Pioneer
Veteran
There may not be many who have had the opportunity to work with this combination but the Zeiss Ikon paired with the MS Optical Perar 28/4 is about the most compact camera/lens setup I have ever worked with. This setup easily slides in and out of my shirt pocket.
From a performance perspective this lens is certainly not perfect but it does a great job considering how small it is. I have noticed that it seems to work better on film than on a digital sensor. Images on my M9 have decent resolution but things do get a touch fuzzy if I enlarge much beyond 8x10. Color fidelity seems very good but it will be a bit on the cool side. On film it works great and I am very happy with the resolution and print quality. Distortion seems relatively well controlled with both film and digital.
But the biggest reason for this lens is obviously size and portability. Having the camera and lens with you at all times is important. As you can see from the attached images the ZI/Perar combo is a bit taller but certainly no deeper than the Leica II/Elmar combo. And it makes my poor M9 look positively portly.
From a performance perspective this lens is certainly not perfect but it does a great job considering how small it is. I have noticed that it seems to work better on film than on a digital sensor. Images on my M9 have decent resolution but things do get a touch fuzzy if I enlarge much beyond 8x10. Color fidelity seems very good but it will be a bit on the cool side. On film it works great and I am very happy with the resolution and print quality. Distortion seems relatively well controlled with both film and digital.
But the biggest reason for this lens is obviously size and portability. Having the camera and lens with you at all times is important. As you can see from the attached images the ZI/Perar combo is a bit taller but certainly no deeper than the Leica II/Elmar combo. And it makes my poor M9 look positively portly.
Attachments
Archiver
Veteran
That's very interesting, and is kind of like the Olympus body-cap lenses for m43, albeit with real focusing and a decent starting aperture.
Since picking up my Ikon again, I've been looking at my lens lineup and thinking about what a really compact setup would be like.
I already have the CV 25/4P which doesn't protrude much, and is light for a RF lens. Another lens I like with the Ikon is the CV 35/1.4, which is larger and heavier but certainly not that much. One I have yet to try with the Ikon is the CV 50/3.5 collapsible Heliar. On the M9 it produces the most organic yet clear rendering of all my RF lenses, so I can only imagine how it will look on the Ikon and some Ektar or Portra.
The 25/4P, 35/1.4 and 50/3.5 could make a great travel combination if you want to cut down on as much lens bulk as possible. When I was shooting a lot with the Ikon, I used to use the 25/4P during the day, and the 35/1.4 at night.
There are others that I don't have but to which I am giving thought, including:
- CV 35/2.5 - purportedly very close to the Leica Summarit in image quality
- CV 21/4P
- CV 40/1.4 - I think this looks flatter/smaller than the 35/1.4, and could be an alternative to a fast 50
And I'm curious about the other MS Optical lenses, including:
- Super Perar 35/3.5
- Super Triplet 24/4
Ah, I love these thought experiments!
Since picking up my Ikon again, I've been looking at my lens lineup and thinking about what a really compact setup would be like.
I already have the CV 25/4P which doesn't protrude much, and is light for a RF lens. Another lens I like with the Ikon is the CV 35/1.4, which is larger and heavier but certainly not that much. One I have yet to try with the Ikon is the CV 50/3.5 collapsible Heliar. On the M9 it produces the most organic yet clear rendering of all my RF lenses, so I can only imagine how it will look on the Ikon and some Ektar or Portra.
The 25/4P, 35/1.4 and 50/3.5 could make a great travel combination if you want to cut down on as much lens bulk as possible. When I was shooting a lot with the Ikon, I used to use the 25/4P during the day, and the 35/1.4 at night.
There are others that I don't have but to which I am giving thought, including:
- CV 35/2.5 - purportedly very close to the Leica Summarit in image quality
- CV 21/4P
- CV 40/1.4 - I think this looks flatter/smaller than the 35/1.4, and could be an alternative to a fast 50
And I'm curious about the other MS Optical lenses, including:
- Super Perar 35/3.5
- Super Triplet 24/4
Ah, I love these thought experiments!
axiom
Non-Registered User
Is the ZI actually smaller than the M9?
CrisR
Well-known
The CV 40/1.4 is identical size to the 35/1.4, it's the same barrel, with a different front element and associated surround. I have both.
Monochrom
Well-known
Great combination Pioneer, i think the best is the smallest even if slow glasses are used.
Now i´m waiting for an kmz orion-15. 28mm f6.
I will end up using only lenses that don´t protrude more than 15mm from flange.
I left go my biogon 28mm lens, only 1 point slower than your perar...and have to say that at 2.8 it really sucks!
I used it all the time at f8-f11 where the edges are superb, but for that reason i moved to the orion great edges stopped down, low budget and none small!!!
Now i´m waiting for an kmz orion-15. 28mm f6.
I will end up using only lenses that don´t protrude more than 15mm from flange.
I left go my biogon 28mm lens, only 1 point slower than your perar...and have to say that at 2.8 it really sucks!
