Zeiss 25mm or 28mm on an M9?

[Tobers]

I'm looking for an affordable wide angle lens. I'm super-impressed with my Zeiss Planar 2/50 so am looking at the 25mm and 28mm f/2.8 Biogon lenses.

I'm erring towards the 25, but I'm interested in any opinions of one over the other.

Most likely use is landscape photography.

Thanks!

 

[irq506]

21 has barrel distortion.

 

[zleica]

Take a look at this:

http://forum.getdpi.com/forum/showthread.php?t=27989

 

[Bill Blackwell]

I have owned and used both - just not at the same time. The [Zeiss] 25 is said to be sharper (and I know first-hand it is comparable to the Leica 24mm Asph. Elmarit-M) compared to the [Zeiss] 28, but both are wonderful lenses.

FWIW, my personal preference is the 28, which is as good as - or better than - the current Leica 28mm Asph. Elmarit.

The Zeiss 25 comes 'standard' with a flange which brings up 28mm framelines - so you either need to get a replacement lens mount from Zeiss (35/135) or 6-code the lens as a 28mm pre-Asph. Elmarit-M.

 

[Benjamin Marks]

The 28 is wide.
The 25 is wide-wide.

If you have the 50, I'd get the 25. Also I have both and while the 28 is a fine lens, the 25 just has a liiiiitle more "oomph" -- it is a great design.

 

[Richard G]

The 25 is stunning. No distortion, sharp. It isn't small and I use the 25/28 Zeiss finder so it's quite a rig, but worth it.

 

[semilog]

21 has barrel distortion.

21/2.8 Biogon has about 1.0 % barrel distortion. This is detectable but really not a major concern unless you're shooting really critical stuff with straight lines.

21/4.5 Biogon-C hardly has almost zero distortion. It's a stunningly well-corrected lens. Unfortunately it's not suitable for the M9 due to the high angle of incidence at the corners of the frame.

 

[tlitody]

21/2.8 Biogon has about 1.0 % barrel distortion. This is detectable but really not a major concern unless you're shooting really critical stuff with straight lines.

21/4.5 Biogon-C hardly has almost zero distortion. It's a stunningly well-corrected lens. Unfortunately it's not suitable for the M9 due to the high angle of incidence at the corners of the frame.

Does that apply to any 21mm lens on the M9 or just this one and what about the ZM 15mm lens with centre filter?

 

[seakayaker1]

I'm looking for an affordable wide angle lens. I'm super-impressed with my Zeiss Planar 2/50 so am looking at the 25mm and 28mm f/2.8 Biogon lenses.

I'm erring towards the 25, but I'm interested in any opinions of one over the other.

Most likely use is landscape photography.

Thanks!

From the reviews the Zeiss 25/2.8 ZM is considered to be a fantastic lens and the better of the two lenses.

Bottom line is what you would rather shoot with.

Good luck with your decision.

 

[efirmage]

I'd go for the 28. I have it and I'm constantly amazed at how great a lens it is. I got mine used for $650 and it is a steal at that price. For my style it's perfect for nearly everything, and I have a 50 for when I need some length.

Here's some examples:


Untitled by Ed Firmage, on Flickr


Untitled by Ed Firmage, on Flickr


Untitled by Ed Firmage, on Flickr

 

[semilog]

Does that apply to any 21mm lens on the M9 or just this one and what about the ZM 15mm lens with centre filter?

The 21 f/2.8 Biogon is fine for the M9. The problem with the Biogon-C is not just vignetting, it's loss of sharpness and color shift in the corners, due to how far the rear element sticks into the camera body.

 

[mile]

The Zeiss 25 comes 'standard' with a flange which brings up 28mm framelines - so you either need to get a replacement lens mount from Zeiss (35/135) or 6-code the lens as a 28mm pre-Asph. Elmarit-M.

No, that is not correct. At least not for my rather recent sample of this lens. Here it brings up the 35mm frames on my M6.

(Someone explained to me at some point that on a M8, the 24 and 35mm frames are paired and that's why Zeiss chose such a rather odd-for-full-frame-cameras frame line, where you'd probably use some external finder anyway.)

 

[Tobers]

All - many thanks for your views. Looks like the 25 is a super little lens then so I'll stick my cash there I think.

 

[jamato8]

Yep, I use the 25 2.8 and really like it. It is extremely sharp but I also like the contrast and color. I find they 35 Summicron excellent and enjoy it as much but there is something special about the Biogon. I use the 25, 35 Sum, 50 Sum, 90 Sum and a 135 Tele and always pack the 25. Such a nice lines and very reliable. I did have to get the focus tweaked for my M9.

 

[MCTuomey]

Yep, I use the 25 2.8 and really like it. It is extremely sharp but I also like the contrast and color. I find they 35 Summicron excellent and enjoy it as much but there is something special about the Biogon. I use the 25, 35 Sum, 50 Sum, 90 Sum and a 135 Tele and always pack the 25. Such a nice lines and very reliable. I did have to get the focus tweaked for my M9.

What "tweaking" did you have to do?

 

[Bill Blackwell]

No, that is not correct. At least not for my rather recent sample of this lens. Here it brings up the 35mm frames on my M6. ...

The dealer you purchased the lens from ordered it that way (a dealer option). Unless Zeiss changed the specs (a possibility), the standard lens flange on the 25 ZM brings up 28mm framelines. I have first-hand experience with this, owning two examples of this lens - both were 'unmodified' out of the box bringing up 28mm framelines. In each case I had to order a new lens flange so the lens could be coded as a 24mm Asph. Elmarit.

Another recent change from Zeiss is they have shifted the mount so 6-bit coding can be done unhindered by a screw (it's about time).

 

[tlitody]

The 21 f/2.8 Biogon is fine for the M9. The problem with the Biogon-C is not just vignetting, it's loss of sharpness and color shift in the corners, due to how far the rear element sticks into the camera body.

Thanks, that's useful to know cos I had my beady little eye on the 21/4.5 due to its lack of distortion.

 

[Mesti3K]

Personally, I love the 25..Although I've never used the 28. The 25 just has that extra...thing...that's more like a feeling when you look at pictures taken from it. It goes beyond the lens' stats..which certainly don't hurt.

 

[Olsen]

The 25 is as good a lens as you'll find, anywhere. It's darn near perfection. Stupid sharp, no distortion, all the usual Zeiss goodness. But you can't go wrong with either. Depending on how you code it, the 28 will be less likely to show "red edge."

Agree.

The Biogon is one of the legendary lens designs ever made. It was originally designed for areal photography before WWII. Luftwaffe used cameras with Carl Zeiss Biogon lenses to photograph harbours to identify ships. Providing reconnaissance raw material for the u-boat fleet. They needed cameras that could identify merchant ships from 30.000 ft, having no distortion and very high resolution from the middle to the very edge in the corners. These Carl Zeiss lenses were the first to use 'multicoating', a military secret patent back then.

I have had two Biogons. A Hasselblad SWC that I have sold (possibly the best camera I ever had!), and a ZM 25 mm which I used uncoded on my M8. I was persvaded to sell that too, together with my Zeiss Ikon. Which I regret.

An issue with the M9 is the Italian Flag thing. Some lens designs create this effect on the M9. You can correct it in post processing with certain software (not the Lightroom that comes with the M9). Make sure that the ZM works flawlessly with the M9 before you buy it. I think it will, though.

 

[jamato8]

What "tweaking" did you have to do?

It was focussing past the focus point. DAG adjusted it.

I code mine for the 24 Leitz and get fine results.