D&A
Well-known
Hi All,
Before I get to my question and ask for your opinion, permit me to qualify a few personal points. The two lenses in question will be used on the M8. I've throughly have read Sean Reid's excellent article and tests on current 35mm rangefinder lenses as well as many other opinions here and elsewhere. In one sense I have a good handle on what to expect specifically with use of the VC 35mm f1.2 and Zeiss ZM 35mm f2 lenses on the M8. I realize everyones expectations, shooting style, requirements are quite different, so here is a brief overview of mine. Please keep in mind that although there are many other fine 35mm rangefinder lenses to consider (both current production and older ones)...I'd like to restrict consideration to just these two lenses (on the M8). I do often shoot wide open under low available light but not exclusively under these conditions. I shoot in color although often convert to B&W. I do value shallow depth of field...meaning often shooting a 35mm close up and near wide open...but again I'm just as likely shooting in good light and at a distance where stopping down and achieving excellent sharpness and detail across the frame is needed. I realize the size/weight difference between these two lenses although the cost difference is not significant.
The one area I can't get quite a handle on comparing these two lenses is the central sharpness, (and to a lesser degree, micro-contrast) when both lenses are shot at f2.0 (wide open for the ZM) and f2.8 . I've seen the comparison shots on Sein Reids website...but if someone had compared say 3-4 different types of images with both lenses simultaniously..both at f2.0 and f2.8 (and maybe f5.6), and the image was examine across the frame and at actual pixels (100%)..I think I'd have a better idea the differences. I realize when one considers corner resolution the Zeiss definitely has the edge at f2 and f2.8. In the central part of the image, the VC 35mm ff11.2 seems to have the advantage...BUT by how much??? Thats the part I'm stuck on...as some say the ZM 35mm f2 is somewhat soft wide open (centrally) when compared tgo the VC 35mm f1.2 at f2 and also soft in comparison to some other 35's). Others say it iss somewhat close to the VC 35mm f1.2 when both lenses are shot at f2.0 It's this center of the frame resolution when both lenses are shot at f2, f2.8 and f4... where opinions widely vary and I'm at aa loss for making some definitive conclusion.
If anyone has shot with both these lenses , feedback would be appreciated. No doubt sharpness and resolution isn't everything as other factors can play an equal or more prominant role (such as bokeh, contrast and how the lens draws it's image)..but for now, central resolution of these two specific lenses at f2 and f2.8 is my primary concern. Thanks very much!
Dave
Before I get to my question and ask for your opinion, permit me to qualify a few personal points. The two lenses in question will be used on the M8. I've throughly have read Sean Reid's excellent article and tests on current 35mm rangefinder lenses as well as many other opinions here and elsewhere. In one sense I have a good handle on what to expect specifically with use of the VC 35mm f1.2 and Zeiss ZM 35mm f2 lenses on the M8. I realize everyones expectations, shooting style, requirements are quite different, so here is a brief overview of mine. Please keep in mind that although there are many other fine 35mm rangefinder lenses to consider (both current production and older ones)...I'd like to restrict consideration to just these two lenses (on the M8). I do often shoot wide open under low available light but not exclusively under these conditions. I shoot in color although often convert to B&W. I do value shallow depth of field...meaning often shooting a 35mm close up and near wide open...but again I'm just as likely shooting in good light and at a distance where stopping down and achieving excellent sharpness and detail across the frame is needed. I realize the size/weight difference between these two lenses although the cost difference is not significant.
The one area I can't get quite a handle on comparing these two lenses is the central sharpness, (and to a lesser degree, micro-contrast) when both lenses are shot at f2.0 (wide open for the ZM) and f2.8 . I've seen the comparison shots on Sein Reids website...but if someone had compared say 3-4 different types of images with both lenses simultaniously..both at f2.0 and f2.8 (and maybe f5.6), and the image was examine across the frame and at actual pixels (100%)..I think I'd have a better idea the differences. I realize when one considers corner resolution the Zeiss definitely has the edge at f2 and f2.8. In the central part of the image, the VC 35mm ff11.2 seems to have the advantage...BUT by how much??? Thats the part I'm stuck on...as some say the ZM 35mm f2 is somewhat soft wide open (centrally) when compared tgo the VC 35mm f1.2 at f2 and also soft in comparison to some other 35's). Others say it iss somewhat close to the VC 35mm f1.2 when both lenses are shot at f2.0 It's this center of the frame resolution when both lenses are shot at f2, f2.8 and f4... where opinions widely vary and I'm at aa loss for making some definitive conclusion.
If anyone has shot with both these lenses , feedback would be appreciated. No doubt sharpness and resolution isn't everything as other factors can play an equal or more prominant role (such as bokeh, contrast and how the lens draws it's image)..but for now, central resolution of these two specific lenses at f2 and f2.8 is my primary concern. Thanks very much!
Dave
