JoeMac
Member
As a complement to my 50mm 1.4 what do you think would be the better lens, the 25mm or the 28mm. Is one better than the other in terms of picture quality? Is 25mm too far from 50mm to be useful?
Thanks
Thanks
tfelton
Ted
When I got into the ZI I had to make the same decisions: 21, 25, or 28. I went with the 25 and have not been sorry. It is a superb lens. In a way, the decision is easy to make if you look at the frame lines in the camera's viewfinder. You see the 50 and the 28 lines; for the 25 just use the entire viewfinder image. The little bit extra the 25 has beyond the 28 can be quite handy. If you look at the threads in this forum you'll see how well thought of the 25 is.
back alley
IMAGES
what he said...
Dougg
Seasoned Member
Glorious as the 25 might be, the 28 is great optically too... And offers the advantage of parallax-compensated framelines for easier framing, and which also allow you to see a bit around the outside too, which is often useful. And 25 seems a long step from 50, considering I think the 28 and a 40 make a great pair.
I have used my 25 Snapshot Skopar with my CLE using this "whole viewfinder" technique, and do the same routinely with the 45mm on the Bronica RF645. It's workable but handicapped. For nearby objects I have to be conscious of the parallax issue and manually compensate or risk lopping body parts off my subjects...
It's just nicer to have proper moving framelines, and that was one reason I got the 28 Skopar (the other, about as important, was that my 25 was not RF coupled).
I have used my 25 Snapshot Skopar with my CLE using this "whole viewfinder" technique, and do the same routinely with the 45mm on the Bronica RF645. It's workable but handicapped. For nearby objects I have to be conscious of the parallax issue and manually compensate or risk lopping body parts off my subjects...
It's just nicer to have proper moving framelines, and that was one reason I got the 28 Skopar (the other, about as important, was that my 25 was not RF coupled).
David Kieltyka
Clicking away feverishly
Try before you buy
Try before you buy
The title says it. The last thing I would ever do is choose one focal length over another based on test chart results or MTF graphs. Instead go for the lens that gives you the amount of coverage you want. Some folks like a 24/25mm + 50mm combo while others prefer 28 + 50mm (or even 35 + 50mm). Depends on how wide you want to go.
-Dave-
Try before you buy
The title says it. The last thing I would ever do is choose one focal length over another based on test chart results or MTF graphs. Instead go for the lens that gives you the amount of coverage you want. Some folks like a 24/25mm + 50mm combo while others prefer 28 + 50mm (or even 35 + 50mm). Depends on how wide you want to go.
-Dave-
Grober
Well-known
Film camera: ZM28 + ZM50.
Digital Epson or M8: ZM25 + ZM50.
-g
Digital Epson or M8: ZM25 + ZM50.
-g
RFNewbie
Established
Thanks for the info. I'm been pondering the same question. It's difficult to try them out as there are no camera shops that I know in my area that carries a range of M mount lens. Maybe a trip to B&H is long overdue.
How does the image quality between a Zeiss compare to a Leica? Is either that much better than a Voigtlander?
How does the image quality between a Zeiss compare to a Leica? Is either that much better than a Voigtlander?
Avotius
Some guy
if it was me I would have a hard time choosing, I like the 35-50 focal length and 28 is not that far off from 35 but 25 is. That said I prefer the idea of using framelines because thats why I got into rangefinder photography, being able to see around the photo. Also the 28 is a lot smaller then the 25 if that means anything to you.
In terms of image quality, the zeiss is right up there with the leica, and in some cases even better, in the end it depends if you like a warmer image (zeiss) or a cooler image (leica). Compared to voigtlander I would have to say that the zeiss is hands down better, the optics really are fantastic at a wonderful price, the voigtlanders are great too but the zeiss is just better. Dont hesitate to go zeiss just because it doesnt say leica.
In terms of image quality, the zeiss is right up there with the leica, and in some cases even better, in the end it depends if you like a warmer image (zeiss) or a cooler image (leica). Compared to voigtlander I would have to say that the zeiss is hands down better, the optics really are fantastic at a wonderful price, the voigtlanders are great too but the zeiss is just better. Dont hesitate to go zeiss just because it doesnt say leica.
x-ray
Veteran
My 25 ZM is a stellat lens. I find using my 28 CV more convenient due to the 28mm frames of my ZI and M6 but I certainly do no hesitate to use the 25mm. I also have a 21mm Elmarit but find I rarely use it now after getting the 25 ZM. From experience with a great number of premium lenses the 25 Zeiss is one of the finest super wides ever made by any manyfacturer.
I've been a hard core leica shooter for four decades nearly. I've always loved the system but in recent years as other makers of lenses have appeared I've come to appreciate other makes of lenses. I still have a great system of leica glass but have added Zeiss and a couple of CV lenses and phase out some of my Leica glass. I have no plans to sell any of the leica glass but by the end of this year I will have replaced all but my 50 asph summilux and 75 summilux with Zeiss glass. I currently have the 25, 35 and just ordered a 50 planar and when the 85 sonnar comes out I will probably purchase it to replace the 90 ap summicron. The 90 apo is a fine lens at distances over 10ft but much of my work is done at less than 10ft and the 90 apo is not a good performer at that distance. I've mentioned before, if I were to buy a new lens system today it would be Zeiss with the exception of the 50 (haven't made a decision here yet) and the 75 which Zeiss has no equivalent focal length. Not considering cost I feel the Zeiss performs as well or better in many cases and factoring in cost they are about 1/3 the cost of leica glass and built equal or better than the current leica lenses. The 85 sonnar is about the same price as the 90 apo. Ergonomics of the ZM lenses are better in my opinion than the leica lenses too.
