CV Nokton 35 1.4 or Zeiss Biogon 35 f2?

CV Nokton 35 1.4 or Zeiss Biogon 35 f2?

  • Zeiss Biogon 35mm

    Votes: 56 68.3%

  • CV Nokton MC 1.4

    Votes: 26 31.7%
  • Total voters
    82
BLKRCAT

BLKRCAT

75% Film
Local time
12:16 AM
Joined
Aug 12, 2012
Messages
1,791
Location
Toronto-ish
View My Gallery
Im thinking of upgrading from my cv mc 35mm to a zeiss biogon. Ive searched around but cant find any definitive answer.

I think the biogon will be sharper but will be slower one stop. For you biogon users, do you find you wish you had the extra stop? At f2 im going to assume the zeiss lens wil put out a better image than the nokton. So shooting wide open will yield increased quality.

Thoughts?
 
Yes, the Biogon will give you overall better image quality than the CV 35/1.4. The size difference is fairly significant, but may not be an issue for you.

There is also the C-Biogon 35/2.8, which is small like the CV 35/1.4 and offers better sharpness like the 35/2. One option is using these two lenses together instead of going for the larger Biogon. That takes some size off the camera (removing finder blockage) and puts it into your bag or pocket.
 
The Biogon 35/2 is fairly big, much bigger than the CV 35/1.4. The most visible difference in the images is the lack of distortion of the Biogon compared to the pronounced barrel distortion of the Nokton. The Zeiss is a bit sharper at f/2, which may or may not make a difference, and has no focus shift, while the CV has quite a bit. Again, the focus shift may or may not matter to you.

- N.
 
I haven't looked into any more CV lenses. I think they are wonderful for the price but I do want to end up with a 35mm summicron eventually. I haven't enough funds at the moment to make the step all the way there yet but Im thinking that the biogon will be a great stepping stone between the voigtlander and a leica summicron.

I'll look into options for trades or buying and reselling.

Size isn't a huge factor for me. I usually carry my 35mm and 50 summicron in my domke fx5b. Sometimes I go out with one lens and the camera also. For me function trumps form. (Even though the form is still very nice)
 
ZF1 said:
I haven't looked into any more CV lenses. I think they are wonderful for the price but I do want to end up with a 35mm summicron eventually. I haven't enough funds at the moment to make the step all the way there yet but Im thinking that the biogon will be a great stepping stone between the voigtlander and a leica summicron.
Click to expand...

Look, I think you know what you really want. If what you really want is the Summicron, don't get the Zeiss. Just be patient and save for the Summicron. The CV is already a very competent lens and it will not limit your work while you save for the Summicron.

My specific advice: get the screw-mount version of the 35/2 ASPH. In chrome it's even better built than the standard versions, and you can put it on many more different bodies. That lens is would be an investment for life.

I currently have the 35/2.8 ZM Biogon-C and the Summilux ASPH 35/1.4. I'm on my second copy of both lenses, after selling the first copies and regretting it. I find that I use the baby Biogon >90% of the time, and am thinking about selling the Summilux (again…!). The little Biogon is overall the most pleasing lens I've ever used in any focal length or format, and I don't find f/2.8 to be terribly limiting. The current copy will not be sold.

Your mileage may, of course, vary.
 
Biogon c 35/2.8 would be my choice.
It's a couple stops slower ... sure.
But the images and handling are fantastic!
I had tge f2 version Biogon and switched to the f2.8 originally for size.
Im the end I preffered the f2.8.
At wide open it has a bit of vignetting and the perfect amount of DOF for casual portraits.
It's a super lens.
 
I went 35mm 1.4 as I figure it is the closest thing to a fast 35 that I meets my needs. The VC 1.2 is better but the size is a deal breaker for me. I decided that even if I picked up a more modern 35mm down the road it would be a f2 at fastest making the VC distinct enough to justify on its own - particularly the SC version.

The Asph Summilux is probably my ideal lens but that simply won't happen. 🙂 A VC 35mm 1.4 SC + a more modern 35mm gives me the range of options I want at a significantly lower price point (and is more manageable if something gets broken, stolen, etc as I only have one of the lenses with me at a time). If I could only do one or the other, I'd probably have to go for a Biogon with a fast 50mm.
 
35 Summiron Asph & 35 Lux pre-asph are my favorites. Great ergonomics, small form factor. Workhorses.

As to your question -- I'd recommend the Zeiss 35 f.2.8 C model as being sharp and compact -
 
semilog said:
.My specific advice: get the screw-mount version of the 35/2 ASPH. In chrome it's even better built than the standard versions, and you can put it on many more different bodies. That lens is would be an investment for life.
Click to expand...

agreed w/ your thesis. Problem is they are fairly rare.
 
Biogon f2, without a doubt.

I've shot it on film and digital...sharper, crisper contrast, more flare-resistance, 1/3-stop click-stops...but sticks out just a *bit* in the finder.

People will hate to hear this...but if you get the Biogon 35/2, you probably won't want or need a 'Cron.
 
Get the Biogon if you don't mind a slightly larger lens and want to avoid house-of-mirrors distortion.

If you absolutely want the compactness and speed of the Nokton f1.4 on a budget then get the significantly better 40mm Nokton. I'd take the 5mm narrower lens (insignificant in 95% of applications) and the much nicer IQ personally.
 
Im with Semilog,

if you want a cron, buy a cron. it doesn't matter if the biogon is better if what you really want is the summicron. stepping stones just end up being money and time wasted in the end.
 
compactness personally isn't the main sell of why I ended up with the Nokton. It is a nice feature but If it were the size of my rigid summicron or even a little bigger I wouldn't be too phased.

What sells me on the Zeiss over the nokton is the 3d effect. Ive seen it from the nokton but in very certain situations.

I think the straight lines and sharpness from the zeiss will benefit quite a bit over the nokton.

Im particularly interested in the F2. Still looking into options.
 
Well it's time for some images. Hopefully these two will spur others to post as well.
My image below of the f2 is rather old from my RD1. It's the only SFW Portrait I have online and processed with an early version of aperture. It would benefit from re-processing but, you can still see that Zeissy character.
The f2.8 image is from an M8 and processed with a latest version of Aperture.

Both are great. There is something about the f2.8 that just really sings in my opinion. You can't go wrong with IQ but indeed the f2 is larger and does not handle as well IMO.

ZM 35mm F2 Biogon RD1
4965154929_1121875bcf_b.jpg


ZM 35mm f2.8 Biogon M8
5124852293_765fafb671_b.jpg
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top Bottom