Zeiss 25

[jackal2513]

makes everyone look pasty faced with mushy monotone faces


presumably because of zero microcontrast ?

i'm selling mine ASAP for something CV or Leica

 

[back alley]

be sure to put that comment in your sales ad!! 😉

i have not found that to be my experience with the lens. in fact, it may very well be the finest lens i have ever used.

 

[kipkeston]

I highly doubt the 25 zm is reponsible. best of luck.

 

[jackal2513]

the contrast was also bonkers and reds/greens are odd

 

[retow]

makes everyone look pasty faced with mushy monotone faces


presumably because of zero microcontrast ?

i'm selling mine ASAP for something CV or Leica

Examples please. The ZM 25 gets nothing but praise, whether in this or in the Leica forum. I'm still struggling with the decision whether I should keep the ZM 25 or the Elmarit 24. And the latter one is considered one of Leica's masterpieces.

 

[jackal2513]

i'll buy your elmarit
how much ?

 

[Nachkebia]

Yeah, right, 25 zm has deepest tones that I have ever seen shot on 35 film 🙂 learn to work with light 🙂

 

[Krosya]

the contrast was also bonkers and reds/greens are odd

Do you have photos that show that you could post here?
I'm surprised to hear this about this lens.

 

[Olsen]

- Something must be wrong with your example of Carl Zeiss's legendary Biogon 25 mm 2,8. It is regarded as one of the sharpest (highest resolution in the photo business!) and one of the most contrast rich of all lenses ever made. It is a refined copy of a design made for airborne 'spy photography' of WWII. It draws straight lines despite is wide angle. What could be said is that, like all extreme wide's, it is not intended as portrait lenses. But this the Biogon share with it's Leica counterparts. You must add some pictures explaining what you mean.

 

[MCTuomey]

t-r-o-l-l ?

 

[jackal2513]

resolution... schmesolution !

i'm talking about microcontrast on faces

granted it's a very high contrast lens for overall lights and darks (too high contrast imo... first thing you have to do in developer is drop the blacks setting to zero and return the contrast setting to zero !) and it is a sharp lens for sure but when you look closely at peoples faces you don't see the same range of tones and detail like you get with a good leica lens (because their lenses get ther detail from microcontrast rather than resolution/sharpness)

seriously, its the one M lens ive tried that didn't create good pictures


IN SUMMARY: its no 24mm elmarit

 

[mfogiel]

jackal2513
You're having good fun, aren't you ?

Go shooting pictures.

Biogon 25

http://farm3.static.flickr.com/2246/1657467496_fde45192de_b.jpg

 

[jackal2513]

jackal2513
You're having good fun, aren't you ?

i'm sorry, what's your point there ?


and what's the point of the picture you posted ?


seriously, I found that outdoors in reasonably strong light the contrast was just so over the top and produced out of control pictures, so much so that your eye didn't know where to look. For example, you'd take a full frame shot of someone but then there would be some bonkers light on some builing in the background which would ruin the sense of depth and distract your eye. (And that was even after reducing contrast in the RAW)

Indoors and on peoples faces (when they were smallish in frame) it producd a milkyness that lacked micro-definition and it did odd things to certain colours. In particular reds went a bit pinkish.

I am trying to dig out some examples but I think I didtched them all they were that bad.

I can accept that the lens would probably be better on film and also for something like architechture. It certainly didn't work well for people on an M8.

 

[Terao]

I know what you mean, it does lack something when shooting people. Brilliant (I'd almsot say unsurpassed) for architecture and "stuff" but I haven't got a person shot I'm happy with. Of course why would you use a 25 for people photography where the face is the entire subject of the frame? Its going to work well for street (particularly on a Bessa R4), particularly if you're used to standing in a crowd and shooting, but no way would I use it for a portrait.

 

[Terao]

Perhaps the pinkish reds are an M8 IR sensitivity thing? Were you using the IR filters?
The R-D1 is also sensitive to IR and I see some of what you mention in some of my shots.

 

[mfogiel]

jackal2513

I seriously thought you were pulling our leg. However, the problem is with your sensor and exposure technique and not with the lens. If you don't like modern lenses, it is ok with me, but what's the point in buying one and then complaining it is not a vaseline jar?

Biogon 25

http://www.flickr.com/photos/59177039@N00/1544162482/sizes/l/

 

[jackal2513]

Biogon 25

http://www.flickr.com/photos/59177039@N00/1544162482/sizes/l/

kind of an example of some of the things i'm talking about


the contrast is so mad in that photo that despite the DOF the whole sense of depth has been completely negated or ruined. The picture has no natural logic, no sense of ordered theology. Its a mess.

 

[retow]

i'm sorry, what's your point there ?


and what's the point of the picture you posted ?


seriously, I found that outdoors in reasonably strong light the contrast was just so over the top and produced out of control pictures, so much so that your eye didn't know where to look. For example, you'd take a full frame shot of someone but then there would be some bonkers light on some builing in the background which would ruin the sense of depth and distract your eye. (And that was even after reducing contrast in the RAW)

Indoors and on peoples faces (when they were smallish in frame) it producd a milkyness that lacked micro-definition and it did odd things to certain colours. In particular reds went a bit pinkish.

I am trying to dig out some examples but I think I didtched them all they were that bad.

I can accept that the lens would probably be better on film and also for something like architechture. It certainly didn't work well for people on an M8.

In post 9 you said "(too high contrast imo... first thing you have to do in developer is drop the blacks setting to zero and return the contrast setting to zero !)"

Then you mention the ZM 25 would not work well "for people on an M8" (I use mine on the M8). On which camera did YOU use YOUR ZM25 again? And how come YOU know its no Elmarit 24 (as you mention in another post). You seem to already own one, but then, why did you suggest to buy mine?

 

[mfogiel]

jackal2513
Thanks for your kind impression. I maintain my opinion. The only lighting in this scene was from halogen spot lamps in the ceiling. A Leica lens would have flared down to the underpants. Go and try to make a better one with whatever lens you like.
And above all, go taking photos.

 

[jackal2513]

flare is what you want !

it might have made that shot look photographic/pretty