35mm - Zeiss C-Biogon f2.8 vs Color Skopar f2.5

[28framelines]

Advertisement (gone after registration)

Hey folks, so I’m looking to get a 35mm, but my budget is pretty tight. My question is, shy of buying what I’d really love (a 35mm Summilux SR), in the mean time I’m looking at one of these two lenses (no, I’m not interested in the 35mm Ultron, Nokton f1.4, or Nokton f1.2 III as two of them focus closer than 0.7m and one of them has ridiculous distortion). So, if I had to pick between these two, which should I choose? I’d like something with a bit of character, and I’m worried the C-Biogon is just gonna look too perfect. If possible, please provide sample images showcasing the character of these, particularly for portraits (I understand they aren’t the fastest, but I just would like nice bokeh for whatever bokeh exists). Like, is the C-Biogon noticeably better in all regards? Is it worth double the money? I’ll be shooting ONLY on Film, I don’t have a digital Leica, and I swap between black and white.

Edit: I guess I should note that I showed my hand a bit, in that I’d love to get the reissue SR at some point (I hate the whole filter situation that we’ve been talking about in the thread but ultimately I love the look it produces). So optical perfection is not a must. I just don’t like distortion, and I like a bit of character. The SR has virtually no distortion, just like my 28 Elmarit. That’s more important than sharpness in my eyes.

Edited January 31, 2023 by 28framelines

[Advertisement]

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

[hdmesa]

Samples look pretty good. I bought one a while back, but it was crazy decentered. Need to try again with another copy.

[28framelines]

20 minutes ago, hdmesa said:

Samples look pretty good. I bought one a while back, but it was crazy decentered. Need to try again with another copy.

Thanks! Yea, I saw this review, though it’s such a small sample, and I’d love to hear from this community and what people’s opinion of it on this forum is. Thank you for sending it though, I’m sorry your copy was very decentred!

[hmzimelka]

I had both on my M11 and the decision was easy; Color-Skopar 35mm for me. 

The new C-Biogon copy I tried never got sharp at the edges. It was very high contrast, incredibly sharp all the time at the centre. Lovely form factor. I don't like the 1/3 stop aperture that Zeiss implements on the their VM lenses.

The Color-Skopar is much sharper across the frame. Arguably it's form factor is a little to focused on compactness making it a little fidgety to use. It takes 39mm filters, which for me was a big plus. Also contrasty and sharp. Slightly wavy field curvature. It has focus shift, although not a lot. 

Be sure to buy either from a store that allows returns. The Color-Skopar 35mm seems to have more copy variance than modern Voigtlander lenses. For landscapes, it should produce good sharp results across the frame at f/5.6.

[28framelines]

While there aren’t many portraits in this Flickr, the Skopar seems to have a very pleasant, dare-I-say-it, Leica 35mm Summicron v3/v4 look to the images; cinematic, very natural look.

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 January 31, 2023 by 28framelines

[28framelines]

33 minutes ago, hmzimelka said:

I had both on my M11 and the decision was easy; Color-Skopar 35mm for me. 

The new C-Biogon copy I tried never got sharp at the edges. It was very high contrast, incredibly sharp all the time at the centre. Lovely form factor. I don't like the 1/3 stop aperture that Zeiss implements on the their VM lenses.

The Color-Skopar is much sharper across the frame. Arguably it's form factor is a little to focused on compactness making it a little fidgety to use. It takes 39mm filters, which for me was a big plus. Also contrasty and sharp. Slightly wavy field curvature. It has focus shift, although not a lot. 

Be sure to buy either from a store that allows returns. The Color-Skopar 35mm seems to have more copy variance than modern Voigtlander lenses. For landscapes, it should produce good sharp results across the frame at f/5.6.

Definitely the 39mm filters are a plus, as the Elmarit has the same. Not super concerned with focus shift, as it’s less noticeable on Film than on digital I find

[ktmrider2]

Advertisement (gone after registration)

Have owned both but the Color Skopar was so long ago I don't remember much.  My impression is that it is a fine lens, great size and great price.  The 35f2.8 C-Biogon is my all time favorite.  It lives on my Leica if 35 is the focal length I require.  And it is half of my travel kit, the other being a 90f2.8.

I don't think you can go wrong with either lens but have you looked at the 35 APO from Voightlander?  It is getting great reviews and you won't have to sell your wife and daughters to pay for it.

[28framelines]

1 hour ago, ktmrider2 said:

Have owned both but the Color Skopar was so long ago I don't remember much.  My impression is that it is a fine lens, great size and great price.  The 35f2.8 C-Biogon is my all time favorite.  It lives on my Leica if 35 is the focal length I require.  And it is half of my travel kit, the other being a 90f2.8.

