ZM 35 2.8 on CL?

[John in Nassau]

Advertisement (gone after registration)

Has anyone used the tiny zm 35 2.8 on the CL?   I’m seriously considering a CL to use as a platform for my M lenses.  Have only used them on film thus far but having moved to the Bahamas film processing is a bit more challenging - to put it mildly 😂.  All comments welcome 

john

 

[jaapv]

Why not?  It is a very fine lens.

[wda]

Welcome John.

I really enjoy using my 75mm Summarit on my CL. Even my old 135mm Elmar from the 1960s is a joy to use on the CL. IT IS MUCH EASIER TO FRAME THAN On A RANGEFINDER CAMERA. (Sorry about upper case. No quick way to convert on my tablet)

[John in Nassau]

Thanks - Just worry about the depth.  It protrudes at bit more than most lenses so at best it would be very close to the sensor.

Thanks MDA - having not used a CL I can at least agree in principal.  Always laughed at the idea of some of the best lenses in the world being used on what is possibly the least accurate focusing and composition mechanism.

really three things driving this  (ok price is #4).  Last one I never thought about until I moved south - 

size & weight, more accurate focusing, ability to easily use a polarizing filter.  Was

 going to break down and do an M10 but after years with a Bessa and Ikon even an M6 feels a bit chubby in the hand.

ZM collection is 28, 35, 50 and 85.  All would still be useful if a bit slow after the crop factor.  
 

John

 

 

[wda]

59 minutes ago, John in Nassau said:

Thanks - Just worry about the depth.  It protrudes at bit more than most lenses so at best it would be very close to the sensor.

Thanks MDA - having not used a CL I can at least agree in principal.  Always laughed at the idea of some of the best lenses in the world being used on what is possibly the least accurate focusing and composition mechanism.

really three things driving this  (ok price is #4).  Last one I never thought about until I moved south - 

size & weight, more accurate focusing, ability to easily use a polarizing filter.  Was

 going to break down and do an M10 but after years with a Bessa and Ikon even an M6 feels a bit chubby in the hand.

ZM collection is 28, 35, 50 and 85.  All would still be useful if a bit slow after the crop factor.  
 

John

 

 

I cannot agree with your second claim. What evidence do you have that the CL is lacking in precision so far as composition  and focusing. You would be pleasantly surprised. Why not visit a good dealer and try the lenses in practice?

[John in Nassau]

Lol, I was referring to rangefinder mechanisms....

[wda]

Advertisement (gone after registration)

35 minutes ago, John in Nassau said:

Lol, I was referring to rangefinder mechanisms....

On the CL, set focus assist as standard and focusing is so simple when using M-lenses manually. 

[tommonego@gmail.com]

I have used a 25 Canon screw mount on the CL, it has a 10mm protrusion into the camera and works fine, I believe the limit is 11mm. Just remember the lens coverage is 1.5x of the nominal focal length, so your 35 will have the coverage of a 53 on a full frame camera. I broke down and bought a 23 Summicron for the 35 coverage, nice lens BTW. 

I feel your pain about getting film processing.

[jaapv]

3 hours ago, John in Nassau said:

Thanks - Just worry about the depth.  It protrudes at bit more than most lenses so at best it would be very close to the sensor.

Thanks MDA - having not used a CL I can at least agree in principal.  Always laughed at the idea of some of the best lenses in the world being used on what is possibly the least accurate focusing and composition mechanism.

really three things driving this  (ok price is #4).  Last one I never thought about until I moved south - 

size & weight, more accurate focusing, ability to easily use a polarizing filter.  Was

 going to break down and do an M10 but after years with a Bessa and Ikon even an M6 feels a bit chubby in the hand.

ZM collection is 28, 35, 50 and 85.  All would still be useful if a bit slow after the crop factor.  
 

John

 

 

Slow after the crop factor?? The sensor format does not affect the aperture... 🙄  Lens speed is a property of the lens and not of the camera.

If you mount an M lens, the flange to sensor/film distance will always be the same, regardless of camera. Otherwise you would not be able to focus.

[lct]

8 hours ago, John in Nassau said:

Has anyone used the tiny zm 35 2.8 on the CL?

Works fine indeed. I would not call it tiny but it shows the same excellent IQ on APS-C as on FF cameras. Here at f/4 on the digital CL. 

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 November 4, 2019 by lct

[John in Nassau]

Thanks ict - very nice

john

 

[lct]

You're welcome. Hard to find any con in such a lens, if you like contrasty ones that is. It has just a bit of vignetting but it is hardly noticeable on APS-C. Otherwise it has almost no distortion and no CA with very little flare and smooth bokeh w/o the relative softness of the Summarit 35/2.5 (no experience with 35/2.4) at edges and corners below f/5.6. Now such a softness is less visible on APS-C to be honest so i would recommend the Summarit on the CL as well.

[Skarpen]

I got it for my CL and am impressed by it.

I needed a normal «50» and prefer small lenses over larger ones. I considered the 18-56mm, but the faster aperture of f2.8 at 35mm won it.

Nice price, size and superb quality from wide open. Wonderful rendering. Contrasty, shadow details, colors and clarity.

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!

[Philip Freedman]

I also have the Zeiss 35 2.8 on my CL and am very pleased with it. 
Philip

[Viv]

I am sorely tempted to buy this lens for my CL.

[jaapv]

It is an excellent lens. I prefer it to my Summicron 35 asph on the Monochrom1 I think the contrast and sharpness are better matched to the monochrome sensor.

[Viv]

Question: Will focus peaking on the CL work with this lens?

[jaapv]

Undoubtedly. Focus peaking works by contrast - and this is a contrasty lens. Having said that, contrast peaking is not very useful for a 35 mm lens, magnification is far more accurate - and faster, as you will have to find the optimum focus within the DOF using peaking.

[Viv]

Just now, jaapv said:

Undoubtedly. Focus peaking work by contrast - and this is a contrasty lens. Having said that, contrast peaking is not very useful for a 35 mm lens, magnification is far more accurate - and faster, as you will have to find the optimum focus within the DOF using peaking.

Thank you. I am happy to use magnification to focus.

[Advertisement]

Hallo,

Look here: Leica L-Mount

[Philip Freedman]

Focusing through the EVF without magnification or focus peaking is quite accurate and sufficient at medium or smaller apertures. The viewfinder gives a large clear image. Reminds me of using the ground glass screen on early SLRs (showing my age ...)

Philip