Why do people keep saying Zeiss lenses aren't smooth?

S

SaveKodak

Well-known
Local time
1:07 AM
Joined
Oct 9, 2012
Messages
598
You hear it all the time when people talk about the ZM line up. "They don't have that Leica silk" and "they're just not as smooth as Leica" or (my favorite) "the IQ of xxx lens is great but it's just not smooth like my Lux".

Unless whatever lens they're using is physically BROKEN...what are they talking about???

All my ZM lenses rotate through the helical in one fluid motion from infinity to MFD. All the aperture 1/3rd stops click normally and they do not shift easily by mistake. I've used a couple of the cheaper CV lenses that start off with a few rough spots in the focusing range, but even they generally clear up with use. Never have my ZM lenses exhibited this, and I would put the quality I saw in the 35/1.4 up against anything.

I find these sophistic arguments particularly irritating. If you are insecure enough to need to justify your choices at least stick with arguments that have a basis in reality.
 
SaveKodak said:
You hear it all the time when people talk about the ZM line up. "They don't have that Leica silk" and "they're just not as smooth as Leica" or (my favorite) "the IQ of xxx lens is great but it's just not smooth like my Lux". […]
Click to expand...



Well, due to the Iron Curtain, the Zeiss (West) guys ran out of silkworms.

I guess the Leitz guys had their own silkworm hatchery, or the Britons did help out?
 
Drinking the wrong 'kool aid' perhaps
just plain a jacka** or simple minded

I have used ..,
leica
Zeiss
Voigtlander

All three have preformed with Charm, Atmosphere, some more bokeh, others more Sharp
All three have given Me some Pictures that are just Stellar and I give Thanks

Boohoo to those that know no better ;)
 
I've had Biogon 2/35 - big wobble, uneven focusing. Sonnar 1,5/50 - small wobble.

After they were repaired they were as good as anything else. I only had one Leica lens so far so maybe I'm not that well versed in smoothness.
 
You've never encountered the Zeiss ZM wobble then... if you had, you wouldn't ask this question. Of course, ones without wobble are great.
 
I find the 50/1,5 C-Sonnar focus far far smoother than the Leica 50/1.4 Summilux ASPH.

On my Summilux focus is stiff and there is stiction and backlash with focus ( when horizontal )
When the lens is held vertical the focus is smooth - my conclusion the FLE mechanism is under engineered and cannot support the weight of the front elements.

However I do believe there was an issue with the early ZM lens designs; the later designs ( I have the 21,35,50 C lenses ) all seem problem free.

I don't know if there were production changes and all the issues are in the past.
 
I own a 35 f2 biogon and 50 planar and had a previous set of the two also plus a 25 biogon. All 5 of the lenses were as smooth as any Leica lens I've owned and I've owned over 50 leica lenses. Matter of fact the only lenses I've had mechanical issues with have been Leica lenses. My v4 Summicron 35 f2 came apart, my v4 50 Summicron would bind at one point, a new 90 apo asph would bind and my 1st 50 summilux asph wasn't manufactured properly and wouldn't focus to infinity.
 
I don't have interest in ZM line, so far, no lenses I want in it. I have deep respect for CV line, for good modern optics and normal price without historic, German aura in ZM pricing practice.
I went through the bunch of old Leitz made ones, CLA'd, they were smooth and solid, but after I traded one of those and CV lens for NiB Summarit-M 35 2.5...
"Leica Silk" it is something soft, sexy and addictive (if enough money). I guess, it is like the silk on the legs, for some :)
Have you tried your fingers on one of those?
 
Ko.Fe. said:
I have deep respect for CV line, for good modern optics and normal price without historic, German aura in ZM pricing practice.
Click to expand...

Please tell me how Zeiss has bad pricing practices vs. Leica or CV (when you haven't used them)?
 
jsrockit said:
You've never encountered the Zeiss ZM wobble then... if you had, you wouldn't ask this question. Of course, ones without wobble are great.
Click to expand...

So that would fall under the category of a lens which is physically broken. I have owned or own now the 28, 35/2, 35/1.4, and 50/1.5 and none of them have developed play. So I have to listen to people on forums who've experienced this and imagine that either it's a thing that used to happen and has since been resolved or happens to some minority of users. Regardless from what I've read there is a DIY fix that takes about a half hour to get you back in business and involves disassembly and screw tightening. Some Leica problems have their own host of problems but people still talk about them as if they are the epitome of build and construction. I'm not saying this to bash Leica, I'm saying there is a dichotomy here. That's what really bothers me I'd say. Both brands produce premium products. Both brands have produced some products that develop problems in one way or another. But Zeiss is the one with "lesser build quality."
 
brennanphotoguy said:
Your senses are obviously not sophisticated enough to notice or understand the intricacies of Leica ergonomics and image quality.
Click to expand...

such Foolishness...
Your comment is so perty in it's absoluteness

I am a Leica fan girl ... moreso with Leica cameras
a RF jubkie I am
Love All Glass in all it's Subtleties
be it Leica, Zeiss, Voigtlander, Nikkor

most glass is BETTER than most photographers !!

and Yes I have had most Leica Glass from retro to modern
My Leica holds up equally to Zeiss & Voigt in my top
20 photos
 
helenhill said:
such Foolishness...
Your comment is so perty in it's absoluteness

I am a Leica fan girl ... moreso with Leica cameras
Love All Glass in all it's Subtleties
be it Leica, Zeiss, Voigtlander, Nikkor

most glass is BETTER than most photographers !!
Click to expand...

Well, I choose to clad my Leica M bodies ONLY with lenses that are the epitome of build and optical quality. Zeiss lenses are inferior in both respects.
 
brennanphotoguy said:
Well, I choose to clad my Leica M bodies ONLY with lenses that are the epitome of build and optical quality. Zeiss lenses are inferior in both respects.
Click to expand...

Well I do hope your ''Epitome of Build and Quality"
also makes some Great Photos or poor You , such a Waste :p
:D
 
helenhill said:
hmmmm.... are You really pulling my leg :rolleyes:... :angel:
Click to expand...

Yes haha. I wondered how long I should string you along and remembered that sarcasm doesn't translate well through the web haha. I've used most of everything from every manufacturer and they all have their own set of issues. Leica seems to get a pass though, like SaveKodak is saying.
 
I only have one ZM lens, the C-Biogon 35mm, and have handled the 50mm Sonnar and Planar. To me, they seem quite well built and smooth in handling, and I'm very happy with the results from the C-Biogon. My only Leica M lenses date from the 1940s-1950s (Elmar, Summitar and DR Cron), and are well built and smooth as well, and produce great results. So for me, it's a tie.
However given their disparate ages, it may not be fair to directly compare the silkiness of these Zeiss and Leica examples.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top Bottom