anyone thinking about getting the zm 35/2.8?

back alley

back alley

IMAGES
Local time
11:32 AM
Joined
Jul 30, 2003
Messages
41,289
even though it seems silly to me to get a 2.8 lens when i have and am happy with the f2 lens, my mind wanders in that direction.

i doubt that i could keep both.

* it's smaller
* might be better or at least as good
* i have a 35/1.4 lens to balance it all out

or maybe i should get another canon 35/2.8 lens and be done with it?
would be great on the cle...
 
I am probably going to get it. A/one cant have too many 35's and B/ if the performance of the C-Biogon 21/4,5 and the C-Sonnar 50/1,5 are anything to go by - it should be a really good lens. Summer is also coming and light is more freely available even North of the 49's parallel.
It would be interesting to run it against the 35/2,5 Summarit, the 35/2,8 Summaron, the VC 35f2.5 II and also my old 35/2,8 Biogon in Contax mount.
 
I think we can guess what this lens will render like, all the zm mount lenses more or less render the same. If the price is right here in China I might get one. Most of the time I use a 50 so the speed is not the deal breaker for me, sometime small in the pocket would be nice. But what would be best is if it used the same hood my planar and the 35 biogon shares, then it would be more interesting.
 
i might not get it for myself, but throw in a bessa r2a and it would make a great christmas present package!
 
aizan said:
i might not get it for myself, but throw in a bessa r2a and it would make a great christmas present package!
Click to expand...

i hope somebody have same idea for my christmas package. but i would be happy even with bessa r and color scopar 35/2.5...
 
I am just hoping to catch Joe's first 35/2 Biogon when he is ready to pass it on. :D
 
I think Joe you should sell both the Biogon 2/35 and the CV 2.5/35 and get the new 2,8/35. And while you're at it, you should ditch the CV 4/21 and get the ZM 4.5/21.

I have the Nokton 1,2/35 and the Biogon 2/35. Nothing to complain about there. But I could be tempted to replace both with the 1,4/35 from CV and the 2,8/35 from Zeiss. Thank goodness either way is pretty sweet (I'm looking to get a CV 75, first, and then maybe a ZM 21).

But whichever two I get, the fact is I would never carry both lenses at the same time. And if I choose to carry only one, I'd prefer either of the lenses I have now. But if I was pairing a 35 with a 50/75 or a 21/25, I think I would go with one of the two I don't have for size reasons.
 
Well, there you go, it is the wrong color. I am still digging my 35 Ultron so I think my wallet is safe regardless. But, I never say never.
 
noimmunity said:
I think Joe you should sell both the Biogon 2/35 and the CV 2.5/35 and get the new 2,8/35. And while you're at it, you should ditch the CV 4/21 and get the ZM 4.5/21.

I have the Nokton 1,2/35 and the Biogon 2/35. Nothing to complain about there. But I could be tempted to replace both with the 1,4/35 from CV and the 2,8/35 from Zeiss. Thank goodness either way is pretty sweet (I'm looking to get a CV 75, first, and then maybe a ZM 21).

But whichever two I get, the fact is I would never carry both lenses at the same time. And if I choose to carry only one, I'd prefer either of the lenses I have now. But if I was pairing a 35 with a 50/75 or a 21/25, I think I would go with one of the two I don't have for size reasons.
Click to expand...

i'd love the zm 21/4.5 but it's way too expensive for a focal length i rarely use. truth is i might go after the 2.8 and keep the 2 as well.
 
no, not at the moment - I'm happy with my 2.0/35 ... but maybe someday I will look for a 2nd body and in that case this nice compact lens would complement that 2nd camera perfect. Yes, maybe a 2nd ZI in black with a black 2.8/35 as a small, compact "travelling set" ...
 
Now that there are two great CV lenses at 1.2 and 1.4 a Biogon F2.8 is about as sexy as grandma's underpants.

I'll bet it's the sharpest 35 around, but only the Summarit 35 can equal the yawn factor.:p
 
It will be interesting to see how the new 35 f2.8 images, the size, etc. I'm not likely to be a customer, as for small size I like my v.1 35 'cron, and for "modern" I also like the 35 f2 ZM. Seems odd to have two 35 f2 lenses for the same system, but they're different.

Though I don't have one, the 21 C-Biogon "pulls" at me from time to time, slow as it is. The smaller size would be nice on the R4A, zero rectilinear distortion is attractive, and its lower cost makes it less risky for travel than the pricy 21 Elmarit Asph.

Maybe the new 35 f2.8 C-Biogon will share some of the same attributes.
 
generally, slower lenses from reputable mfgs like zeiss are well corrected. chances are the 35/2.8 is going to be a kicker of a lens.

I may pass since i have the 35/2.0 IV and 35/1.4 ASPH.
 
I have the f2 biogon so no interest to me. If I was to get a very compact 35 I would go for the CV pancake II. Smaller than a summarit or the new ZM and by all accounts a supern performer.

I agree with avotius in that keeping lenses within the family is not bad as you get used to contrast and exposure/dev requirements. some people complain that the ZMs are very contrasty for monochrome, but that is nothing that cannot be adapted to in the darkroom. I intend to stay pertty well ZM where I can so this becomes a constant (along with great resolution, no flare, no distortion etc!). The 21 4.5 appeals but is disappointingly expensive.

If it was the size of teh pancake II i might have been tempted, but were I not to own the biogon f2 I might be interested. having both makes no sense to me tho!
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top Bottom