I don't think you can go wrong with either lens but have you looked at the 35 APO from Voightlander?  It is getting great reviews and you won't have to sell your wife and daughters to pay for it.

I’m not interested in the 35mm APO either, it’s absolutely massive, and seems too clinical. Glad to hear the C-Biogon is your go to. So far it seems almost half and half

Edited January 31, 2023 by 28framelines

[hmzimelka]

3 hours ago, 28framelines said:

Definitely the 39mm filters are a plus, as the Elmarit has the same. Not super concerned with focus shift, as it’s less noticeable on Film than on digital I find

Pop me a DM if you want some M11 DNG files from the Color-Skopar. Sometimes what we report here only says so much and I personally find that DNG files are more informative.

I can probably also send you a series showing focus shift... I'm sure I have those test pics somewhere still.

[spydrxx]

Years ago I purchased the Color Skopar and initially was disappointed as for me it was just too contrasty and sharp, having grown up on a Summaron/2.8. Over time, though, I've come to really like the Color Skopar, although I admit I'm still learning how to tame it when desired. For a short while I owned the Biogon thinking it would answer everything, but somehow I just couldn't connect with it. Presently in the 35mm range I'm using both the Color skopar and the Voigtlander Nokton Classic 35/1.4 SC, because almost all of my film work is with B&W, and I use both on digital for color.

[BradS]

14 hours ago, 28framelines said:

.... is the C-Biogon noticeably better in all regards? Is it worth double the money?

Yes.

The Color-Skopar was my first M lens. It is a fine lens in every respect but I really hated the aperture ring. It is NOT a character lens. It is sharp and clean, much like the 35mm f/2.5 Summarit-M.  I sold the Color Skopar and replaced it with the 35mm f/2.8 Biogon ZM. I love the Biogon. Everything about it is fabulous. I could not ask for nor hope to find a better 35mm lens....ok, I wish that it were a stop faster but that's it. The performance of Biogon is noticeably better than the Color-Skopar in every regard but neither is a character lens. Is the Biogon worth the money? Absolutely, yes...but the little Color-Skopar is no slouch. It really leaves very little on the table. I really don't think you can go wrong with think either of them.

Edited January 31, 2023 by BradS

[28framelines]

1 hour ago, BradS said:

Yes.

The Color-Skopar was my first M lens. It is a fine lens in every respect but I really hated the aperture ring. It is NOT a character lens. It is sharp and clean, much like the 35mm f/2.5 Summarit-M.  I sold the Color Skopar and replaced it with the 35mm f/2.8 Biogon ZM. I love the Biogon. Everything about it is fabulous. I could not ask for nor hope to find a better 35mm lens....ok, I wish that it were a stop faster but that's it. The performance of Biogon is noticeably better than the Color-Skopar in every regard but neither is a character lens. Is the Biogon worth the money? Absolutely, yes...but the little Color-Skopar is no slouch. It really leaves very little on the table. I really don't think you can go wrong with think either of them.

Thanks Brad! I think so far I’m leaning towards to Skopar, just for cost considerations. If I hate it I can always upgrade instead of spending the extra up front.

I guess one other lens to (potentially) consider is the new Voigtlander 40mm f2.8. I know it’s not a 35, but maybe I should consider it? It meets the requirements of small/lightweight, and seems to have pretty good image quality if I’m not mistaken. But at that cost (and if I’m now considering a 40mm), would the M-Rokkor be the better spend?

[lct]

Just tried the Skopar 35/2.5 once but i did not like its bokeh at all. It is a subjective mater though. As for the Biogon 35/2.8, it is my favorite "slow" 35 ever. It is a high contrast lens and it somewhat vignettes at full aperture but it has very little distortion and CA and its bokeh is smooth. As a comparison, the Summarit 35/2.5 has smooth bokeh as well and less vignetting than the Biogon but significantly more distortion and CA. Edges and corners are also softer on the Summarit below f/5.6.

[28framelines]

5 minutes ago, lct said:

Just tried the Skopar 35/2.5 once but i did not like its bokeh at all. It is a subjective mater though. As for the Biogon 35/2.8, it is my favorite "slow" 35 ever. It is a high contrast lens and it somewhat vignettes at full aperture but it has very little distortion and CA and its bokeh is smooth. As a comparison, the Summarit 35/2.5 has smooth bokeh as well and less vignetting than the Biogon but significantly more distortion and CA. Edges and corners are also softer on the Summarit below f/5.6.

I forgot about the Summarit! Thanks for the insight!

[BradS]

1 hour ago, 28framelines said:

Thanks Brad! I think so far I’m leaning towards to Skopar, just for cost considerations. If I hate it I can always upgrade instead of spending the extra up front.

I guess one other lens to (potentially) consider is the new Voigtlander 40mm f2.8. I know it’s not a 35, but maybe I should consider it? It meets the requirements of small/lightweight, and seems to have pretty good image quality if I’m not mistaken. But at that cost (and if I’m now considering a 40mm), would the M-Rokkor be the better spend?

I think it's a good plan - trying the Color-Skopar. Considering the price/performance, you really can't go wrong. Be prepared to love it.

I've not tried either of those 40mm options but the new CV 40mm f/2.8 is very tempting...especially the LTM version - which could be used on an M with a LTM-M mount adapter that brings up the 35mm frame lines.

[Ouroboros]

2 hours ago, BradS said:

I've not tried either of those 40mm options but the new CV 40mm f/2.8 is very tempting...especially the LTM version - which could be used on an M with a LTM-M mount adapter that brings up the 35mm frame lines.

I have the Voigtlander 40mm Heliar f2.8 asph in ltm.  I use it on my iiif and  on my MP and M10-R with a 35mm adapter.

It looks very retro and is small and unobtrusive but it’s looks belie it’s very clean  rendering as you would expect from CV’s more recent asph lenses.  
I’m very pleased with colour and black and white prints I’ve made from scanned negatives and M10-R files.
It makes a good partner to a 28mm summaron-m for a lightweight compact pair to carry all day.  It’s comparable to the summaron-m’s build quality and they share the same 34mm filter thread.

I can’t fault it and the cost isn’t bad either. 

 

[28framelines]

45 minutes ago, Ouroboros said:

I have the Voigtlander 40mm Heliar f2.8 asph in ltm.  I use it on my iiif and  on my MP and M10-R with a 35mm adapter.

It looks very retro and is small and unobtrusive but it’s looks belie it’s very clean  rendering as you would expect from CV’s more recent asph lenses.  
I’m very pleased with colour and black and white prints I’ve made from scanned negatives and M10-R files.
It makes a good partner to a 28mm summaron-m for a lightweight compact pair to carry all day.  It’s comparable to the summaron-m’s build quality and they share the same 34mm filter thread.

I can’t fault it and the cost isn’t bad either. 

 

Thank you! I think it’s a strong contender at the moment, I believe I’ve ruled out the C-Biogon as I haven’t seen many photos where I look at it and think “wow, that’s incredible”

[tedd]

I've had two ZM 35mm's (not the 1.4) and absolutely hated both of them wide open. Super harsh OOF rendering, though fine stopped down if you don't mind the crazy high contrast. I'm now using a Summarit 2.5 which I'm still in the honeymoon phase with but genuinely really like. Doesn't really answer your question I know, but I got the Summarit for only a couple of hundred more than I sold the ZM.

Edited February 1, 2023 by tedd

[Advertisement]

Hallo,

Look here: Leica M

[Ouroboros]

1 minute ago, 28framelines said:

Thank you! I think it’s a strong contender at the moment, I believe I’ve ruled out the C-Biogon as I haven’t seen many photos where I look at it and think “wow, that’s incredible”

Just a couple of things you might want to be aware of:

the usual online criticism of the CV 40mm Heliar asph is that the lens barrel and aperture ring turn simultaneously as you adjust focus.  My experience is it took me less that 1 second to register that fact and I never needed to think about it again.  The 34mm filter thread  makes some filters difficult to source (same applies to 28mm summaron-m), but a good dealer should be able to order the more common types such as UV, yellow & orange. 

Overall, it's an easy lens to like.  If you can, try all the lenses on your shortlist before you make a final decision. 

[28framelines]

9 minutes ago, Ouroboros said:

Just a couple of things you might want to be aware of:

the usual online criticism of the CV 40mm Heliar asph is that the lens barrel and aperture ring turn simultaneously as you adjust focus.  My experience is it took me less that 1 second to register that fact and I never needed to think about it again.  The 34mm filter thread  makes some filters difficult to source (same applies to 28mm summaron-m), but a good dealer should be able to order the more common types such as UV, yellow & orange. 

Overall, it's an easy lens to like.  If you can, try all the lenses on your shortlist before you make a final decision. 

Thank you! I think my main concern with the 40mm is actually the knob. Apparently it unscrews and can fall off? I saw it on a YouTube video but not sure how true that is. Do you find that?