nksyoon
Well-known
Wouldn't it be too wide, as it's meant for 21/25 while the round is meant for 25/28?
Your experience with ZM lenses
- Thread starter Olsen
- Start date
- Latest activity Latest activity:
- Replies 58
- Views 745
Wouldn't it be too wide, as it's meant for 21/25 while the round is meant for 25/28?
DougFord
on the good foot
[FONT="]I currently own the Zeiss c-biogon 35mm 2.8 [/FONT]
[FONT="]Of the 35mm lenses that I’ve owned over the past I would rate their build quality in this order –[/FONT]
[FONT="]UC-hexanon[/FONT]
[FONT="]Summicron asph[/FONT]
[FONT="]Zeiss c-biogon[/FONT]
[FONT="]Summicron IV[/FONT]
[FONT="]My personal preference as to their optical qualities –[/FONT]
[FONT="]Zeiss c-biogon[/FONT]
[FONT="]Summicron IV[/FONT]
[FONT="]Summicron asph[/FONT]
[FONT="]UC-hexanon[/FONT]
[FONT="]Of the 35mm lenses that I’ve owned over the past I would rate their build quality in this order –[/FONT]
[FONT="]UC-hexanon[/FONT]
[FONT="]Summicron asph[/FONT]
[FONT="]Zeiss c-biogon[/FONT]
[FONT="]Summicron IV[/FONT]
[FONT="]My personal preference as to their optical qualities –[/FONT]
[FONT="]Zeiss c-biogon[/FONT]
[FONT="]Summicron IV[/FONT]
[FONT="]Summicron asph[/FONT]
[FONT="]UC-hexanon[/FONT]
scorpius73
Well-known
I am comparing it to my Hexanon 50mm f2 and even the CV 40mm f1.4.
sepiareverb
genius and moron
Mechanically very nice. I just never liked how my prints looked as much as I did from other lenses. That's why I choose lenses, for how they make my prints look. I like the Contax G Biogon 21 best of any 21, the ZM wasn't nearly as good, and the Elmarit ASPH isn't either to my eye.
But I much prefer the Elmarit 24 to the ZM 25.
I got a brand new Leica 75/2.0 AA lens with a loose front retaining ring. I've also gotten Nikon 50/1.8 AF-D lenses (for class) that were unable to focus. Every brand can have dogs escape the factory.
But I much prefer the Elmarit 24 to the ZM 25.
I got a brand new Leica 75/2.0 AA lens with a loose front retaining ring. I've also gotten Nikon 50/1.8 AF-D lenses (for class) that were unable to focus. Every brand can have dogs escape the factory.
Last edited:
P
Prosaic™
Guest
Sorry, whats the "wobble"?
ferider
Veteran
Loose optical barrel in focus mount.
sepiareverb
genius and moron
The rectangle 25/21 hood fits on the 28, it just blocks more VF real estate.
ampguy
Veteran
My experience is that they are not as good mechanically, or optically, as Leica lens.
Lets see now ... I've owned these 14 Zeiss lenses.
ZM Biogon 25mm f2.8 x 2 (one black, one silver)
ZM Biogon 28mm f2.8 x 3 ( three black)
ZM Biogon 35 f2 x 2 (two black)
ZM Planar 50mm f2 x 2 (one black, one silver)
ZM Sonnar 50mm f1.5 x 2 (two black)
SC Sonnar 50mm f1.5 x 1
ZF Planar 50mm f1.4 x 1
ZF Planar 85mm f1.4 x 1
The only one that was a dud optically was the ZF Planar 50mm f1.4. It had a decentering problem that was very noticable at f1.4.
I've never experienced the "wobble" some people mention, but have noticed that depending on the lens, the focus action can vary from silky smooth to having a little play. Slightly annoying in some cases but not enough to affect focusing accuracy. Nothing that re-lubing the focus helicoid wouldn't fix.
ZM Biogon 25mm f2.8 x 2 (one black, one silver)
ZM Biogon 28mm f2.8 x 3 ( three black)
ZM Biogon 35 f2 x 2 (two black)
ZM Planar 50mm f2 x 2 (one black, one silver)
ZM Sonnar 50mm f1.5 x 2 (two black)
SC Sonnar 50mm f1.5 x 1
ZF Planar 50mm f1.4 x 1
ZF Planar 85mm f1.4 x 1
The only one that was a dud optically was the ZF Planar 50mm f1.4. It had a decentering problem that was very noticable at f1.4.
I've never experienced the "wobble" some people mention, but have noticed that depending on the lens, the focus action can vary from silky smooth to having a little play. Slightly annoying in some cases but not enough to affect focusing accuracy. Nothing that re-lubing the focus helicoid wouldn't fix.
john_s
Well-known
Maybe my fingertips are abnormal (they look ok to me) but I have found the grip on the pinch tabs a bit slippery. I have rectified it on Zeiss, Nikon and Tamron caps with a cutting tool on my Dremel. I cut some grooves in the direction that adds to the grip/friction. A big improvement (but it looks a bit rough). In fact, the roughness makes them work better! The tool cuts leaving some burr, making it look a bit untidy.
thomasw_
Well-known
So, let me guess, you and mfogiel are leaders of the Zeiss fan club? 😛
-Seriously, though, I have noticed that you seem to have a fair amount of Nikon gear, Jon. Is that the rf gear you use most?
