Summicron 35 f2 vs Zeiss 35 f1.4 Distagon

[Sharphoto]

Advertisement (gone after registration)

Summicron 35 f2 vs Zeiss 35 f1.4 Distagon. Would like opinions before I purchase. Thank you.

[CRTZMO]

Any reason you need the 1.4? What about the BIOGON 2.8? Half the size, weight, and a fraction of the cost..

The SUMMICRON is also dramatically smaller, lighter, and will be equal or better optically.

[Advertisement]

The Leica Q3 is available for pre-order at B&H Photo Video and Adorama

[astrostl]

On 1/15/2019 at 3:55 PM, CRTZMO said:

and will be equal or better optically.

[Citation needed]

Here is a counter-reference: https://diglloyd.com/prem/prot/LEICA/LeicaM/lens-ZeissZM-35f1_4-compare-PineCreekMorning.html

"There is only one lens of the six here that reliably delivers sharpness corner to corner and near to far as per the photographer’s intent, and that is the Zeiss ZM 35mm f/1.4 Distagon. Even in the context of the Leica 50/2 APO, your author considers the 35/1.4 Distagon to be finest lens available for the Leica M platform (and having the most attractive bokeh as well)."

The Summicron was easily ranked the last of the bunch from a price/performance perspective. I haven't owned it, but I do currently own the ZM 35/2.8 and ZM 35/1.4, and briefly had the ZM 35/2.0 as well. Despite preferring the size, handling, and FOV of the 50/1.4, being impressed by the 21/3.4 SEM, etc. I also find the ZM 35/1.4 to OPTICALLY be the best lens I own.

[jaapv]

Digiloyd is not quite the most authorative of bloggers...

[Big John]

I use the Distagon on an SL - where it handles well and produces great IQ. It is a heavy lens though and I have recently bought a Zeiss 50/2 which has made me realise just how big and heavy the Distagon is. 

[astrostl]

On 1/17/2019 at 12:30 PM, jaapv said:

Digiloyd is not quite the most authorative of bloggers...

Properly-taken photographs in testing conditions are, no matter who took them. Properties like much higher focus shift and lower contrast relative to peers are objective, not opinons.

[Mr.Q]

Advertisement (gone after registration)

Neither. The Cron isn't fast enough and the Zeiss is too big. The FLE is the cream of the crop at 35mm 😎

But if I had to choose between the two you mention, I'd go with the Cron. The Zeiss is beyond my acceptance of viewfinder blockage.

[Ashkanani1985]

I am using the Cron latest version for a 8 month now and its my main go lens and even did 3 complete photography trip with Cron and 75 2.4 Summarit. Nothing beats the contras and the color pop of Leica lenses, I've used most of the lenses out there through my photography journey but Cron its really special! it has the magical glass looking picture and micro contrast that only Leica lenses can produce even the 75mm Summarit it so sharp maybe even sharper than Cron but again it doesn't have the magical effect of the Cron. 

My advice sharpness is cheap item that can be bought cheaply (look at Sigma lenses they are cheap compare to how much sharpness they have) but other characteristic of lens like Bokeh, Micro contrast and 3D effect that cost a lot is what you should look for in lens, the Zeiss is not bad at all but Cron specially the last version is in a different league.

Edited January 24, 2019 by Ashkanani1985

[jaapv]

On 1/21/2019 at 4:12 AM, astrostl said:

Properly-taken photographs in testing conditions are, no matter who took them. Properties like much higher focus shift and lower contrast relative to peers are objective, not opinons.

He has made too many basic mistakes to be taken seriously. He even confused mosfocus with focus shift.