time
Established
Hi
Now, since Leica introduced the new 35mm summilux asph II and the price is pretty high, I really think Zeiss should come up with their own zm 35mm f1.4 or f<1.4. Don´t you think so? Zeiss is introducing a 35mm ZF/ZE 1.4 these days.
Maybe at about 1500USD price tag? Will you prefer that Zeiss or still aiming for or dreaming of the 35mm summilux asph II?
Now, since Leica introduced the new 35mm summilux asph II and the price is pretty high, I really think Zeiss should come up with their own zm 35mm f1.4 or f<1.4. Don´t you think so? Zeiss is introducing a 35mm ZF/ZE 1.4 these days.
Maybe at about 1500USD price tag? Will you prefer that Zeiss or still aiming for or dreaming of the 35mm summilux asph II?
horosu
Well-known
I will buy one even at a 3000 USD price tag, if it doesn't have focus shift ( I had the NEW 35 Summilux II. It still has it) and is perfectly usable (to say the least) wide open. Actually, I am secretly hoping that Zeiss will surprise us in the coming months....
back alley
IMAGES
cv 35 or better yet, the cv 40/1.4 is available and you don't have to spend all that $$...
Phil_F_NM
Camera hacker
Like Joe says, the CV options are still available.
There is not very much product overlap with the CV - Zeiss lens lineup which is why I don't think we'll see a ZM 35mm f/1.4 any time soon.
Zeiss has also stated that they want to keep the cost down while maintaining the best image quality they can. They do this by adhering to using only spherical elements and keeping the apertures "modest" at f/2. Any faster and they would begin to degrade image quality across the frame.
Also, look at the size of most of the f/2.8 and f/2 ZM lenses. They are as big as Leica's Lux ASPH. RF users still like small lenses. The Zeiss design might be huge, considering how much they stick to best image quality and classic design.
Zeiss isn't looking for Leica "glow", they want the image to be perfect across the plane.
If they bring out a lens that matches or comes close to Leica's in cost, then they won't sell many and they know this. Their market share is the zone between new CV and new Leica price. Often that is used Leica, so Zeiss has the chance to snatch up a few would be Leica customers by offering a new lens instead of a used one.
In the case of the 35mm lenses, Zeiss still has to compete with the fantastic used Summicron market. Were they to debut a 1.4 aperture lens, they would be competing with used Summilux lenses.
They do what they do very well and make some of the sharpest lenses with best field illumination and least distortion around. They just don't want to compete on the price point level with Leica and a 35mm f/1.4 might get really close. More power to them if they do it though!
I think a better idea would be to come up with an accurately coupled adapter to allow use of the 35mm Distagon from the Contax line.
Phil Forrest
There is not very much product overlap with the CV - Zeiss lens lineup which is why I don't think we'll see a ZM 35mm f/1.4 any time soon.
Zeiss has also stated that they want to keep the cost down while maintaining the best image quality they can. They do this by adhering to using only spherical elements and keeping the apertures "modest" at f/2. Any faster and they would begin to degrade image quality across the frame.
Also, look at the size of most of the f/2.8 and f/2 ZM lenses. They are as big as Leica's Lux ASPH. RF users still like small lenses. The Zeiss design might be huge, considering how much they stick to best image quality and classic design.
Zeiss isn't looking for Leica "glow", they want the image to be perfect across the plane.
If they bring out a lens that matches or comes close to Leica's in cost, then they won't sell many and they know this. Their market share is the zone between new CV and new Leica price. Often that is used Leica, so Zeiss has the chance to snatch up a few would be Leica customers by offering a new lens instead of a used one.
In the case of the 35mm lenses, Zeiss still has to compete with the fantastic used Summicron market. Were they to debut a 1.4 aperture lens, they would be competing with used Summilux lenses.
They do what they do very well and make some of the sharpest lenses with best field illumination and least distortion around. They just don't want to compete on the price point level with Leica and a 35mm f/1.4 might get really close. More power to them if they do it though!
I think a better idea would be to come up with an accurately coupled adapter to allow use of the 35mm Distagon from the Contax line.
Phil Forrest
35mmdelux
Veni, vidi, vici
A super fast Zeiss promises to be expensive. I suspect a 35mm/1.4 ZM to easily sell for $3,000 (USD). At that rate I would buy Leica version.
horosu
Well-known
Joe,
I said "no focus shift"
.
And: between a Zeiss 35/1.4 at 3000 USD with no focus shift and a Leica at 5000 with focus shift, I would choose the former.
I said "no focus shift"
.And: between a Zeiss 35/1.4 at 3000 USD with no focus shift and a Leica at 5000 with focus shift, I would choose the former.
Last edited:
back alley
IMAGES
i had no focus shift on the either the 35 or 40 cv lenses i owned...
not sure, maybe it's age but i realize that i am not a $3000. per lens image maker...
not sure, maybe it's age but i realize that i am not a $3000. per lens image maker...
horosu
Well-known
Well, maybe I'm not a 3000 USD per image maker myself, but I really like focus to be where it should be. The M9 only makes focus shift so much more visible. My current 35/2 Biogon does that just right, but I sometimes miss a 1.4 aperture, particularly now, in the winter season, where much of the environmental photography takes places indoors over here.
Phil_F_NM
Camera hacker
I said "no focus shift"
And: between a Zeiss 35/1.4 at 3000 USD with no focus shift and a Leica at 5000 with focus shift, I would choose the former.
Do we get to set our prices on lenses now?
