What new ZM lens would you like to see?

What new ZM lens would you like to see?

  • Total voters
    162
  • Poll closed .
Turtle - tiny lens, I feel the same sometimes. However, the VC lens (f2.5, f3.5 ) are small. The way the ZM lens are with their chrome hood mounting rings, thats always going to add a little to the length.
Collapsible lens- hummm, saves a few mm in legth but would add to the weight, and possibly add some flex in the lens train.
 
I like the idea of a 50mm f/2.8 Collapsible Tessar. Something like the 35-70 Vario-Sonnar for the Contax G but for M-mount would be appealing to me too. I'm thinking of a continuous zoom lens coupled to zooming goggles!

I would also be receptive to a new Zeiss SLR body. Similar to the idea of the Bessaflex but based on the ZM body and hopefully with a Pentax-K mount. :)
 
I believe that the only wide aperture wide angle lens for the M8 currently in production is the Leica 28mm f/2.0. The CV 28/1.9 is discontinued. And none of the 35mm lenses count as wide angles on the M8, as they are effectively normal 46mm lenses on the M8. Leica's 28/2.0 is terribly expensive at $3,600, and it's not very wide on the M8. By contrast, Canon offers the 24/1.4, 28/1.8 and 35/1.4, all wide aperture wide angles for its DSLRs, and those are all true wide angles on the full-frame models.

The door is open for Zeiss to fill the category of wide aperture wide angles for the M8 and and future digital rangefinders. These would be ideal lenses in this category:
24/2.0
28/1.4, 1.8 or 2.0
If priced substantially less than the $3,600 28/2.0, they could be very attractive.

A 35/1.4 could also be a very attractive normal lens, as the Leica 35/1.4 has become extremely expensive.
 
I'll weigh in with the others who are suggesting a 75mm. I think f/2 would be a good choice, but maybe an f/2.8 would be good, too. (But note Tom A's remarks that there probably won't be a lens that competes too directly with the CV lenses. There is a CV 75/2.5, after all.)

I thought the "Bi-Biogon" was a great suggestion. I have occasionally talked about a "Bi-Elmarit" that would provide 35/50 or 35/28 at f/2.8. The advantage: one stop faster and hopefully more compact, in exchange for giving up one focal length choice. It seems to me that retrofocus lenses get bigger as the focal length gets shorter, so I am guessing that a 35/50 would be shorter than a 35/28.

As to the question of whether there could be a 50mm f/2 Tessar: I don't think so. The Tessar is a four element, three-group design; a triplet; and it is a bit of a stretch just to get it to f/2.8. Until better glasses and design methods became available, f/3.5 was the practical limit for this type of lens.
 
How about a 25-28 Bi-Biogon and f2.8. Zeiss already makes a viewfinder with both 25 and 28mm framelines.
 
Wrong:bang:Wrong:bang:Wrong:bang: The next lens released is none of the above but a f2 35mm C. Oh well, what would you like THE NEXT ZM lens to be (come on Nando you don't really mean a 25mm/28mm, get a 25mm and use your feet ;))
 
I would love to see a 50/1.2 Planar ZM. Actually Zeiss has already manufactured a 50/1.2 lens for the Contax/Yashica system, as an anniversary edition lens. It was said to be extremely good.

An "affordable" (that is less than 2000 USD) 50/1.2 lens ZM would be a killer IMHO.

Regards, Horea
 
I think Fuji recently had a compact 35mm P&S for the Japanese market with a 24mm/1.8 lens, so it seems feasible that Zeiss could make a 25mm/2 M lens that would not be excessively big. I once had a Nikkor 24mm/2 which had a 52mm filter ring. Though it was no where near so good as the 25mm/2.8 Biogon ZM or the big 25mm/2.8 Distagon ZF, it was pretty good in the close-up range.
 
.JL. said:
I'd buy a Planar 35-50mm f/2 ZM if it is not much bigger/heavier than the Tri-elmar. Perhaps it's impossible to make (or to sell), but hell would I know...
Click to expand...

I agree. A 35-50 at f/2 or f/2.8 would be wonderful. No more swapping lenses!

Also, a 50 f/1.2 would really be something. I think that such a lens would sell very well, what with the price of the Noctilux these days.
 
Last edited:
adorama canceled the order (for a C/Y mount tessar) because of problems with the lens:(
but from comments around i can see a rising tide of interest in a new ZM tessar :)
 
I'd just like to see some legitimate reports and critiques of the 85mm f/2 Sonnar we have been waiting for, then maybe I'll start gassing for the next Zeiss creation (leaning towards a 1.4/28 myself, a true low light masterpiece; the 2.0/35 is too good and I don't think we need a third lens at that focal length). Now the 1.4/28 and the 2.0/85 would really put some heft into the walking kit; Zeiss shooters would certainly not be the skinny kids on the block.
LJS
 
A f1.4 28mm would be great but I feel it would have a serious wallet crunching effect (such as the f2.8 15mm) - so its out of my league for this poll.
 
What would be so bad about having Voigtlander and Zeiss branded lenses with the same focal lengths and speeds? I hate to use a car analogy, but it's like Toyota selling a Camry and a GS460. They're both midsize sedans, but they appeal to different people.

A ZM 35/1.4 would be a completely different beast than the Nokton. It would probably be a bit larger/heavier, have nicer bokeh, and be sharper wide open.
 
it wouldn't be bad but it also won't be practical. not sure cosina would be too interested for direct competition especially since they will be manufacturing both lenses.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top Bottom