Zeiss Biogon F2.8 ZM

[Craig Clark]

Advertisement (gone after registration)

Recently picked up the Zeiss 35mm Distagon for my SL2-S and have been really pleased with the results.  I was thinking of adding a wider angle lens to the kit for landscapes etc and curious to know what folks experience has been adapting the 25mm Biogon to the SL system. 

Any input is greatly appreciated.  

[Anakronox]

My experience is that shot either coded as a 24mm Elmarit or not, there’s a definite color cast that I still need to remove in post when shooting the SL2 and the 25 Biogon ZM.  Don’t remember which side of the frame it happened on though.  I’d personally not use it for landscapes for this reason.  I love the lens on my M10M though.

[Stuart Richardson]

In my experience the 25mm distagon is not a great lens to adapt to digital. It was designed as a quite symmetrical wide angle for film and the cover class of digital sensors really gives it a problem, even on cameras that have offset microlenses. When I got the SL2, I tried using it for a bit. It is very sharp on center, even wide open, but other than the very center, the image is soft across the entire frame. It gets better while stopping down to become just an average lens by f11. I added the very inexpensive Sigma 24mm f3.5 for L mount and it is excellent and vastly better on the SL2. The best way to enjoy the 25mm biogon is with a roll of Provia in an M7. I will say, however, that coding it as a 24mm Elmarit, I have not noticed any significant color casts, just the substantial softness/fuzziness at anything below f8. In my opinion the only usable apertures are 8, 11 and 16, at least if anything other than the central frame is important.  I am attaching an early test I did. The center of the frame at 2.8 and the left corner. As I said, the fuzziness in the edges of the frame does not really clear up until f8 or f11, and by then overall contrast is lowered and detail rendering is fair but not great. One of the best things about the L mount system is the incredibly good standard lenses. I would highly encourage a look at the 24mm Sigma lenses...I mostly use the APO Summicrons but the Sigma 24mm holds its own. I found it to be equally good to the lens in the Q2...

I should also note I am very picky about lenses as a printer, so if you are not sweating the details, then the biogon might be ok, but I would definitely look for another 24mm designed more for digital...

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 June 22, 2023 by Stuart Richardson

[Craig Clark]

16 hours ago, Stuart Richardson said:

In my experience the 25mm distagon is not a great lens to adapt to digital. It was designed as a quite symmetrical wide angle for film and the cover class of digital sensors really gives it a problem, even on cameras that have offset microlenses. When I got the SL2, I tried using it for a bit. It is very sharp on center, even wide open, but other than the very center, the image is soft across the entire frame. It gets better while stopping down to become just an average lens by f11. I added the very inexpensive Sigma 24mm f3.5 for L mount and it is excellent and vastly better on the SL2. The best way to enjoy the 25mm biogon is with a roll of Provia in an M7. I will say, however, that coding it as a 24mm Elmarit, I have not noticed any significant color casts, just the substantial softness/fuzziness at anything below f8. In my opinion the only usable apertures are 8, 11 and 16, at least if anything other than the central frame is important.  I am attaching an early test I did. The center of the frame at 2.8 and the left corner. As I said, the fuzziness in the edges of the frame does not really clear up until f8 or f11, and by then overall contrast is lowered and detail rendering is fair but not great. One of the best things about the L mount system is the incredibly good standard lenses. I would highly encourage a look at the 24mm Sigma lenses...I mostly use the APO Summicrons but the Sigma 24mm holds its own. I found it to be equally good to the lens in the Q2...

I should also note I am very picky about lenses as a printer, so if you are not sweating the details, then the biogon might be ok, but I would definitely look for another 24mm designed more for digital...

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!

this is super helpful.  I was honestly looking also at the sigma art 24mm.  I had one of those back when I shot sony and liked it very much.  Pretty sure I can find one of those used for somewhere around $600....about the same as the zeiss used.   

do you know how the sigma art stacks up against the 24 you have?

[Sohail]

1 hour ago, Craig Clark said:

this is super helpful.  I was honestly looking also at the sigma art 24mm.  I had one of those back when I shot sony and liked it very much.  Pretty sure I can find one of those used for somewhere around $600....about the same as the zeiss used.   

do you know how the sigma art stacks up against the 24 you have?

Have you ever thought about going ultra-wide at say 14mm? 
https://www.bhphotovideo.com/c/product/1463163-REG/sigma_14mm_f_1_8_dg_hsm.html

[Craig Clark]

15 hours ago, Sohail said:

Have you ever thought about going ultra-wide at say 14mm? 
https://www.bhphotovideo.com/c/product/1463163-REG/sigma_14mm_f_1_8_dg_hsm.html

I hadn't until now...maybe I will rent a couple of these and see.  14 is ULTRA wide!

[Sohail]

Advertisement (gone after registration)

5 minutes ago, Craig Clark said:

I hadn't until now...maybe I will rent a couple of these and see.  14 is ULTRA wide!

Take a look at João Coelho's work. He uses ultra-wide lenses. It's an interesting look that might complement your work:
https://www.joaocoelho-photography.com/gallery

Edited June 23, 2023 by Sohail

[Virob]

23 hours ago, Sohail said:

Have you ever thought about going ultra-wide at say 14mm? 
https://www.bhphotovideo.com/c/product/1463163-REG/sigma_14mm_f_1_8_dg_hsm.html

You may as well go with the newly released version of that lens which is designed for mirrorless, L and E mount systems.

https://www.bhphotovideo.com/c/product/1770211-REG/sigma_14mm_f_1_4_dg_dn.html

Both are beasts.

Coelho's work is amazing.

[Sohail]

As it happens, I have the L mount version. 

[JakubKPlasil]

Hi! I have purchased recently biogon 25 for my sl2-s. So far testing did not revealed any critical shifts mentioned above. Maybe i am missing something, i admit. I did not processes the pictures thoroughly, but quick checks did not show smeared colors nothing, unsharpness, weird shifted colors (in the non focused areas). I am taking it this weekend for the photography trip, So Will definitely see....

[Stuart Richardson]

I never noticed any color shifts, just the unsharpness at wide to normal apertures, as compared to how it works on film. In my experience it was usable stopped down to f8 or so, but that it was not in the same league as a native L mount 24mm. It is obviously a beautiful lens that is great to handle, and it is still very sharp on center at all apertures.

[Archiver]

The Biogon 25 is a stunning lens on a M body, but on the Panasonic S5 it is less than satisfactory. @Stuart Richardsoncomments about it on the SL2 are similar to how it is on the S5. I honestly wish Leica would make a mirrorless camera, non rangefinder, that is optimized for M mount lenses.