Craving the Zeiss look: 28 Biogon and 50 Planar for M8?

Steve Bellayr said:
Personally, I like the sonnar look and the shift has never been a problem. But, since you are using an M8 with a crop factor the 50mm f1.5 Sonnar would be approx. 75mm. I think that is the issue for the M8.
Click to expand...

The M8's crop factor is not the issue, I've gotten used to the different field-of-view and use my lenses accordingly. But I've had the 35/1.4 Nokton which shifted quite heavily, and I didn't at all get along with it. Also, the Planar is more affordable for me 🙂
 
efix said:
Alberti - I reckon with "liquidity/liquidness" you're referring to the typical Zeiss look? Would you say the 28 Biogon and 50 Planar exhibit similar signatures in drawing?
Click to expand...

Yes, indeed, there is no word that I have seen that describes it. At least this word differs from words like contrasty. The funny thing is the blacks 'do look darker' with the Zeiss lenses in my opinion. So it different than just lines per mm.
In the Leica Forum I have seen absolutely awesome pictures with a similar signature from the Planar.
Older Leica lenses like the 35mm Summicron version II (chrome) also exhibit a very smooth rendering, closed down at F4 but often without the feeling of depth.
Of course the 28 has it's drawbacks (a similar one to the 90mm macro-M).
albert
 
I love the Zeiss look myself.

50 f/2 Planar wide open on a NEX-3 (1.5x crop sensor)

5494513152_810171feab_z.jpg


5493896297_27d13b19e4_z.jpg
 
Last edited:
Turtle said:
If you like 28mm and like Zeiss you wont be disappointed with the 28 ZM. [...] Very sharp and indistinguishable IQ from the others on prints. Ignore the MTFs.
Click to expand...

Absolutely. For me, the 28/50 combo is my favorite two-lens setup (for film, though). And I was long deterred from buying the ZM 28 because of its rather mediocre-looking MTFs published by Zeiss. But then I figured, if Ken Rockwell and (more importantly) Erwin Puts say that this lens is par on par with the Elmarit 28 asph, there must be something to it.

And so I bought it, and I was not disappointed. It makes a very harmonic couple with the 50 Planar. This pertains to image quality as well as handling.

On a more general note, I can absolutely relate to your GAS, and I can only warn you about the addictive potential of these ZM lenses! My next purchase will be the 21 C-Biogon, even after I proved to myself last year that my CV 21 is every bit as sharp. So beware! For me, there'll be no stopping before my line-up is all ZM...
 
For me, the 28/50 combo is my favorite two-lens setup (for film, though)
Click to expand...

I also shoot a lot of film with a Leica CL and the 50 Planar - I would like the 28 f/2, and although the CL does not have the VF lines, I think I can use the outside border well enough - I will try it in-store first, but that is my plan.
 
Thanks everyone, you made my Zeiss-lust even worse ... 🙂
I will try both the 28 Biogon and 50 Planar in a store when I have the chance, and see how I like them. But judging from my experience with the 35 Biogon, I think I will like them ...
 
Anybody else got some wide-open 28 Biogon shots for me? It'll be a while until I can try one out at a dealer ...
 
Well, as was to be expected, I did it. I found a 28 Biogon in silver on the bay for a reasonable price and grabbed it. I'll have to sell both my 28/2.8 M-Rokkor and 28/1.9 Ultron for this, so I hope I won't regret the purchase ... I also found a silver Planar I'm considering to buy, but I'll have to find a way to finance it first. I'll let you know when I received the lens, and tell you how I like it. I might even do a little comparison to the M-Rokkor and Ultron, if I haven't sold them until the Biogon arrives. Oh, and yes, it's all YOUR fault! ;-)
 
River Dog said:
Sorry. But I have bought an Olympus XA this week and looking at Rolleiflex today, because of this place. This is wrong. It has to stop!!! I buy but I don't sell. Can't bear to lose my shiny things.
Click to expand...

You can't imagine how much I'd like to keep my other lenses. But having to feed a family and being on a tight budget every month doesn't help when one's hobby is photography, does it ... 😛
 
dfoo said:
I like the Zeiss look, I can't stand the focusing bump nor the 1/3 stop click stops. Annoying!
Click to expand...

I admit both were part of the reason why I sold my 35/2 Biogon. But whenever I look at pictures taken with Zeiss glass, I know that's the look I want to see every day. So I have to live with the quirks 🙂 Btw., what annoys me about my 50/1.5 Nokton is that is has neither a focusing bump nor tab nor anything, and I don't like it when I have to grab the whole focusing ring to focus ...
 
dfoo said:
I like the Zeiss look, I can't stand the focusing bump nor the 1/3 stop click stops. Annoying!
Click to expand...

I'm curious; why don't you like the focusing bump?

In it's defence, I find it perfect on my C-Biogon 35mm as it lends itself to soft-hand focusing. The 'bump' falls to the pad of my left hand index finger, and the focusing can quickly and gently be rolled into place with, or without, a little assistance from my left thumb. For this way of focusing the design is excellent for me so I'm perplexed by any antagonism to it. I also have a 'bump-less' Hex lens, which would be a lot better with a Zeiss-type focusing bump. With the Hex., my focusing hand is stiffer as I can't roll it's focusing like the Zeiss because greater focusing barrel contact with my index finger and thumb is needed.

Regarding click stops; I set my aperture, and work the exposure from the shutter speed. Why would the Zeiss preference for 1/3 stop increments be worse than another manufacturers choice of 1/2 stop increments? It's a non-issue for me, though apparently not for everyone.

Just curious.

................ Chris
 
Last edited:
Update

Update

Just a quick note: I received my 28 Biogon today! It's silver, to fit the chrome finish of my M8. I just shot a few test frames with it, but I can already say I love it! It's got the same bold colours and contrasts that I remember from my 35/2 Biogon, plus a little bit of that famous "Zeiss 3D pop" going on when shot wide open and on short focusing distances. Very nice! It's also virtually distortion free and very sharp already @ f/2.8. I think this was the right decision 😀
 
Put me on the list 28(or wider) and 50 Planar potential buyer..🙂

Curently .i'm using CV 35/1.4 Nokton for M4-P, but when attached to M8 I missed 35mm wide view due to 1.33 crop factor (equivalent 47mm) .
Planning to change CV 35/1.4 Nokton to wider lens; 21mm, 24mm,or 15

Any sugesstion , what suitable wide lens for me ,pair with ZM 50/2 Planar on M8? with <$800 budget.
I will using 50mm Planar for potrait and the wide for walkaround/street lens.

~ronni~
 
You must log in or register to reply here.

Similar threads

stephen_lumsden
Pre-war biogon 35mm f2.8 vs Planar 35mm f3.5
Replies
16
Views
665
dexdog
dexdog
Shab
A 35mm lens for a Nikon FM3A
2 3
Replies
42
Views
3K
Dogman
Dogman
W
Road Trip Kit: Leica body, Nikon glass
Replies
12
Views
361
agentlossing
agentlossing
P
Which camera for 28 and 50mm?
3 4 5
Replies
95
Views
5K
Beemermark
Beemermark
Sonnar Brian
Transition CZJ 5cm F1.5 Sonnar compared with an Early 5cm F1.4 Nikkor-SC.
2
Replies
28
Views
1K
boojum
boojum
Back
Top Bottom