Explicitly NO focus shift means that a floating rear element will have to be used a la the newest 35 Lux. Add that to the fact that such a lens will have to either be very long and wide, like the Contax 35 1.4 Distagon or it will have to have one or more aspherics in order to possibly decrease the lens size.
So, floating rear element plus aspherics does not a $3000USD lens make.
(I wanted a 21mm field of view with a faster aperture and it was cheaper for me to buy an M9 and use my 21mm ZM than to buy the Zeiss 15mm 2.8 to use on my M8.)
Conjecture is fun though.
Phil Forrest
leicashot
Well-known
While I love my 35/1.2 I'd love a smaller 35/1.4, and going on Zeiss's ZM track record, if they did release one, it would be a killer lens, possibly better than Leica's Summilux ASPH if it's better than the CV 35/1.2.
keithdunlop
www.keithdunlop.com
If it had no focus shift and was priced <$2,000 I'd buy one in a heartbeat. The track record of the ZM lenses I have used has thoroughly convinced me that the ZM line has the perfect price-to-performance ratio.
semilog
curmudgeonly optimist
I don't think that such a lens would really fill a niche that's not already filled. There are MANY good fast 35's already available.
What I'd LOVE to see is a stellar, compact ZM 75/2.8.
What I'd LOVE to see is a stellar, compact ZM 75/2.8.
semordnilap
Well-known
I'd think about it, for sure. Do any of the ZM lenses have aspheric elements?
horosu
Well-known
Of course Phil, the 3000 USD part is entirely hypothetical. The latter, 5000 USD, part is reality though.
Phil_F_NM
Camera hacker
Just the 15mm, if I recall correctly.
Phil Forrest
Phil Forrest
Turtle
Veteran
I don't think its quite fair to say that Zm lenses are close to teh size of the Lux asphs. For example:
35 C Biogon is the same size as the Summarit-M. A fraction shorter in fact.
The 35 f2 biogon is slightly smaller than the Lux asph I or II
The 21/25/28 Biogons (2.8) are nowhere near as large as the 21 or 24 luxes.
The 50 planar is the same size as the 50 summicron.
I will agree that they are generally larger than their leica counterparts tho!
In terms of price, a 35 cron IV is almost double the price of a NEW 35 C biogon and a good 60% more than a new f2 Biogon. I dont think there is much ovelap because when comparing used: used they are half/double the price.
I agree that avoiding focus shift on a 35 1.4 would be very costly and most likely require a cost well in excess of the current japan manufactured ZMs. If they were able to do it somewhere bwteen the cost of their german and japanese models I suspect they would sell quite a few as long as the ZM wobble is eliminated. $3K is still $2K less than the new 35 Lux II and thats enough for a used M7.
35 C Biogon is the same size as the Summarit-M. A fraction shorter in fact.
The 35 f2 biogon is slightly smaller than the Lux asph I or II
The 21/25/28 Biogons (2.8) are nowhere near as large as the 21 or 24 luxes.
The 50 planar is the same size as the 50 summicron.
I will agree that they are generally larger than their leica counterparts tho!
In terms of price, a 35 cron IV is almost double the price of a NEW 35 C biogon and a good 60% more than a new f2 Biogon. I dont think there is much ovelap because when comparing used: used they are half/double the price.
I agree that avoiding focus shift on a 35 1.4 would be very costly and most likely require a cost well in excess of the current japan manufactured ZMs. If they were able to do it somewhere bwteen the cost of their german and japanese models I suspect they would sell quite a few as long as the ZM wobble is eliminated. $3K is still $2K less than the new 35 Lux II and thats enough for a used M7.
35mmdelux
Veni, vidi, vici
The 85mm/2.0 ZM Sonnar sells for $3,350 (USD) and an easier lens to manufacture than fast wide angle lenses. Zeiss likes to manufacture its primo lenses in Germany, not at the Cosina plant in Japan. This alone drives up its costs. Time will tell.
For us B&W & analogue shooters the color shift thing is not a problem.
fixbones
.......sometimes i thinks
I don't think i'd be buying one but I'd be really curious to see how the lens performs.
Fast lenses tend to have little quirks here and there that sets them apart me thinks.
Fast lenses tend to have little quirks here and there that sets them apart me thinks.
Bob Michaels
nobody special
Sure I would consider buying a ZM that was a stop faster than my ZM 35mm f2.0 if it was not much bigger and did not cost much more money. Oh, it needs to have the same optical qualities as well.
But I know the laws of optics will require it to be much larger and heavier. And the laws of economic production costs will require it to cost much more as well. So the harsh realities of physics and economics tell me that it is not really possible.
I guess that if I really wanted a 35mm f1.4, I would have bought one of those CV's to try. But since I have never done that, it probably won't happen with a ZM either.
My guess is that Zeiss has concluded that while there are may who wished they would make a lens like this, very few would actually buy one.
But I know the laws of optics will require it to be much larger and heavier. And the laws of economic production costs will require it to cost much more as well. So the harsh realities of physics and economics tell me that it is not really possible.
I guess that if I really wanted a 35mm f1.4, I would have bought one of those CV's to try. But since I have never done that, it probably won't happen with a ZM either.
My guess is that Zeiss has concluded that while there are may who wished they would make a lens like this, very few would actually buy one.
Last edited:
leicashot
Well-known
If Zeiss manufacturers a 35/1.4 with quality that matches or exceeds the Leica at a price of $3995, things will surely heat up. Any more and they wouldn't sell, even if it does exceed the Leica. I couldn't see them doing this lens in a Japanese make if they're going to do it properly. It needs to be German.