Anybody talking about the ZM 35mm Distagon f/1.4?

[David_Manning]

Biogon 2/35: Distagon 1.4/35

43mm 49mm Filter size

68mm 87mm Length

240g 381g Weight

 

[David_Manning]

Horosu, it looks like it's 2cm longer (almost an inch).

 

[Vobluda]

I have asked about the lens at Zeiss Lens FB:

How many ASPH elements please? Tested for focus shift with digital M cameras? Thanks!

• The Distagon T* 1,4/35 ZM has ten elements in seven groups. Two of the elements have aspheric optical surfaces and three of the elements are made of special glass with anomalous partial dispersion.
  Regarding your other question: we will get in touch with our experts and get back to you as soon as possible.
  Best regards
  ZEISS Lenses Team
• We owe you one more answer. And here it is: One of the really special features of our Distagon T* 1,4/35 ZM is that it shows no noteworthy focus shift.
  
  Best regards,
  Your ZEISS Lenses Team
  
  
  Concerning our previous statement about the floating elements design... ehm... please forget what we said. The new Distagon T* 1,4/35 ZM actually has a floating elements design Sorry for the confusion!
  
  Best regards,
  Your ZEISS Lenses Team

 

[Vobluda]

And yes, I am happy with replies🙂

 

[horosu]

Horosu, it looks like it's 2cm longer (almost an inch).

That's the length with caps. The Distagon cap is larger.

The length without caps is 65 vs 56 mm (according to Zeiss PDF's)

 

[judsonzhao]

That's the length with caps. The Distagon cap is larger.

The length without caps is 65 vs 56 mm (according to Zeiss PDF's)

I though it's a miss translation, it should be hood IMO.

It's still noticeable larger than the 35 FLE, however the MTF looks superior.

 

[judsonzhao]

ZE is the designation for the Manual focus Canon Eos mount lenses made by Zeiss.
The B+H page is not for the M mount lens....

What? The page is for sure the ZM 35/1.4 indeed.
The starting ZE simply means Zeiss
Here's the BH stock number for EOS mount
ZE3514ZEC
and it's $1843 not $2290

 

[Nigel Meaby]

More info here http://www.rangefinderforum.com/forums/showthread.php?t=99943&page=5 😀

 

[veraikon]

The Distagon cap is larger.

That is in my eyes one of the disadvantages of this lens (the only one ?) - the last glass element of the optics is very far behind the mount unprotected - a possible trouble maker. (not with the camera - with the user 😉 )

 

[Noserider]

Why is nobody talking about the ZM 35mm Distagon f/1.4?

Why is nobody talking about the ZM 35mm Distagon f/1.4?

I thought the discussion would be pages deep.


http://blogs.zeiss.com/photo/en/?p=5459


I've not seen the optical diagram yet, so I *may* keep some opinions to myself.

 

[splash_fr]

There is discussion in the "new ZM lenses in 2013" thread below...

 

[horosu]

That is in my eyes one of the disadvantages of this lens (the only one ?) - the last glass element of the optics is very far behind the mount unprotected - a possible trouble maker. (not with the camera - with the user 😉 )

For a double aspherical with floating lens element design, I think we are quite nitpicking.

Anyway, as an owner of the Summilux 35 FLE, I reserve my final decision until I actually get to see/touch the lens.

 

[horosu]

Just to say, that the information about the double aspherical + floating elements comes directly from Zeiss:

Zeiss Blog (in the comments section, further down the page)

 

[Noserider]

Thanks! This may help direct some people looking for the thread.
My thoughts are that it looks to me as if the design has balanced evenness of illumination and distortion against high contrast and a flat plane of sharpness. Very impressed that yes it includes a floating set of elements; this prob due to needed to squeak out more MTF and APO for newer sensors and in fact Zeiss states something to that effect; optimized for digital sensors. Good on them for fitting it into a (somewhat) .small barrel, something that Leica had to do with the FLE Summilux
This design looks to me as likely to have amazing bokeh, with prob higher than expected barrel distortion more so closer in (no doubt helped by the FLE), a really even plane of sharpness and illumination when used in a more stopped down mode. I'm glad they waited the extra year; no doubt Zeiss's experience working on the OTUS lenses surely helped.

 

[Noserider]

My thoughts are that it looks to me as if the design has balanced evenness of illumination and distortion against high contrast and a flat plane of sharpness. Very impressed that yes it includes a floating set of elements; this prob due to needed to squeak out more MTF and APO for newer sensors and in fact Zeiss states something to that effect; optimized for digital sensors. Good on them for fitting it into a (somewhat) small barrel, something that Leica had to do with the FLE Summilux
This design looks to me as likely to have amazing bokeh, with prob higher than expected barrel distortion more so closer in (no doubt helped by the FLE), a really even plane of sharpness and illumination when used in a more stopped down mode. I'm glad they waited the extra year; no doubt Zeiss's experience working on the OTUS lenses surely helped.

 

[Noserider]

Oh and why can't I count more than 7 elements in the Zeiss diagram? where are the other 3 elements? They usually show the cemented elements.

 

[horosu]

Please look at the diagram in the Zeiss Camera Brochure, where the elements are correctly identified: Brochure Zeiss ZM line

 

[Johann Espiritu]

Some photos mounted on an M240 and with the hood. Looks good:

 

[k__43]

Looks a bit too big for me, I'd need to see it in real life. I guess that's what you get when you optimize for max performance on a sensor.

 

[Johann Espiritu]

Looks a bit too big for me, I'd need to see it in real life. I guess that's what you get when you optimize for max performance on a sensor.

I have the original Voigt 35/1.2 (was lucky to get one in chrome), and if the VF blockage is not too far off, I may skip the new Zeiss. But right now, I'm drooling... It looks formidable.