NLewis
Established
Informed opinions please on:
CV 35/1.4 vs Leitz 35/1.4 pre-ASPH
and
CV 35/2.5 vs Zeiss 35/2.8
CV 35/1.4 vs Leitz 35/1.4 pre-ASPH
and
CV 35/2.5 vs Zeiss 35/2.8
Benjamin Marks
Veteran
Well, OP, if you sense a little pique in Double Negative's response, it is because you have not given us a lot to work with; don't know the intended purpose, the price/performance preferences, digital or film and if digital, RF or TTL focusing etc. etc. When you ask an open ended question like that of a community, essentially you are asking the community to donate its time to help you solve a problem. It is hard to know how to spend time giving you an informed opinion if you are not explicit about the problem you are trying to solve and what investigations you have already performed before asking folks to donate their time to your cause. Here are three general comments.
The two fast lenses are said to exhibit some focus shift between f:1.4 and f:5.6. I own the C/V and it is certainly true with that lens. If you need the speed, you can certainly learn to work around this by learning how the lenses behave at different apertures and distances and compensating accordingly. Not an issue w/m-4-3 if you focus or check focus stopped down.
The two slower lenses exhibit no focus shift. Both are sharp and contrasty. The Zeiss 35/.28 C-Biogon is amazing, although a v.3 or v.4 Summicron is physically smaller and gives you an extra stop.
Another way to group the lenses is by age. The Leica is an older design and will be a little lower contrast/flare-y wide open, the newer designs will give snappier results. Once again, if you are shooting digital, you may want a lower contrast lens, but it is hard to know if that is something that matters.
Ben
The two fast lenses are said to exhibit some focus shift between f:1.4 and f:5.6. I own the C/V and it is certainly true with that lens. If you need the speed, you can certainly learn to work around this by learning how the lenses behave at different apertures and distances and compensating accordingly. Not an issue w/m-4-3 if you focus or check focus stopped down.
The two slower lenses exhibit no focus shift. Both are sharp and contrasty. The Zeiss 35/.28 C-Biogon is amazing, although a v.3 or v.4 Summicron is physically smaller and gives you an extra stop.
Another way to group the lenses is by age. The Leica is an older design and will be a little lower contrast/flare-y wide open, the newer designs will give snappier results. Once again, if you are shooting digital, you may want a lower contrast lens, but it is hard to know if that is something that matters.
Ben
Last edited:
NLewis
Established
Well, I did do a search of past posts, and this was my conclusion among those who have tried both:
The CV 35/1.4 is a technically better lens than the Leitz 35/1.4 pre-ASPH, but some people like the character of the Leitz's oddities, not to mention the red dot.
The Zeiss 35/2.8 is awesome. The CV 35/2.5 is very good, but not quite awesome, and has some sample variation issues.
The CV 35/1.4 is a technically better lens than the Leitz 35/1.4 pre-ASPH, but some people like the character of the Leitz's oddities, not to mention the red dot.
The Zeiss 35/2.8 is awesome. The CV 35/2.5 is very good, but not quite awesome, and has some sample variation issues.
That pretty much sums it up.
This is the most frequent interesting topic at RFF I think. There are other topics that are asked more often, which are of no value, but 35mm lenses is a fastball down the middle of the plate for RF photography.
I don't know that you will get any new or unique answers at this point not mentioned in any of those prior threads, but do read through them as I think they are very valuable.
ChrisC
Established
That much is my experience. Except; after using the Zeiss I would relegate the C.V. to 'good value', but noticeably outclassed by the C-Biogon. I sold my Colour Skopar without any regrets.
.............. Chris
maddoc
... likes film again.
I have replaced a CV 35/2.5 PII (my first RF lens ever, bought new) with a 35mm Summilux-M pre-ASPH (my first Leica lens ever and bought used) and have never looked back. 
The Meaness
Well-known
A lot of this comes down to taste. What kind of contrast do you want? Do you prefer "clinical"/"3d" look, or one that is "classic"/has "character"?
Do you have other lenses you want to pair with this 35? How important is speed to you? I assume size is a factor more so than price based on your 4 choices. Does distortion matter? The CV 1.4 has some.
And there are certain qualities of a lens' rendering that just can't be measured exactly. Flickr is a good source to find samples.
Do you have other lenses you want to pair with this 35? How important is speed to you? I assume size is a factor more so than price based on your 4 choices. Does distortion matter? The CV 1.4 has some.
And there are certain qualities of a lens' rendering that just can't be measured exactly. Flickr is a good source to find samples.
bluebook
Member
I got stuck in the same dilemma before. I picked up a CV because of the 35 Lux price (>3x the cost of CV) and of the series VII filter. Now I am very happy with the CV. The only complain I have is its distortion. Meh you cannot have everything.
jljohn
Well-known
Buy the one you will most wish you had bought after buying one of the one's you didn't want most.
ferider
Veteran
I like this summary. But I want to add that when you look at photos, "awesome" and "good but not quite awesome" makes no difference
Also, the color skopar is much smaller and half stop faster than the Biogon.Roland.