Old Leica M vs new Zeiss ZM ?

S

Speedfreak

-
Local time
3:06 AM
Joined
Dec 31, 2011
Messages
221
I might benefit from a tax refund in a few weeks and think about spending it on lenses I could (or would) normally not afford.

So if you were to build a set of rangefinder lenses, how would you chose?

Used Leica M lenses (pre asph) or current Zeiss ZMs?

Which are optically superior? Which have better build quality?
 
I would make a separate case for C Sonnar 50/1.5 If you like portraiture, this is a lens without par and a keeper. Second consideration is, if you shoot colour or B&W, as Zeiss glass is particularly convincing for colour, and older Leica lenses on the other hand, are particularly good in B&W. As far as quality is concerned, Zeiss lenses have at times need for minor tightening of the rear ring, thing easily done with a spanner, otherwise they are robust more than enough, even if some older Leica brass lenses are really indistructible.
In my opinion best value for money against optical quality would be:
For B&W
Elmarit 90.2.8 (last)
CV 75/2.5 ltm
Summilux 50/1.4 pre asph
C Sonnar 50/1.5
Nokton 35/1.2 either version
Summicron 35/2 3rd
Summaron 35/2.8
CV 28/1.9 ltm
SA 21/3.4
For Colour:
Zeiss ZM lenses, all along.
 
Hard to say, since it's all in TASTE. They produce different images so putting words into your mouth will be hard. Pre ASPH Leica lenses do have a very unique and classic 'look' to them which suit B&W quite nicely. A lot of them have moderate contrast but high sharpness.

Zeiss (the modern ones) are usually as sharp of a lens as you can find, very high contrast as well which may or may not be great for B&W (brilliant for color, especially slides, in my opinion) work since it clumps up the micro contrasts, and it becomes more BLACK AND WHITE instead of all the juice in between unless you do a lot of exposure/dev magic. Build quality I've heard is not that impressive, you'll hear "ziess wobble" quite a lot.

Bokeh? You'll have to try yourself and see what you like.

Zeiss definitely cheaper though.

You might also want to consider M-Hexanons and Voigtlanders which are brilliant and highly appreciated by a lot of people who also worship Leicas.

gooooooooood luck
 
Assuming you would not like to pay more than $/€ 1.000 for each; the followings are all top-notch.

C-Sonnar or Planar 50mm (Exc. bokeh too..)

C-Biogon 35/2.8 (Creamy bokeh!)
Summaron 35/2.8

I am very happy with a cherry-picked Elmarit 90/2.8 first version; to be found for less than $400.
 
As mentioned previously the zeiss is much better in colour rendition and the older m glass is much better for black white work. And what I love most is that the older lenses flares beautifully (if thats your thing)
 
Old Leica M vs new Zeiss ZM ?

Buy original Leica. The Leica lenses will always have a resale value. The Leica lenses designed for a Leica. When i replaced a stolen 35mm, i chose an older 35mmSummaron f2.8 because it is Leica. The lens behaves like my 50mm Summicron collapsible.i doubt anyone needs all that sharpness? i certainly don't.
 
for a long time I thought I wanted a DR summicron more than any other lens.

several times, I got close to selling my ZM 50 planar.

but, looking at the direct comparisons, even in b&w, I see that I made the right choice (for me). I like the ZM rendering and evenness across the frame, and I can always control contrast in development and scanning / printing as long as I dont miss the mark too far. Ive seen some great shots from a DR on color though; it's just different.

the planar may not last as long as an old Leica, but it should last me long enough to make it worth it's very reasonable price.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top Bottom