Crazy about the Biogon-C 35mm - pics thread

Riverman said:
.... seriously considering this ZM 35mm f2.8. Has anyone had a chance to compare it with the Voigt 35 f2.5 .....
Click to expand...

As suggested earlier, the light falloff from the CV f2.5 is significantly worse than the C-Biogon. I am selling my CV because it has been replaced by a C-Biogon; the Zeiss is a far better lens than my CV Colour Skopar copy. The Zeiss resolution at all focusing distances improves upon the CV, the more-even illumination is an excellent bonus as is the flat focus plane, flare resistance, and absence of focus shift.

The C-Biogon is a diamond of a lens and for me is the 35mm 'M' platform first lens of choice --- it's that good. On a related issue, Forum obsessions with ultra fast lenses sends a poor message to lens designers because there is a place for optimal lens designs which necessitate a slight loss of maximum lens speed [reminder -- Coastal Optics 60mm f4.0]. The C-Biogon is a fabulous lens and I for one am glad the designers made it an f2.8 lens rather than compromising it's splendid performance by making it faster.

Regarding the 35mm Colour Skopar, it's mall size and light weight make it a joy to use, I happen to like it's screw in lens shade, and it's functional focusing tab. However it will be sold as there is no cicumstance where I would use it rather than the C-Biogon. The CV served me well but my C-Biogon is a lens-for-life.

............. Chris
 
Bessa R3A with C-Biogon
These were from the first B&W film that I developed!!
4973253862_b31fab7c43_z.jpg

4972639735_af4e0ff934_z.jpg
 
leicashot said:
I know what you mean. There are too many great options available for the M and sometimes it's better we just admire from a distance and concentrate on our photography with the equipment we have. I'm still trying to finalize my kit and not 100% sure this gem will stay, but right now it's perfectly comfortable. The only other lens I've ever been so excited about is the Zeiss 100mm f/2, as well as other ZF lenses for my D3s, which are absolutely killer - even better than my M9 and any lens combo....but thats another story :bang:
Click to expand...

In another thread you were impressed by the Nokton 35/1.2 (if I remember correctly). Any decisions made yet, or do you consider them as two completely different beast? I'm asking because of the following: I have the Biogon 35/2 which is an outstanding lens IMO. But reading all the praises about the C-Biogon I'm tempted to replace it with a combo of the Nokton for really low light and the C-Biogon for everything else. If the Nokton is equally good from f2.8 to f8 I could imagine to switch to the Nokton as my only 35mm lens (although the size still hurts).

Thanks.
 
My contribute to this thread ans lens

ausgebuechste_ziege.jpg


Rollei Retro 80S in Rodinal and no filter, should be about f4.
 
Last edited:
mn4367 said:
In another thread you were impressed by the Nokton 35/1.2 (if I remember correctly). Any decisions made yet, or do you consider them as two completely different beast? I'm asking because of the following: I have the Biogon 35/2 which is an outstanding lens IMO. But reading all the praises about the C-Biogon I'm tempted to replace it with a combo of the Nokton for really low light and the C-Biogon for everything else. If the Nokton is equally good from f2.8 to f8 I could imagine to switch to the Nokton as my only 35mm lens (although the size still hurts).

Thanks.
Click to expand...

Actually I owned that combo and it was great. I ended up selling the Biogon-C first cause it vignetted MUCH more at 2.8 and they were equally sharp at that aperture. Therefore the Nokton did exactly what the Biogon could do (except distortion control) but with a faster aperture of 1.2. I think if you're happy with the Biogon and don't 'need' the 1.2 aperture, then keep what you have, which is an awesome lens and a great tweener.
 
bwcolor said:
So, you start a thread called "Crazy about the Biogon-C 35mm" and six weeks later you sell it.

You are like the Henry VIII of lens evaluators.
Click to expand...

I still think very highly of the lens and would own it if it was suited to my style but it isn't. The 35/1.2 is more versatile but the Biogon-C is perfect, except for the vignetting wide open. Both are great value but speed is more important to me, so sacrifices had to be made. I also no longer have the Nokton, but not out of choice.
 
You don't need to defend yourself. I purchased this lens based on your praise and I don't regret that decision.

God help me, but I must ask.

What resides on your M9 these days?
 
haha

haha

If every RFF'er kept every lens they praised, there would be little to no used market.

Let's just say the C-Biogon had a good run as lens of the month, and leave it at that.

It was a non-starter for me, being so slow, but that's another story. As a firm believer that the speed of light is constant, while time changes, I need fast lenses to keep up.

Therefore, the Summilux pre-asphs have no equals.
bwcolor said:
So, you start a thread called "Crazy about the Biogon-C 35mm" and six weeks later you sell it.

You are like the Henry VIII of lens evaluators.
Click to expand...
 
I'd just like to go on record as one of the earlier participants in this thread that I do still own this lens, even though six weeks have passed.

🙂
 
Last edited:
You must log in or register to reply here.

Similar threads

A
The Mandler 35mm f2
2 3 4
Replies
74
Views
5K
Slumgullion
Slumgullion
A
Light Lens Lab - 35mm f1.4 Aspherical now in production
2 3 4
Replies
62
Views
3K
Ororaro
Ororaro
CandidChronicles
Alternative to Voigtländer 35mm 2.5?
2 3
Replies
46
Views
2K
filmtwit
filmtwit
R
The Medium Format Semi-Fisheye Lens: something the rangefinder never approaches
Replies
0
Views
346
RJ-
R
M
Carl Zeiss Jena Sonnar 1.5/5cm
Replies
1
Views
621
dexdog
D
Back
Top Bottom