Leica M and Zeiss ZM "wides"

[jamin-b]

Raid, how did you decide between the ZM f/2 vs. the f/2.8 c Biogon? The latter seems to have acquired some sort of mystique in the minds of photographers; but the f/2 is only another $50 or so, and some say it's just as good (and a stop faster). I've been thinking of getting one of them myself, and I'm not sure which to get.

The answers I've seen are like, "You want smaller and lighter, get the f/2.8. You want f/2, get the f/2." But people ascribe magical qualities to the f/2.8 C Biogon . . .

I only have and have used the biogon. It is without doubt the sharpest lens I have used it can be sharp to a fault in digital, but I actually quite like it for film. I chose it for the smaller size and lower price.

Sent from my HTC U11 using Tapatalk

 

[raid]

Raid, how did you decide between the ZM f/2 vs. the f/2.8 c Biogon? The latter seems to have acquired some sort of mystique in the minds of photographers; but the f/2 is only another $50 or so, and some say it's just as good (and a stop faster). I've been thinking of getting one of them myself, and I'm not sure which to get.

The answers I've seen are like, "You want smaller and lighter, get the f/2.8. You want f/2, get the f/2." But people ascribe magical qualities to the f/2.8 C Biogon . . .

If I were mainly using B&W film (and not digital), I may have favored the 35/2.8 over the 35/2 based on posted comments and images from both lenses. When you have tried so many lenses, there is no real mysterious ora covered lens left to try out and use. Maybe the Hologon has a special magic attached to it?

 

[Ronald M]

The 18/4 is big but sometimes indispensable for architecture. For me it works like a poor man's tilt shift giving parallel vertical lines, and I then lop off the foreground.

I know what I mean about getting used to a 28. I've learnt new lenses by walking around for a couple of weeks with only that lens on the camera. I did this with the 21 before I was digital. I now use the 28 where I'd often want the 21 but I can go all day with just a 28. I would not have thought that possible when I started.

Try a 28 R in Leitax mount or Nikon TS with Nikon to M adapter.

No live view? Use a matt plastic where the film goes, pan up and measure degrees, and figure where top of frame is . Then find the proper shift to accomplish the same. Live view is better.

 

[Out to Lunch]

I have the 4/18 Zeiss and have concluded that the younger CV 4.5/15 Super-Wide-Heliar III is the better lens, especially when used on digital bodies.

 

[micromontenegro]

L1002132 by Aguaitacaminos, on Flickr

Verano2013 347 by Aguaitacaminos, on Flickr

 

[Out to Lunch]

Not sure ...and so?

 

[james.liam]

Raid, how did you decide between the ZM f/2 vs. the f/2.8 c Biogon? The latter seems to have acquired some sort of mystique in the minds of photographers; but the f/2 is only another $50 or so, and some say it's just as good (and a stop faster). I've been thinking of getting one of them myself, and I'm not sure which to get.

The answers I've seen are like, "You want smaller and lighter, get the f/2.8. You want f/2, get the f/2." But people ascribe magical qualities to the f/2.8 C Biogon . . .

The f/2 Biogon is just not at its best @ f/2.

Focus shift—the lens is optimized for f/2.8, not unlike the 1,5/50–lower contrast wide/open because of its symmetrical design and way larger. The C resists flare better, renders at higher contrast & resolution from 2,8 and I have not detected focus shift in slightest.
Lots of “punch” in the image, glorious Zeiss color and small. For years, no one paid much attention to it. The ‘cult of speed’ I suppose, less needful now with better sensors and so this true gem is suddenly appreciated.

 

[taffy]

The f/2 Biogon is just not at its best @ f/2.

Focus shift—the lens is optimized for f/2.8, not unlike the 1,5/50–lower contrast wide/open because of its symmetrical design and way larger. The C resists flare better, renders at higher contrast & resolution from 2,8 and I have not detected focus shift in slightest.

Lots of “punch” in the image, glorious Zeiss color and small. For years, no one paid much attention to it. The ‘cult of speed’ I suppose, less needful now with better sensors and so this true gem is suddenly appreciated.

Hi I just bought the ZM 35/2.8 and use it with my M8. I’m currently shooting it to see if it can replace my Summarit 35/2.5. After a few weeks with it I find it crazy sharp. Hoping to see more of the 3D qualities people talk about. Those qualities I’ve seen in my ZM 25/2.8.