Bob Michaels
nobody special
I just make photos with mine. They seem to do very well in that regard.
If any of them "wobble", it is something I have never noticed.
I have to say none of my ZI lenses have any problems at all. But then I have had no problems with the number of CV lenses I own either, nor the one Leica.
Maybe this thread is about something other than making photos with camera lenses and I missed the whole point.
If any of them "wobble", it is something I have never noticed.
I have to say none of my ZI lenses have any problems at all. But then I have had no problems with the number of CV lenses I own either, nor the one Leica.
Maybe this thread is about something other than making photos with camera lenses and I missed the whole point.
I've thinned the collection down to three Zeiss lenses, and even one of them (Biogon 28/2.8) is for sale in the RFF classifieds now, so mfogiel has me squarely beat.
The Nikons are my favourite, and most used, RF cameras. I've just been dabbling in M-mount gear to see what all the fuss was about 🙂
Krosya
Konicaze
I have had ZM 50/2, 25/2.8, 21/2.8 and never had any problems with glass or Built. They dont feel as solid as my Hexanons, and in some ways I prefer Hexanons signature/rendering, but otherwise they are good lenses in my experience. I still have the 21/2.8 ZM - my favorite 21mm lens, yet others got sold for one reason or another. Also, I dont think that focusing on my ZMs was as smooth and sure as it is on Hexanons. I dont have much experience with Leica lenses other than Summicron 50 - different versions, which is a good lens, but I still prefer Konicas better.
But all in all, I think ZM lenses are worth the investment - some more than others.
But all in all, I think ZM lenses are worth the investment - some more than others.
maddoc
... likes film again.
I had the ZM 25/2.8 (silver) for a while (bought used) and no problems at all. Very sharp but to high contrast for my taste so I sold it. The latest pre-ASPH Leica lenses are more my cup of tea except the 40mm M-Rokkor (better than the 35mm Summicron IV I had) and the 50mm M-Hexanon.
Spoks
Well-known
All the ZM lenses I have tried to buy 2.hand here in Norway, a few Planar 50 mm 2,8, had this wobbling/loose inner barrel. They looked brand new, though. The owners claimed that it was not possible to see any ill effect, which I doubt.
So, the few chances I have had to buy any ZM lenses second hand came to nothing. Because they were not in order.
So, the few chances I have had to buy any ZM lenses second hand came to nothing. Because they were not in order.
Interesting to read this. Of the ZM lenses I've owned/used, I'd rate the two ZM 50/2 Planars as having the smoothest focus action. No problem with "wobbles" either. In fact, I like my black ZM Planar 50/2 so much, its the only ZM lens I kept (once the Biogon 28/2.8 sells...).
f16sunshine
Moderator
My 2/35 has been perfect in every way.
The 2.8/25 I have is optically perfect but mechanically has an issue.
The focus begins to bind a bit over time. It is from the decoupling on=f the RF cam at close focus. It just becomes less smooth coming from de-coupled to coupled. Other then that it's a gem. The Z series lenses RF or reflex are great. I am a longtime Zeiss Contax T* shooter. It's great to have these RF lenses now with matching color, contrast, and 3D effect (micro-contrast) to those older reflex lenses. I use the Contax lenses with an adaapter on my 5D. Haaving the ZM's for the RD1 and M8 is great.
The 2.8/25 I have is optically perfect but mechanically has an issue.
The focus begins to bind a bit over time. It is from the decoupling on=f the RF cam at close focus. It just becomes less smooth coming from de-coupled to coupled. Other then that it's a gem. The Z series lenses RF or reflex are great. I am a longtime Zeiss Contax T* shooter. It's great to have these RF lenses now with matching color, contrast, and 3D effect (micro-contrast) to those older reflex lenses. I use the Contax lenses with an adaapter on my 5D. Haaving the ZM's for the RD1 and M8 is great.
Never Satisfied
Well-known
Hi, I have the 35mm f2.0 Biogon that I bought here 2nd hand a while back. I also have the Gen IV 'Cron and have to say that the Zeiss is built considerably better than the little Summicron.
The only issue I have with the Zeiss is that I now want a 50 f1.5 to go with it.
Excellent value for money and a completely different signature to the Leica.
Andrew.
The only issue I have with the Zeiss is that I now want a 50 f1.5 to go with it.
Excellent value for money and a completely different signature to the Leica.
Andrew.
MCTuomey
Veteran
I've recently begun shooting with the 35/2 and 50/2, so my experience is limited. Other than slight play in the focus ring when beginning to move it from the infinity position, both seem mechanically sound. I rated them average. Above average to me would be the hexanons and my rigid summicron. Image-wise, it's too early to make a judgment, but I do notice the edge-to-edge consistency. And the "zeiss color."
Similar threads