I've been a hard core leica shooter for four decades nearly. I've always loved the system but in recent years as other makers of lenses have appeared I've come to appreciate other makes of lenses. I still have a great system of leica glass but have added Zeiss and a couple of CV lenses and phase out some of my Leica glass. I have no plans to sell any of the leica glass but by the end of this year I will have replaced all but my 50 asph summilux and 75 summilux with Zeiss glass. I currently have the 25, 35 and just ordered a 50 planar and when the 85 sonnar comes out I will probably purchase it to replace the 90 ap summicron. The 90 apo is a fine lens at distances over 10ft but much of my work is done at less than 10ft and the 90 apo is not a good performer at that distance. I've mentioned before, if I were to buy a new lens system today it would be Zeiss with the exception of the 50 (haven't made a decision here yet) and the 75 which Zeiss has no equivalent focal length. Not considering cost I feel the Zeiss performs as well or better in many cases and factoring in cost they are about 1/3 the cost of leica glass and built equal or better than the current leica lenses. The 85 sonnar is about the same price as the 90 apo. Ergonomics of the ZM lenses are better in my opinion than the leica lenses too.
PaulDalex
Dilettante artist
I would object to Kieltyka. I choose lenses studyng accurately the graph of MTF and never regretted. I made terrible mistakes when such data were not available as was the case of the mediocre Minolta AF 85 1,4.. Looking at the MTF, I decided to buy the ZM 35, and I can only strongly recommend it. The results are outstanding. Next superb MTF show the 25 and 85. Zeiss informed me that the 85 fits well on the M5. I am still waiting to know about the 25 on the CLE. I absolutely need to know and I would greatly appreciate it if someone has tried and could tel me the results. Does it fit?
ERV
Well-known
I had a CV 25 that I sold when I came across a demo Zeiss 28 for a great price.
The CV 25 is a nice lens, compact, very sharp, and the focal length is not too wide to show distortion. Although using an external finder is not a big deal, I prefer the 28 framelines on my M6 and not having to zone focus.
The zeiss 28 is a great lens, very sharp, not too contrasty (like the CV lenses IMO) and produces great color.
I have images on my Flickr page taken with the 28.
The CV 25 is a nice lens, compact, very sharp, and the focal length is not too wide to show distortion. Although using an external finder is not a big deal, I prefer the 28 framelines on my M6 and not having to zone focus.
The zeiss 28 is a great lens, very sharp, not too contrasty (like the CV lenses IMO) and produces great color.
I have images on my Flickr page taken with the 28.
Berliner
Well-known
I can't speak as to the difference between the 25 & 28, but I can say the 28 Biogon is amazing. No questions on build quality--it is a solid lens all around. I was really blown away by the silky action on the aperture ring--It click stops on the index like the bezel on a Swiss chronograph--unlike any lense I've ever held. Very rich feel, blade sharp, warm tone. You'll probably not be dissapointed with either--If the 25's anything like the 28.
Gary B
Established
ZM 25 and CLE, CL
ZM 25 and CLE, CL
Just wanted to let you know that the ZM 25 does fit on the CL & CLE. You do need an external finder as the CLE only has a 28 finder built in and the CL stops at 40. The 25 is a bit larger than the old Canon 25 or CV 25 to say the least as well as heavier and does block part of the finder.
Metering is fine on both cameras as I don't think that the lens extends as far into the body.
Hope that this helps. A dam sharp lens.
Gary B.
ZM 25 and CLE, CL
Just wanted to let you know that the ZM 25 does fit on the CL & CLE. You do need an external finder as the CLE only has a 28 finder built in and the CL stops at 40. The 25 is a bit larger than the old Canon 25 or CV 25 to say the least as well as heavier and does block part of the finder.
Metering is fine on both cameras as I don't think that the lens extends as far into the body.
Hope that this helps. A dam sharp lens.
Gary B.
PaulDalex
Dilettante artist
Gary,
a zillion thanks. I was scary to spend the money and find myself with a superb lens orphan of a body to be mounted on. I cannot buy other bodies. I want to travel light and, besides, I already have too many. Looking at the mesures given at photonet the issue was very doubtful.
http://www.photo.net/bboard/q-and-a-fetch-msg?msg_id=00I4sa
BTW. I am not willing to use an external finder. I hope one can guess from the whole field framed by the viewfinder, which is a tiny bit larger than 28 but not certaily 25.
All the best
Pistach
a zillion thanks. I was scary to spend the money and find myself with a superb lens orphan of a body to be mounted on. I cannot buy other bodies. I want to travel light and, besides, I already have too many. Looking at the mesures given at photonet the issue was very doubtful.
http://www.photo.net/bboard/q-and-a-fetch-msg?msg_id=00I4sa
BTW. I am not willing to use an external finder. I hope one can guess from the whole field framed by the viewfinder, which is a tiny bit larger than 28 but not certaily 25.
All the best
Pistach
Dougg
Seasoned Member
I have used the Voigtlander 25mm on my CLE, and while that is a usable combination, it's not ideal. There is adequate room around the outside of the 28mm framelines to adequately represent the field of the 25mm lens, given that RF camera framelines are not particularly precise anyway. But there's a disadvantage in losing parallax guidance at closer distances. This too can be dealt with, just another little challenge. But in all, I would prefer a viewfinder with built-in 25mm framelines, and there is yet none and never has been. The answer comes this Spring with the Voigtlander Bessa 4. Another alternative is to be happy with 28mm, and then there are several good choices.Pistach said: