35's: Biogon f/2 vs. Asph Cron

35's: Biogon f/2 vs. Asph Cron

  • Zeiss 35/2.0 Biogon

    Votes: 508 50.6%

  • Leica 35/2.0 Summicron ASPH

    Votes: 495 49.4%
  • Total voters
    1,003
35mmdelux said:
A litely used cron would cost a few hundred schillings more over the Biogon and worth it. It is a workhorse.
Click to expand...

Depends on what you're shooting. Lloyd Chambers shoots landscapes, and he chooses the Biogon, rather definitively. His review of the Summicron ASPH and careful comparison to the Biogon — how shall I put this? — dwells on the Summicron's limitations. But not everyone shoots the same stuff, and for other purposes the Summicron might be preferred.

His reviews are definitely worth the subscription cost, IMO.
 
Last edited:
For my first Leica (M4), I got the Biogon because of price. I did do a lot of research on it though, and I am very happy with it! At some point in the future, I will get a 50 Summicron...not sure which one, but price always is a very large factor. My first few rolls that I had developed and scanned (small files) are pretty delightful to see-the color, crispness, and sharpness...I need to scan some on my Nikon V for printing.
 
Monz said:
Jamming
M6, 35mm f2.0 Biogon, Acros iso 100

http://farm2.static.flickr.com/1304/1141261351_ec8856c6bd.jpg

1141261351_ec8856c6bd.jpg
Click to expand...
Beautiful image!
 
It's the wrong poll. The 35/2.8 Biogon C is the one to get; it's arguably a better performer than the 'cron all round. The 35/2 Biogon isn't; it wins on bang for the buck but not if you must have "the best".
 
That's pretty much the only aspect of these lenses that Ken Rockwell criticises.

There are also frequent murmurings that the build quality isn't as good, though; in particular the focusing action becomes loose without affecting photos.
 
rogerzilla said:
It's the wrong poll. The 35/2.8 Biogon C is the one to get; it's arguably a better performer than the 'cron all round. The 35/2 Biogon isn't; it wins on bang for the buck but not if you must have "the best".
Click to expand...

Damn. Whilst you may well be right, I'm sure the original poster who started this in September 2007 didn't foresee the introduction of the wonderful C-Biogon. Here we are 3 1/2 years later; should we start again?

Perhaps not.

.............. Chris
 
Biogon C 35/2.8

Biogon C 35/2.8

I'm on my 2nd 35mm F2 Biogon. I had one, sold it, bought the C Biogon, sold it and now have a new chrome 35/2 Biogon again!

I prefer the look of the F2 Biogon, colours and contrast are similar to my old Zeiss SLR Contax lenses, especially the 35/2.8 distagon, and 50/1.7 which I loved.

The C biogon, while technically great, didn't move me like the pics from the F2 do.

Prefer the size of the 2.8 though!
 
rogerzilla said:
It's the wrong poll. The 35/2.8 Biogon C is the one to get; it's arguably a better performer than the 'cron all round. The 35/2 Biogon isn't; it wins on bang for the buck but not if you must have "the best".
Click to expand...

I had the 35/2.8 biogon... it was a nice lens, but not as good as the 35/ASPH. I have a lens comparison around here which I made between the Summicron v3, 35/2.8 biogon, Nokton 35/1.4 and Summicron 35/ASPH on an M8. The ASPH was the best in all respects. The Nokton was never very good... The summicron v3 is surprisingly good!
 
dfoo said:
I had the 35/2.8 biogon... it was a nice lens, but not as good as the 35/ASPH. I have a lens comparison around here which I made between the Summicron v3, 35/2.8 biogon, Nokton 35/1.4 and Summicron 35/ASPH on an M8. The ASPH was the best in all respects. The Nokton was never very good... The summicron v3 is surprisingly good!
Click to expand...

"All respects?" No.

The ASPH may be better in some respects important to a specific user, but vs. the Biogon and Biogon-C it has more astigmatism and considerably poorer flatness of field. Lloyd Chambers looks very closely at the field flatness issue in his comparison of the 35/2 Biogon and the ASPH (also here). His comparison is worth the price of admission for anyone considering these lenses.

For practical photography we're splitting hairs, of course. Under normal conditions it simply won't matter.
 
Last edited:
Horses for Courses.

I like the handling of my 35/2 asph., I like the size, I like the images it produces. If you don't then shoot something else, plain and simple.

Todd
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top Bottom