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
Wow, that's a pretty detailed comparison. The 'cron made a better showing than I expected. I'd like to see the difference in flare reduction. Here, I would expect the Biogon to shine (so to speak).
 
I had been shooting with a Biogon for a year and got rid of it because I found the images at f2 unusable. I don't know what the reason is, but they looked slightly washed out. Did I have a bad sample? At f2.8, the problem would disappear. From what I understand, the ASPH doesn't suffer from this problem, and b/c of its size, I think it's a better lens. But maybe the point is that I don't own the ASPH because of how much it costs!
 
hehe..

you guys kill me.

We all know that everyone that wants to view a framed image gets out a magnifying glass and gets within centimeters of the print to see exactly how sharp it is or how the bokeh is rendered :D

I think at "regular viewing distance" you'll see very little difference at all - and, again, for the price, I doubt the Cron is worth the extra $1500-$1700.

As for "size" - there's really not that much difference between the two.

Dave
 
Not much difference in size, especially when you consider that the hood for the 'cron makes it slightly longer and wider (thus obscuring the viewfinder much more) than the Biogon and that the Biogon doesn't really need the hood because it is bloody nearly flare-proof IMHO.
 
dcsang,

I don't think one needs to use a magnifying glass to evaluate bokeh. I can see the 'cron's characteristic bokeh (the apparant doubling of out of focus vertical lines) in my tombstone shot looking at my screen from a "regular viewing distance."

And as for what I noted in my comparison, the extra price of the 'cron might be worth it to a professional who has to sell images taken at f/2.0. Although my comparison makes note of what I see using my 22X loupe, the Biogon's specular highlight flare is apparant to me when I view the uncropped two images on my computer screen.
 
visiondr said:
...the Biogon doesn't really need the hood because it is bloody nearly flare-proof IMHO.
Click to expand...

You mean veiling glare. As for flare, the close up images show that at f/2.0, the Biogon is susceptible, but certainly a lens hood wouldn't help in that case.
 
J J Kapsberger said:
Some side-by-side shots of the two lenses which seem fated to compete with one another: the 35 Summicron ASPH and the 35 ZM Biogon.

<snip>

I find that at f/2.0 the Summicron outperforms the Biogon. In this scene the Summicron's acutance is higher, its greater contrast aids in causing certain details to stand out (e.g., the lady in the poster)

<snip>

Perhaps the 35 Summicron ASPH is one of those great lenses which allows Leica to enjoy a reputation for unequaled wide-open performance, at least from a technical standpoint.
Click to expand...
I haven't been able to compare a 35 ZM Biogon with any 35mm Summicron, side by side, but one thing I did notice is that the 35 ZM Biogon is a little "dimmer" when shooting the same aperture and shutter speed as the 40mm M-Rokkor, 40mm Summicron-C, 50mm Summilux pre-asph, 50mm Summitar f/2...

I see evidence of this in your comparisons, where the highlights have "better detail" with the Biogon than the Summicron, and I believe this is to be due by what I've stated above.

The Biogon has 9 elements; the 35mm Summicrons range from 6 to 8, with the ASPH having 7, I believe. ...?
 
J J Kapsberger said:
dcsang,

I don't think one needs to use a magnifying glass to evaluate bokeh. I can see the 'cron's characteristic bokeh (the apparant doubling of out of focus vertical lines) in my tombstone shot looking at my screen from a "regular viewing distance."

And as for what I noted in my comparison, the extra price of the 'cron might be worth it to a professional who has to sell images taken at f/2.0. Although my comparison makes note of what I see using my 22X loupe, the Biogon's specular highlight flare is apparant to me when I view the uncropped two images on my computer screen.
Click to expand...

ya.. like I said.. a framed image on the wall at regular viewing distance - I sell images professionally for my wedding photography - people rarely get as anal as we do here with respect to bokeh or corner sharpness.

Dave
 
jjovin said:
There is only one thing in the whole wide world that fulfills the criterion “built like a tank”. Zoran
Click to expand...

yahhhh......and it has a cannon mounted on it. (two "n's")

wasn't it Wimpy who said, "I'll glady pay you Tuesday for a biogon today."
 
Could not resist getting the Biogon after reading this thread. OT a little here, would the silver 43mm Leica UV/IR filter fit the biogon, or I'm better off using Heliopan or B+W?
 
35/2 Biogon pics

35/2 Biogon pics

Hi, I'm a newbie and have only had my 35/2 Biogon for 3 weeks and tested it out on Holiday in Hong Kong with some Velvia

I posted the pics below in the Bokeh thread that's been running, so have a look and cast your own opinions regarding OoF renderings etc, I'd be interested to hear what you think.

The lab that processed my films, also scanned the images, and they've severely crushed the colour spectrum when compared to the trannies on a lightbox

attachment.php


attachment.php


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