Jump to content
Sign in to follow this  
faxao

Zeiss Biogon 2.8/25 ZM on CL

Recommended Posts

Advertisement (gone after registration)

New to CL, I have just bought a second hand body and I am looking forward to use my M lenses (via Leica M-L adapter) with it. The Biogon 25mm is one of them (I've got also a Cron 1:2/35 and a Lux 1:1.4/50).

 Am I right that no "f " aperture information will come up on the top LCD screen when an M lens is mounted ?

What would be the best M lens profile to be applied in camera (if any) for the Biogon 25mm (since the Leica M lenses are automatically recognized when mounted) ?

For the moment I do not own any TL lenses and I must say I am not a fan of zoom lenses in general. I might consider to look for some native TL complement to my M lenses lineup in future, mainly to take advantage of the AF features of the CL

Thanks for your (always) valuable advise

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I thought about the 25 Biogon, but bought the 23 Summicron instead (great lens). I would go with no profile or try one of the 24mm profiles. I did that with a 25 f3.5 Canon I had, that is a total pancake lens, but didn't notice a difference with or without a profile. I have old Leica lenses and they are not recognized by the camera. My 35 Summilux works fine when I match its profile I get all the focus helpers. But my 90 2.8 Elmarit doesn't and I don't get the focus assist. It is telephoto enough that it really doesn't bother me. Even without a profile the Canon and my 7 Artisan 55 f1.4 have focus assist. I also shoot RAW exclusively.

Have fun, it is a drag to have to go into the menu to set a lens profile if you want to concentrate on the image.

Tom

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

 

3 hours ago, faxao said:

New to CL, I have just bought a second hand body and I am looking forward to use my M lenses (via Leica M-L adapter) with it. The Biogon 25mm is one of them (I've got also a Cron 1:2/35 and a Lux 1:1.4/50).

 Am I right that no "f " aperture information will come up on the top LCD screen when an M lens is mounted ?

What would be the best M lens profile to be applied in camera (if any) for the Biogon 25mm (since the Leica M lenses are automatically recognized when mounted) ?

For the moment I do not own any TL lenses and I must say I am not a fan of zoom lenses in general. I might consider to look for some native TL complement to my M lenses lineup in future, mainly to take advantage of the AF features of the CL

Thanks for your (always) valuable advise

I would code the lens as an Elmarit 24. It is only relevant for EXIF anyway.

If I were you I would get at least one native lens, to make full use of the features of the camera. If you don't like zooms, there is a good choice of primes, although the TL zooms deserve better. They match the primes in image and build quality. Don't let yourself be prejudiced by the grotty kit zooms some other brands offer.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
6 hours ago, jaapv said:

 

I would code the lens as an Elmarit 24. It is only relevant for EXIF anyway.

 

Thank you jaapv, I thought that the in-camera lens coding was relevant also for LR in order to enable the profile correction to the imported DNG file. Is this not the case?

I will certainly take in consideration also the TL zooms for my future decisions: the 11-23 in particular seems to be vastly appreciated here and I will probably give it a try, maybe renting one for a week-end. As far as primes, apart from the absence of AF, I think I will enjoy my current M lenses lineup for the time being (sharing them between the M10 and the MM1).

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

For automatic Lens detection in Darktable (to apply my self-generated Lensfun correction data) I coded my Biogon 2.8/25 as an Elmarit-M 2.8/24 . But the level for distortion and TCA with the Biogon is low on the CL. So lens correction may not be necessary.
Image sharpness in the center is good on every setting. It matches or outperforms the TL 2/23 asph., but from f2.8 to f4 the corners and edges are a bit blurry (not so on TL 2/23).
I prever my TL 2/23 asph. as an 35mm FF equivalent. It makes much more fun (autofocus, faster, weights less, shorter). But for raw processing lens-correction is important (the level of distortion and TCA is much greater).

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
10 hours ago, faxao said:

Thank you jaapv, I thought that the in-camera lens coding was relevant also for LR in order to enable the profile correction to the imported DNG file. Is this not the case?

I will certainly take in consideration also the TL zooms for my future decisions: the 11-23 in particular seems to be vastly appreciated here and I will probably give it a try, maybe renting one for a week-end. As far as primes, apart from the absence of AF, I think I will enjoy my current M lenses lineup for the time being (sharing them between the M10 and the MM1).

In real life I have seen very little benefit from profile corrections. I don't bother with them.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Advertisement (gone after registration)

It is easy enough to see whether correction for lens barrel/pincushion distortion and chromatic aberration need attention. Load a raw file into the donation-only program Raw Therapee. Play with the distortion and CA sliders. If they make a difference, save the profile for re-use. If there is no difference, now you know.

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
8 hours ago, CharlesL said:

It is easy enough to see whether correction for lens barrel/pincushion distortion and chromatic aberration need attention. Load a raw file into the donation-only program Raw Therapee. Play with the distortion and CA sliders. If they make a difference, save the profile for re-use. If there is no difference, now you know.

 

Thank you ! Will give it a try

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
On ‎3‎/‎9‎/‎2019 at 3:49 PM, faxao said:

Thank you jaapv, I thought that the in-camera lens coding was relevant also for LR in order to enable the profile correction to the imported DNG file. Is this not the case?

I will certainly take in consideration also the TL zooms for my future decisions: the 11-23 in particular seems to be vastly appreciated here and I will probably give it a try, maybe renting one for a week-end. As far as primes, apart from the absence of AF, I think I will enjoy my current M lenses lineup for the time being (sharing them between the M10 and the MM1).

If you want maximum resolution and fidelity from CL files, and you don't need EXIF , I think that Sean Reid recommends turning off lens detection when using rangefinder lenses as they are so well corrected anyway. It's a while since I read his articles so might be wrong.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
3 hours ago, hemlock said:

If you want maximum resolution and fidelity from CL files, and you don't need EXIF , I think that Sean Reid recommends turning off lens detection when using rangefinder lenses as they are so well corrected anyway. It's a while since I read his articles so might be wrong.

That's very interesting. First time I read this. Need to do some experiments myself to find out more.

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...
Sign in to follow this  

  • Recently Browsing   0 members

    No registered users viewing this page.

×
×
  • Create New...