What do you shoot it with?


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

 

[james.liam]

M6 and an M10

 

[taffy]

M6 and an M10

Thanks


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

 

[shorelineae]

Interesting that this thread popped up because I've got myself a fever for the Voigtlander 15mm Heliar. I think I'll get a screw mount for use on my Bessa L, although it's tempting to get the III for use on digital.... can't make up my mind.

 

[CharlesDAMorgan]

The 15mm Heliar is a superb little lens and in screw mount form (with included finder) a serious bargain. It is sharp, precise, largely distortion free and like having a portable pinhole. The minimum aperture of f4.5 is only an issue in very dark spaces with film and obviously it's not rangefinder coupled, so watch the depth of field scale. Apart from that, it's something I have with me virtually all the time when out with a Leica.

 

[Rob-F]

I find it more difficult to see what I'm doing with a 15mm lens on the Leica, compared to the same focal length on an SLR/DSLR. Very wide lenses stretch the image near the edges and corners. With an SLR I can see the effect of that, and I might alter the composition to take this into account. With 21mm and 24mm lenses on the Leica, I find the corresponding Zeiss finder helps me a great deal. Wider than that, It's hard to avoid converging verticals, which I dislike. So I'm drawing the line at 21mm for Leica M.

 

[f.hayek]

I find it more difficult to see what I'm doing with a 15mm lens on the Leica, compared to the same focal length on an SLR/DSLR. Very wide lenses stretch the image near the edges and corners. With an SLR I can see the effect of that, and I might alter the composition to take this into account. With 21mm and 24mm lenses on the Leica, I find the corresponding Zeiss finder helps me a great deal. Wider than that, It's hard to avoid converging verticals, which I dislike. So I'm drawing the line at 21mm for Leica M.

Visoflex 020 so WYSIWYG.

 

[Bill Blackwell]

Leica M-P 240
25mm Biogon ZM

 

[HenningW]

I like wides.

I have a lot of options at present and will have to cull the herd, but I use my 35 Lux pre-fle ASPH, 21/3.4 SE and 9mm Laowa the most. Obviously, anything wider than 21 gets extremely challenging to use, but I've had at least a 15mm lens since the 70's (Leica Hologon 15/8 and Nikkor 15/3.5) so have learned to use them.

 

[kram]

Re: ZM 35mm f2. I purchased mine before the f2.8 came out. The f2 is difraction limited at f4 fantastic. I try and use it at around f3.8 -5.6, stopping diwn further if I need increased DoF. Flare resistance is better than my ZM planar 50mm. This is one area where the f2.8 is even better. Do people use the f2.8 without a hood, makes it smaller. Less distortion on the f2, but not bad on the f2.8. If you want small, super Flare resistance and plan to shoot at f2.8-3.8 mist of the time, get the f2.8. For a little more £/€/$/¥ you get a whole stop faster lens. I don't think you can go wrong with any of the ZM 35s 😀.

For full disclosure, I only have film RFs.

 

[Out to Lunch]

A stellar performer, especially on digital RFs is the CV Super-Wide-Heliar 4.5/15 III. Cheers, OtL

 

[Greyscale]

I recently traded a Rolleiflex 2.8D for the ZM 21/2.8 and 35/2, and also use the 15/4.5 Voigtlander Heliar. Once I am fully immunized, I hope to use them for more than shots around my neighborhood. The 15mm is the most fun that I have ever had with a rangefinder. I expect equally great things from the 21/2.8.


Leica M3, Zeiss ZM 21/2.8, Kodak Plus X expired 1989 EI 80, Sprint Standard 1:9 10 minutes 20C by Mike Novak, on Flickr


Leica M3, Zeiss ZM 21/2.8, Kodak Plus X expired 1989 EI 80, Sprint Standard 1:9 10 minutes 20C by Mike Novak, on Flickr


Leica M3, Zeiss ZM 21/2.8, Kodak Plus X expired 1989 EI 80, Sprint Standard 1:9 10 minutes 20C by Mike Novak, on Flickr

 

[taffy]

M10 + ZM 25 Biogon

M10 + ZM C-Biogon