I used it all the time at f8-f11 where the edges are superb, but for that reason i moved to the orion great edges stopped down, low budget and none small!!!
Archiver
Veteran
The Ikon is definitely smaller and much lighter than the M9. The M9 is noticeably thicker than the M7, and the Ikon is 5mm slimmer than the M7.
The M9 weighs 593g, and the Ikon is only 476g. When you put a fast 50 like the C Sonnar on the Ikon, it actually feels front heavy.
The MS Optical lenses are beginning to interest me, not only for size, but also their very low weight.
Archiver
Veteran
Ah, thank you. I must have been deceived by photos that made it appear that they were different sizes.
Pioneer
Veteran
I am very impressed with the MS Optical lenses on the ZI. They do have some ergonomic challenges and there are those who don't like that, but truthfully the good ole Elmar 50/3.5 is not an ergonomic superstar either. Sometimes you have to learn new techniques if you want to go small.
Optically I like both of the Super Triplets. Like all triplet designs they are sharper in the center then they are in the corners so don't expect edge to edge, eye slashing, sharpness. It just won't be there, even stopped down, but it is still quite good at f/8. Trust me, unless you are taking pictures of brick walls you won't even notice. I guess I shouldn't say that though since it seems there are more people concerned with pixel peeping then with taking pictures.
I think the biggest problem with these lenses have nothing to do with their ergonomics or their optical quality. Since they are basically hand produced by one man they are not easy to get your hands on. However, for those who may be interested. Japan Exposures is now taking pre-orders for the new 24mm which will protrude only 5.2mm from the front of the camera. This is less extension than the collapsed Elmar 50/3.5 and it is even smaller than the 28/4.
Optically I like both of the Super Triplets. Like all triplet designs they are sharper in the center then they are in the corners so don't expect edge to edge, eye slashing, sharpness. It just won't be there, even stopped down, but it is still quite good at f/8. Trust me, unless you are taking pictures of brick walls you won't even notice. I guess I shouldn't say that though since it seems there are more people concerned with pixel peeping then with taking pictures.
I think the biggest problem with these lenses have nothing to do with their ergonomics or their optical quality. Since they are basically hand produced by one man they are not easy to get your hands on. However, for those who may be interested. Japan Exposures is now taking pre-orders for the new 24mm which will protrude only 5.2mm from the front of the camera. This is less extension than the collapsed Elmar 50/3.5 and it is even smaller than the 28/4.
segedi
RFicianado
That setup looks nice indeed. Was curious about the 28mm, but i have 25 and 35mm and like those a little better. An MS Optical 24mm sounds like it might be a blast though!
The Perar 35mm is indeed a very nice lens. Excellent on film - I'll have to give it a go on the Monochrom to see how that compares. But only the far corners wide open are soft on my copy with film. It's the only lens I don't bother covering, as the 19mm filter screws into the hood. I even leave it extended all the time as it doesn't make that much difference - so tiny!
Shots of and from my Perar 35mm
The 35mm Summarit-M is a great lens. Wish I had kept mine, but I got a Summilux and the Perar, so it had to go. A lot spendier than the CV, but worth it.
Too many 50s and too many 35s also saw me sell the CV 40mm, but wow, what a lens. Nice FOV, small and lightweight for an f/1.4 lens. If I had a do-over on my kit, it might be CV21mm, CV40mm and a 75mm in there.
The Perar 35mm is indeed a very nice lens. Excellent on film - I'll have to give it a go on the Monochrom to see how that compares. But only the far corners wide open are soft on my copy with film. It's the only lens I don't bother covering, as the 19mm filter screws into the hood. I even leave it extended all the time as it doesn't make that much difference - so tiny!
Shots of and from my Perar 35mm
The 35mm Summarit-M is a great lens. Wish I had kept mine, but I got a Summilux and the Perar, so it had to go. A lot spendier than the CV, but worth it.
Too many 50s and too many 35s also saw me sell the CV 40mm, but wow, what a lens. Nice FOV, small and lightweight for an f/1.4 lens. If I had a do-over on my kit, it might be CV21mm, CV40mm and a 75mm in there.
Pioneer
Veteran
I am very fond of my Perar 35 as well. The only other 35 I use is my Nikkor 35/2.5. It was actually the performance of the 35 that led me to purchase the 28, and I am very glad that I did.
Too many 50s certainly describes me. If I had to pick a kit to go with me everywhere it would be the MS Perar 28/4, the MS Sonnetar 50/1.1 or ZM Sonnar 50/1.5, and the CV Apo-Lanthar 90.
Not totally certain where the MS 24 will fit but I'm sure I can find a place for a lens that tiny.
Too many 50s certainly describes me. If I had to pick a kit to go with me everywhere it would be the MS Perar 28/4, the MS Sonnetar 50/1.1 or ZM Sonnar 50/1.5, and the CV Apo-Lanthar 90.
Not totally certain where the MS 24 will fit but I'm sure I can find a place for a lens that tiny.