Is it worth the extra bucks/euro's

[chrismoret]

I'm thinking to sell my Biogon T 35mm and buying Leica glass for it. Sure I want a a Summilux 35mm but that's has a outrages price tag, imho.
The next step is obviously the Summicron 35mm, priced €2640,-. But what about the Summarit 35mm, priced at €1579, has any one thought about the two lenses. Is a €1061 price gap some how justified in image quality, build, etc.
And I'm not meaning the 0.5 extra stop 🙂

Kind regards, Chris Moret.

 

[sojournerphoto]

I'm thinking to sell my Biogon T 35mm and buying Leica glass for it. Sure I want a a Summilux 35mm but that's has a outrages price tag, imho.
The next step is obviously the Summicron 35mm, priced €2640,-. But what about the Summarit 35mm, priced at €1579, has any one thought about the two lenses. Is a €1061 price gap some how justified in image quality, build, etc.
And I'm not meaning the 0.5 extra stop 🙂

Kind regards, Chris Moret.

I'd keep the biogon myself. The Summilux did impress me when I tried one, but I'm not convinced it offers much more at the same aperture than your Biogon. A different story at 1.4 of course🙂

The rumour machine suggests a new ZM lens next year, that I am expecting to be a fast 35.

Mike

 

[mfogiel]

The Biogon is one of the best 35mm lenses ever made, and from f 2.8 it probably IS the best for sharpness across the frame. However, it also has high contrast and microcontrast, so it depends what you like to see in your photos, and first of all, if you shoot colour, B&W, digital or film.
In my opinion, for a B/W shooter, most of competent 35mm rf lenses are great, and it comes down to preference for speed, size, etc. In colour, Zeiss glass is really very appealing.
My personal preferences are:
Nokton 35/1.2 for low light, Biogon 35/2 for high acutance, Summaron 35/2.8 for landscape and Summicron 35/2 v3 as a walk around lens.
The Summarit 35/2.5 is regarded as one of the best balanced lenses ever made.
As to the mechanical quality, it is difficult to beat Leica, but Hexanons are also well regarded, and personally I am very fond of my 35/1.2 Nokton.

 

[sojournerphoto]

The Biogon is one of the best 35mm lenses ever made, and from f 2.8 it probably IS the best for sharpness across the frame. However, it also has high contrast and microcontrast, so it depends what you like to see in your photos, and first of all, if you shoot colour, B&W, digital or film.
In my opinion, for a B/W shooter, most of competent 35mm rf lenses are great, and it comes down to preference for speed, size, etc. In colour, Zeiss glass is really very appealing.
My personal preferences are:
Nokton 35/1.2 for low light, Biogon 35/2 for high acutance, Summaron 35/2.8 for landscape and Summicron 35/2 v3 as a walk around lens.
The Summarit 35/2.5 is regarded as one of the best balanced lenses ever made.
As to the mechanical quality, it is difficult to beat Leica, but Hexanons are also well regarded, and personally I am very fond of my 35/1.2 Nokton.

What a brilliant useful sumary. Thnaks

 

[icebear]

Be happy with what you have. You will most likely not see much of a difference.

I have a 2/50 Planar and 2.8/25 Biogon and a 2/35 asph in between. The Leica built quality is clearly a step up from Zeiss, no doubt about that but the optical results from the Zeiss lenses on my M9 and MM are equally stunning.

The results are clearly more limited by my own abilities than by any of my lenses but I can live with that 😎 😉.

 

[chrismoret]

Everybody thanks for the input en thoughts!! Reading all this I just might keep the euros in the bank for now. 🙂

 

[hepcat]

Everybody thanks for the input en thoughts!! Reading all this I just might keep the euros in the bank for now. 🙂

That's probably wise counsel. "Best" is totally subjective dependent on your own criteria. I'm going to commit sacrilege here, but I actually prefer everything about the CV lenses and '60s vintage Leitz lenses to any of the Leica offerings since the '80s, so for me, "best" is very different from those folks who lust after all things Leica.

If you're happy with your Zeiss glass and it meets your needs, there's no reason to look for anything else.

 

[ChrisLivsey]

I had to send my 35mm f2 Biogon in, it had started to feel rough and was becoming noisy on focus. Zeiss said I had worn out the focussing helical, I was rather proud of that 😀. I suspect it was poor/inadequate lubrication on build. They sent it back repaired and re-collimated. Smooth now, if I thought it was good before now it is tremendous.
I have a IV 35mm Summicron which does work well in B/W but the Biogon "pastes" it in colour.
The Canon LTM f2 is no slouch either. Can you have too many 35s ? :angel:

You can certainly try others, but if that means selling what you have, be careful it will cost more to buy it back. I would, funds allowing, buy and try then re-sell if necessary. If you find a replacement then move on the Biogon and you are back to one lens, but one you have decided to keep after due comparison. Don't neglect the tactile element either, if it isn't good in the hand it's going to have to produce exceptional images or you will neglect it.
There have been a number of group comparison posts in 35s, nearly as many as 50s 😉 You may get a feel for the differences and see what you are looking for. Let that not be the name though, on it's own it is not enough.

 

[Wulfthari]

The Biogon is the best and the most important historically speaking 35 mm lens. Stop.