Jump to content

M10-P with Zeiss 35mm f1.4 Distagon


Sharphoto

Recommended Posts

Amazing lens from a performance standpoint but, for me, bigger and heavier than I like for travel.  I use the ZM C-Biogon F2.8 or M-Rokkor 40mm F2 for travel in that focal length range.  I use the ZM 35mm Distagon when my primary purpose is going out to take photos and therefore can justify the size/weight. 

  • Like 5
Link to post
Share on other sites

I own a 35lux FLE and a 35 1.4 ZM Distagon and recently traveled for a week with the zeiss as my only lens. I didn't find the weight an issue, but left the hood at home to keep the lens as compact as possible. I quite like the rendering of the zeiss and it is a fantastic performer wide open. On the optical front I like many others have no complaints. I like the extra speed it gives me over f2 lenses/crons because I shoot with an M240. If I had an M10/P I'd still use it because of the flexibility f1.4 gives in terms of playing with Dof. I had purchased the zeiss on a whim just to try out and see what the hype was about, with no intention of keeping it long term.. but now I would feel hard pressed to sell it.

The biggest gripe a lot of people have with it is with it's size - when comparing the 35lux FLE and zeiss side by side and hoodless, there is a rather significant difference. I can only imagine the difference being greater when comparing it to the summicrons, especially the pre-asph variants. I tend to leave the hood on my 35lux FLE because my copy can have a tendency to flare, while the zeiss on the other hand is more flare resistant and had no issues shooting hoodless. There is less of a difference in length when the 35lux hood is left on while the zeiss is hoodless. I do like how the zeiss' hood is rather compact and doesn't add too much to the size of the lens, but I think one can do without it unless they use the hood for protection (I use a filter). I didn't feel the added weight of the zeiss on my trip, though I did feel it initially when I compared both 35mm lenses.It took a while longer to get used to the extra length of the zeiss.

Edited by chasdfg
  • Like 6
  • Thanks 1
Link to post
Share on other sites

That 35mm f1.4 Distagon is the best 35mm lens I ever used, across any system. I see magic in its flawless and sweet rendering, its operation is smooth and precise and it mates wonderfully with the M10 (no matter P, D or whatever). For me, it is up there in the pantheon of the best lenses ever produced.

It is only somewhat "big" and "heavy" when you compare it to other Leica M 35mm lenses, especially the summicrons (it is only 60 grams heavier than the 35 'lux FLE), but it is very far from "big" and "heavy" when you compare it to 35mm f/1.4 lenses in other systems. It is very close in size/weight to the 75mm Summicron, and nobody ever complains about that one being too "big" and "heavy". It is featherweight and super compact compared to the Noctilux or 90mm 'cron. It is quite a bit lighter than the 28mm summilux, etc, etc.

So, do not obsess on that aspect: weight and size are perfectly manageable, especially in view of performance. If you are a 35mm fan, you can always add one of the super compact slower alternatives to your options, for those days when you want to lighten to the max.

Edited by Balivernes
one word
  • Like 7
  • Thanks 1
Link to post
Share on other sites

  • 1 month later...
On 1/19/2019 at 1:40 PM, pedaes said:

"That 35mm f1.4 Distagon is the best 35mm lens I ever used,..."

Have you ever used a 35mm Summilux-FLE?

It really bites when people don't come back to finish the thread.  There are some really good threads that start off great and fizzle before 10 posts.

Link to post
Share on other sites

I'll take a shot, having used both.

The Zeiss optically is as good as it gets in any 35mm f1.4 lens. Compared to the Summilux it has a smoother bokeh, a flat (not wavy) plane of focus and better flare control. Wide-open it is sharper than the Summilux, particularly away from the image centre. I switched completely from Canon to Leica because of this lens, which comfortably out performed the Sigma 35mm Art that I was using previously.

But I eventually sold the Zeiss for a Summilux. The finder blockage was occasionally a problem, and I need to carry two sets of filters (all my other lenses used a 46mm thread).The Zeiss is also slower to focus with a much stiffer focus ring, which can be an issue if trying to focus rapidly (for example, in quick street photography).

My advice would be to opt for the Zeiss if working more slowly and where every last drop of image quality matters (eg, landscape, travel), or opt for the Leica if your priority is small size and quick focussing (eg street, documentary). FWIW, I also think that the Zeiss is also better built than the Leica (loose aperture rings) and of course much much better value.

  • Like 15
  • Thanks 2
Link to post
Share on other sites

On 3/4/2019 at 12:12 AM, Wilson01 said:

Is anyone here recommend the Voigtlander Nokton 35mm 1.2 II ?

larger aperture and half of the price, but its heavy and big.

I had the Voigtlander Nokton 35mm 1.2 II and sold it when I got a Zeiss Distagon. The Voigtlander was softer at all apertures compared to the Zeiss, and the body was heavier. Size wise they were very similar. The Voigtlander has a more "classic" look and a great bokeh, but the Zeiss is an overall better lens from all point of views.

The Voigtlander has also serious issues with chromatic aberrations, especially at f1.2.

  • Like 2
Link to post
Share on other sites

On 1/16/2019 at 3:42 AM, Sharphoto said:

Considering first Leica purchase but with Zeiss 35mm f1.4 Distagon. Use for travel scenes, street, landscapes. All opinions please.

ZM 35/1.4 is a very good lens as reviews suggest. Its big size may not be good for use of the OVF. In addition, its huge weight may be also a problem for travel.

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

Its really not that heavy or large and it’s significantly better rendering, to my tastes, than the FLE. The pre-fle Lux is also a really nice lens and has a far superior draw than the FLE to my tastes. 

  • Like 2
Link to post
Share on other sites

8 hours ago, luoyiigsnrr said:

In addition, its huge weight may be also a problem for travel.

The "huge weight" is only a 160g grams more than the 35mm Summilux, and 60g *less* than a Leica 28mm Summilux. It is half of the weight of a similar DSLR lens and I never found it remotely a problem.

  • Like 2
  • Thanks 2
Link to post
Share on other sites

  • 9 months later...
On 3/8/2019 at 7:09 AM, Mark II said:

The "huge weight" is only a 160g grams more than the 35mm Summilux, and 60g *less* than a Leica 28mm Summilux. It is half of the weight of a similar DSLR lens and I never found it remotely a problem.

Sorry for reviving this old thread, but feel the need to highlight the fact that the weight difference with the ‘lux FLE is a mere 60 grams (not 160). The ‘lux is 324 grams, the Distagon is 381 grams. The weight difference is marginal. The size difference is a bit more noticeable, but one needs to remember the ‘lux FLE extends when you focus, while the Distagon is internal focus.

  • Like 2
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.

  • Recently Browsing   0 members

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