Crazy about the Biogon 25/2.8 Pic thread

Thank you Helen. I just love the 25mm focal length and the sharpness of this lens. I felt it made more sense as a focal length when I already have a VC 35/1.4 and as a pair with my 50 Planar.
 
CrisR said:
Thank you Helen. I just love the 25mm focal length and the sharpness of this lens. I felt it made more sense as a focal length when I already have a VC 35/1.4 and as a pair with my 50 Planar.
Click to expand...

Precisely my reasoning and indeed I possess the same lenses.
 
Cris, nice work!
3 shots from a recent roll of Delta 100 with Rodinal 1:100...

p15893881-4.jpg


p125754866-4.jpg


p180667762-4.jpg
 
Thanks Benji, good to see it renders nicely on film too as I'll be using it on my M6 too.

ReeRay said:
Precisely my reasoning and indeed I possess the same lenses.
Click to expand...

Given that I use an M8 as well as an M9, and I love the 25/50 pairing and look of the Zeiss lenses, I'm thinking of adding the 35/2 Biogon to my range.

It will give me around 50mm when on my M8, instead of the near-70mm the Planar does and give me the same look and sharpness that the other 2 do.

I love the VC 35/1.4, as a classic lens, it's lovely and great for artistic work, but for a lot of my commercial work, the 2 Zeiss lenses massively outshine it in colour, clarity, sharpness and distortion.

The 35/1.4 barrel distortion has been the only real irksome aspect from the start, so the near distortion-free Biogon will be a solid addition when used on either camera. Until then, i'll use my 25mm and get a little closer and higher ISO.
 
Hi Cris,
I actually am running a similar lens set-up as you, with these four lens for my M-mounts - CV 35/1.4 SC, ZM 50/1.5, ZM 25/2.8 and the 35/2.8 Summaron.

Of the four, the CV has the most 'lens characteristics' if you know what I mean. In that sense, it actually hold itself. The others can never give the same 'look' wide open.

I have borrowed a 35/2 ZM for a roll or two, and it is another great lens. I am however smitten by the little ZM 35/2.8. I would say go for that if you can :)
 
I'm still unsure about the stop less light on the 2.8... I did decide on that for a while, then switched to the 35/2
 
This is a timely thread as I'm thinking about this lens and the Voigtlander Color-Skopar 25mm f/4. I'm leaning toward the Zeiss because of it being 2.8, but love the compactness of the Voigtlander.. I normally shoot 35/50 what frame lines does this lens bring up on an M9 or M6? How easy is it to use it without the external viewfinder?
 
35photo said:
This is a timely thread as I'm thinking about this lens and the Voigtlander Color-Skopar 25mm f/4. I'm leaning toward the Zeiss because of it being 2.8, but love the compactness of the Voigtlander.. I normally shoot 35/50 what frame lines does this lens bring up on an M9 or M6? How easy is it to use it without the external viewfinder?
Click to expand...

I used a Voigtlander 25/4 for over a year before finally finding my local dealer had a used one in great condition for a great price (i like to buy from Red Dot where i can). I wish I'd just bought the Zeiss from the start.

The Skopar is a lovely lens for it's price, very small, sharp, but nothing on the Zeiss. The Zeiss is bigger, but it's well worth it. On brightness, edge to edge performance, distortion and outstanding sharpness. It's been like upgrading my sensor, the detail at f8 only gives in when the sensor starts to pixelate.

With regards the use without a viewfinder, if you don't want to use one on an M9, I'd suggest getting the 28mm and using the framelines. There is a fair portion outside the visible frame and it has nothing on the Zeiss viewfinder.

Also, i can't recommend the Zeiss 25/28 viewfinder enough. It's bigger, brighter and just better, than all other OVFs, including the Leicas. The Leica 24mm (metal) is like looking down a dark tunnel in comparison. The Zeiss is brighter than the built in viewfinder and actually makes the M9's built in one looks dark and murky when switching back and forth for focus.

As a result, I will be changing my other viewfinders (15, 21) to Zeiss ones as and when i can.

This is my setup.


Weekend Camera Porn / Leica M9 + Zeiss 25mm f2.8 Biogon by Cris Rose, on Flickr


Weekend Camera Porn / Leica M9 + Zeiss 25mm 28mm Optical Viewfinder by Cris Rose, on Flickr
 
I use the 25ZM with an M2 and M3, with or without the Zeiss 25/28 VF. I shot without a VF for about 2 years, where looking through the Zeiss VF was a mistake. It's so clear that the M2's VF is made to look like a pinhole.

The 'left and right' is easier to compose, where the horizontal is more tricky to align. This is personal, so YMMV. I usually 'fill the frame' on the M2 when I shoot with it, and I hv a pretty good gauge of what I will get.

Go for the ZM if you hv the $$, over the CV.
 
If you take a little time to notice the parallax shift at closer distances, it's easy enough to compensate for with a quick flick.

For a central mounted OVF, just flick the camera up a little so that the bottom of the 25mm frameline is where the bottom of the 28mm frameline is, for under 2m shots that is.

For ones mounted like mine, for ease of flicking back and forth between the two (and not getting your nose grease in the built in VF) it's a flick up and 2 the left.

It took me a day or two to get used to this, but now i just do it. Most of the time i use it hyperfocal at f8, for things 2m and over, so you hardly need to correct at all.
 
11341132523_fd9fb69133_c.jpg


Zeiss Biogon 25mm f2.8 on Bessa R4M. Efke 100 film in Td 201 developer.
Chemainus, Vancouver Island - a week ago.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top Bottom