semilog
curmudgeonly optimist
If you don't like the images you're getting from a Summicron ASPH, it is worth considering the possibility that the problem is not with the lens. Same goes for either of the Biogons.
35's: Biogon f/2 vs. Asph Cron
- Thread starter cmogi10
- Start date
- Latest activity Latest activity:
- Replies 363
- Views 9K
If you don't like the images you're getting from a Summicron ASPH, it is worth considering the possibility that the problem is not with the lens. Same goes for either of the Biogons.
flip
良かったね！
semilog
curmudgeonly optimist
^----- Me, too.
The only con I can see with the Biogon is the size... outside of that, it is wonderful.
klapka
Established
Sorry if my post comes useless since I never had a chance of trying the asph cron but still have an opinion on biogon vs pre asph cron and going to share it..
Well, I do own both the Biogon and the pre asph cron.
Both of them are gems and I can't sell any of them (it would be reasonable to sell one but when it comes to rangefinder stuff I'am ruther a buyer then a seller..) but since I've got the Biogon I use only Biogon: most of the time my cron stays on the shelf.
The reason is - all the shots I have produced from this lens pair made me believe the Biogon opticaly is far ahead of pre asph cron.
I will still take the cron when I have a small bag with me or planning a long walk since it is smaller. And I believe cron is a bit better (means sharper) at f2. But at this f2 and at all other f's I like the Biogon's rendering, bokeh, no distortion, flair resistance and built quality beter over the cron's.
So.. my vote goes to Biogon.
Wide open from pre asph cron:
Wide open from Biogon:
Well, I do own both the Biogon and the pre asph cron.
Both of them are gems and I can't sell any of them (it would be reasonable to sell one but when it comes to rangefinder stuff I'am ruther a buyer then a seller..) but since I've got the Biogon I use only Biogon: most of the time my cron stays on the shelf.
The reason is - all the shots I have produced from this lens pair made me believe the Biogon opticaly is far ahead of pre asph cron.
I will still take the cron when I have a small bag with me or planning a long walk since it is smaller. And I believe cron is a bit better (means sharper) at f2. But at this f2 and at all other f's I like the Biogon's rendering, bokeh, no distortion, flair resistance and built quality beter over the cron's.
So.. my vote goes to Biogon.
Wide open from pre asph cron:
Wide open from Biogon:
dallard
Well-known
Which model pre-asph do you own?
I was dying to get a Summacron recently since I had one back in the 90s (and remember it fondly). However, I've been using the Zeiss Biogon f/2 and I cannot find any faults with it so I can't bring myself to buy a Summicron. The only thing I can see me getting with a Summicron is smaller size.
Update 082911... bought a summicron... biogon for sale... hahahaha.
Update 082911... bought a summicron... biogon for sale... hahahaha.
Last edited:
klapka
Established
The 4-th one.
santino
FSU gear head
I'm pretty surprised by the results!
I sold my Biogon because of mechanical build quality - no problems so far with leica lenses (but all of my Zeiss lenses in C/Y mount are exceptionally well build - so it must be a "ZM" issue or just a lemon).
I sold my Biogon because of mechanical build quality - no problems so far with leica lenses (but all of my Zeiss lenses in C/Y mount are exceptionally well build - so it must be a "ZM" issue or just a lemon).
semilog
curmudgeonly optimist
^--- Sounds like a lemon. My (current) ZM's are as good mechanically as my (previous) Leica lenses were.
clicker
Well-known
I prefer the Summicron, but that being said both are excellent.
Nick De Marco
Well-known
I used to have a Summicron vIV which got broke, so I foolishly sold it
Then I had the Biogon 35mm f2, which was without doubt at least as good, if not a better lens, than the pre-asph Summicron. But a bit longer, which I never liked.
I recently traded that in too, for the 35 Biogon f2.8-C, which I believe is a better lens, equals the Summicron ASPH IMO, and is a good small size - but of course one stop slower. Ideal for daytime shooting. As I picked up the Nokton 35mm f1.2 v2, which is the best 35 in my opinion, I'm happy with this combination.
Then I had the Biogon 35mm f2, which was without doubt at least as good, if not a better lens, than the pre-asph Summicron. But a bit longer, which I never liked.
I recently traded that in too, for the 35 Biogon f2.8-C, which I believe is a better lens, equals the Summicron ASPH IMO, and is a good small size - but of course one stop slower. Ideal for daytime shooting. As I picked up the Nokton 35mm f1.2 v2, which is the best 35 in my opinion, I'm happy with this combination.
Yes, that is probably the ideal "low cost" solution.
damonsong
Established
My vote made the biogon up by one now, oops... I am currently using a Cron asph, it is not bad but since there are about $1000 usd price difference I vote for the biogon.
Biogon is running away with the crown?
NaChase
Well-known
The Biogon is better, duh! ... then again, it's my only 35. It is pretty awesome though! Honest!
lam
Well-known
If I could only find a ZM Biogon 35mm f2, I'd go test it against this 35 cron asph. i'm borrowing..
f6andBthere
Well-known
Just looking ... 332 to 322 is hardly running away with it considering the price advantage of the Zeiss!
I remember checking this poll a while ago and the difference was much greater ... the Leica fans have been late to the party. 😀
edftwin
Street Wanderer
Biogon is best bang for bucks.
Clancycoop
Established
Here's my vote for the 35mm Summicron ASPH:
