pepo007
Newbie
Hello,
I'm new in the rangefinder world, though I taking pictures for quite time. I decided to try this interesting platform with Zeiss Ikon ZM. MY question is which lens should I choose, I settled for 35 mm Biogon, but should I go for 2.0 (1 more stop, but a little soft, you must close it 2 stops) or 2.8 (if fairly sharp from 2.8). Of course, this are assumptions, because I didn't have chance to try these lenses and about 2.0 I know only for Zeiss site. Can you please help me with this matter? Btw. size doesn't matter, I'm shooting mostly medium format, therefore everything under 2kg is light ...
). Thx for advice.
I'm new in the rangefinder world, though I taking pictures for quite time. I decided to try this interesting platform with Zeiss Ikon ZM. MY question is which lens should I choose, I settled for 35 mm Biogon, but should I go for 2.0 (1 more stop, but a little soft, you must close it 2 stops) or 2.8 (if fairly sharp from 2.8). Of course, this are assumptions, because I didn't have chance to try these lenses and about 2.0 I know only for Zeiss site. Can you please help me with this matter? Btw. size doesn't matter, I'm shooting mostly medium format, therefore everything under 2kg is light ...
). Thx for advice.
R
rich815
Guest
Sounds like you really value sharpness. If sharpness is paramount then get the 2.8, if you need the extra stop then the 2.0.
Personally I have the 2.0 and find it the best 35mm lens I've ever used. You ruined it for me though. I had no idea it was so soft at 2.0 and 2.8. Darn!
Personally I have the 2.0 and find it the best 35mm lens I've ever used. You ruined it for me though. I had no idea it was so soft at 2.0 and 2.8. Darn!
sebastel
coarse art umbrascriptor
as far as i know, no one here has seen pictures taken with the 2.8 biogon 35mm yet, so your question is impossible to answer for the time being.
but for your comments on the "sharpness" of the 2.0 biogon 35mm wide open i have to say thank you as well, as i did not realize it is soft, too. maybe my eyes are worse than i expected. i should fix an appointment with my eye specialist.
regards
sebastian
but for your comments on the "sharpness" of the 2.0 biogon 35mm wide open i have to say thank you as well, as i did not realize it is soft, too. maybe my eyes are worse than i expected. i should fix an appointment with my eye specialist.
regards
sebastian
pepo007
Newbie
Hi Rich815,
sorry these are just assumptions from reviews, I didn't have chance actually to have one of there lenses.
Some of reviewers are perceiving it as soft... But you know - thousands people, thousands opinions... ) Thx for respond
R
rich815
Guest
No problem. My point is it's plenty sharp "enough". And ultimate sharpness is not everything either. Unless you plan to shoot Air Force Test charts and admire them....
Steve Bellayr
Veteran
For most part you will shoot within the mid-range or higher. It is only at night with B&W ASA 400 that the wider f stop comes into play. If you feel that you will taking the camera out at night to low light situations then f/2.0 might be necessary.
pepo007
Newbie
Hi sebastel, just what i read. I'll need to buy sets (camera+lens) before mid of jun, hope the I'll have some conclusions before... thx
sebastel
coarse art umbrascriptor
if you find yourself in a sudden need for decision --- just have the CV 2.5/35mm (PII) as a "fill in" solution until you can make up your mind.
it's cheap, it's good, maybe it's even a keeper.
cheers
sebastian
it's cheap, it's good, maybe it's even a keeper.
cheers
sebastian