography as an art form is subjective. It is not reality. I owned every single TL lens at one point. They are boring (my opinion). Flat images. The Elmarit on my X2 produces much more interesting images that the TL23 ever did. The lens on the X-vario is heads and shoulders above the TL 18-56. The 35 TL Summilux? Probably the best of the lot, but overall, meh. And big. I enjoyed using my 1962 Summaron 35 so much more. Turned my TL2 into a compact camera again. Beautiful depth to the photos. Is this is e sort of “perfection” that Leica is chasing...that all their lenses give the same look that I can get from a cheap Sigma lens? Come to think of it, the TL lenses LOOK a lot like sigma lenses. Hmmmm. But, you’re right. This is all subjective. Quote Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
lct Posted September 4, 2018 Share #29 Posted September 4, 2018 I have no experience with TL lenses but i feel perfection boring as well. The charm of M lenses lies in their compactness and character that someone above or elsewhere called crappiness or something like that. On the ZM 35/2.8 it is its small size and high contrast that one can like or dislike depending of their tastes and/or skills in PP. Quote Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
RickP Posted September 4, 2018 Share #30 Posted September 4, 2018 (edited) My preference is the smaller manual focus Zeiss ZMs. . These lenses are quite small compared to the auto focus ..(TL 35 1.4 for example) .. it is a stop or so slower, but not an issue for me at all. The combination of the ZM and my TL2 is perfection in my mind. The manual focus aspect of this kit slows me down just a bit which I believe is a good thing. I am not shooting sports or action photos with it. My photography is my meditation... there is no need to hurry. I am quite addicted to the color and contrast that these Zeiss lenses provide. Btw … the ZM 35 f 2.8 is killer sharp even wide open! This is a walk-around shot taken with the 35 f 2.8 Zeiss downtown Camden Maine TL2 35 f 2.8 Zeiss ZM 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! Edited September 4, 2018 by RickP 2 Quote Link to post Share on other sites Simply register for free here – We are always happy to welcome new members! ' data-webShareUrl='https://www.l-camera-forum.com/topic/287542-zeiss-c-biogon-35mm-28-on-aps-c/?do=findComment&comment=3586062'>More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
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.