35mm Biogon or 35mm Ultron 1.7 ?

[jackal2513]

can anyoen compare the 2 ?

 

[Dektol Dan]

Both are too big, but the Ultron will fit in a standard eveready case. The Ultron has poor ergonomics. Performance wise the Zeiss is 200% better. It's a no brainer. The Biogon is the best if size is not an issue. I have both. The Zeiss' color (blueish) took a while to get used to, but its old timey tonality and lower contrast is drop dead gorgeous. It's flattering to ugly women and babies. My Ultron is an orphan and is the target of my verbal abuse on this forum. I keep it around just to kick it. Please somebody, buy it from me to save me from myself! I know there are plenty of crazy misguided CV worshippers in this forum!

 

[jackal2513]

hmm... i was told previosly that the 35 biogon is VERY high contrast, higher contrast than any 35mm offering from leica or CV ? And also on centre the ultron is sharper (although biogon very sharp in teh corners).

 

[Terao]

You're in the wrong forum 😛

The Biogon if there are no M8 mount/coding issues. If there are then go for the Ultron because you can Milich it...

 

[Terao]

Biogons are sharp across the frame and high(er) contrast. Ultrons & Noktons are lower contrast, softer in the corners, and sharper in the centre. The M8 crop is going to help you on the corner issue.

 

[jackal2513]

so basically the Zeiss is the Caterham, and the Ultron the Burlington Arrow ?

or maybe i shoudl get the baby skopar classic, so cute it hurts !