Zeiss 35/2 or Summicron 3rd or 4th Gen?

P

PaulJ

Guest
Hi,

Does any one have any opinions on a comparison of these lenses? I'm looking at getting one, but not sure which. I can get the Zeiss significantly cheaper than the summicrons.

Regards,
Paul
 
There's a reviewer named Sean Reid (reidsreviews.com) who writes well and extensively about the differences between the Leica and Zeiss. It's a pay subscription but I've found it to be well worth the price---very enjoyable reading. I really like the feel of the Zeiss lenses. There as sharpness and softness that seem to occur at the same time. If I had to characterize it I would say that there is a gentleness about them. The way they handle colour is also very unique and beautiful, saturated and a little cool. It's a question of a new classic versus timeless classic. My 2 cents.
 
I have not used the new Zeiss 35, but everyone that has one talks about its superb optics. Having said that, the one demo I did handle at a shop seemed very sloppy in the focus, for that reason I would stick with the Summicron... and that I still love its 'look' even if its an 'old' design. It also is more compact, takes my 39mm filters, I like the clip-on hood.
 
Check out Raid's recent test of 35 mm lenses which is posted in the "RF General Discussion" section. You'll find comparisons of these lenses there. You can draw your own conclusions.
 
(There's a reviewer named Sean Reid (reidsreviews.com) who writes well and extensively about the differences between the Leica and Zeiss.)

Maybe im wrong, but i cant find any review about the 35 leica vs 35 sumicron 4th. Im jus recetly subscribed to reid reviews. I like it a lot no regrets. But i dont see any leica vs zeiss 35mm lenses. There is a 24 vs 25.


Please correct me if im wrong. maybe I dont know to surf www.reidreviews.com
 
This is opinion - I have shot extensively with the Zeiss and the PRE ASPH Summicron(s) various versions (I am old). I have not shot with the ASPH Summicron. My feeling is the Zeiss is equal to the Summicron(s) at least the PRE ASPH versions. As for sloppy focusing, mine is as smooth as silk not sloppy and I use it a lot. If you are on a budget and want a great 'little' 35mm - the VC Pancake II M mount 2.5 is top notch - of course it is a 2.5 not a 2.0. All of my above comments are tempered with personal preferences..... :)
 
Last edited:
sirius said:
.... I really like the feel of the Zeiss lenses. There as sharpness and softness that seem to occur at the same time. If I had to characterize it I would say that there is a gentleness about them. The way they handle colour is also very unique and beautiful, saturated and a little cool. It's a question of a new classic versus timeless classic. My 2 cents.
Click to expand...

Interesting that you say this. I have heard the older Zeiss glass for the Contax I and II described as this but not the modern Zeiss lenses. I have the full set (minus the 16 Hologon) of the Contax G series of Zeiss lenses and I would never describe them as such, more like the sharpest and most saturated lenses I own (particularly the 28 and 45). That said I do desire this look you describe (for B&W work) and have found it closest in the 50/2 Summicron DR. Are the new Zeiss lenses for M-mount truly like this, and that different from the G lenses?
 
gustav[] pEña said:
(There's a reviewer named Sean Reid (reidsreviews.com) who writes well and extensively about the differences between the Leica and Zeiss.)

Maybe im wrong, but i cant find any review about the 35 leica vs 35 sumicron 4th. Im jus recetly subscribed to reid reviews. I like it a lot no regrets. But i dont see any leica vs zeiss 35mm lenses. There is a 24 vs 25.


Please correct me if im wrong. maybe I dont know to surf www.reidreviews.com
Click to expand...

This is true, Gustav.

If anyone is interested in Sean's comments on the ZM 35/2 biogon, he has reviewed this lens in his article "Fast Lenses for the Epson R-D1." He also has comments on the Leica-M 35/2 ASPH in his article Wide Angle Lenses for the R-D1." Since these lenses are reviewed in 2 separate articles, there is no direct comparison made between the two of them. Because both of these articles were originally written for Luminous Landscape, they are free & can be accessed directly from Sean's review site (www.reidreviews.com). Unfortunately Sean has not reviewed either of the two pre-ASPH Leica lenses in question.
 
Hi Gustav,

You may be correct that there is no 35mm review on Reid Reviews. Thanks for correcting me on that. My comments on the Zeiss lenses were from reading his reviews of the 28mm and 50mm lenses and from seeing the samples that he posted. I've read him saying that he has tested many Zeiss ZM lenses and they have all performed consistently and similarly (except the 50mm f1.5 which is it's own story). My comments on the character of the Zeiss lenses are from looking at photos posted here, Reids reviews and on Flickr. I can't speak to Contax G lenses. I have not used either lens yet, but I would like to get a 35mm ZM lens.

cheers
 
I've owned them both. I've had the Zeiss for only about ten days - traded a Rolleiflex for one on a whim.

There is no shortage of 35/2 Summicron info out there, so just some brief comments about the Biogon.

1) Love the feel of the lens, but do not like the focusing tab. It's needlessly sharp and isn't really big enough for my tastes - I find myself avoiding it.

2) Build quality seems first rate - clearly several steps up one most CV stuff and the equal of my new Summicron 50. No slop in either the focusing or aperture rings.

3) Have shot six rolls in the past ten days with this lens - I'm very pleased. It's quickly becoming one of my favorite lenses.
 
I've shot extensively with the 1st, 4th and asph versions of the summicron and also have the Biogon 35. I sold my v1 summicron for the v4 which was an improvement and purchased the Biogon about a year ago. After using the biogon for a month or so I sold the v4 summicron. I disliked the smallish size of the summicron and the very narrow aperture ring that made it hard to quickly change aperture with the hood on. I also disliked the foxusing tab and had some mechanical issues with slop in the focusing helix with the summicron. The biogon has a real focusing ring and a small hump of a tab that can be used if desired. The Biogon is buttery smooth mechanically and the aperture ring can easily be shanged with the hood on. The lens is only the size of a 35mm film box or a 50mm summicron. Optically the Biogon is the winner even including the asph summicron. The Biogon is organic in quality with smooth creamy tonality and deadly sharp resolution. It's classic and warm in tone but sharp edge to edge even wide open. The v4 summicron was pleasing to the eye but not as sharp. The asph is very sharp but inorganic and cold in the way it renders. The Biogon is almost impossible to make flare even shooting into the sun where the asph summicron and earlier will flare easily. For me the winner is clearly the Biogon.
 
I own a version 3 summicron and have compared it to V4 and asph, I kept the V3. It gives a sharp but smooth rendition, and the handling is very good, easier than the v4 for me. One feature not often mentioned is that the v3 supposedly has a design that reflects unwanted light back from the lens obviating the need for a hood. Whatever, I've shot with and without hood and notice no difference. Flare has been a non-issue with this lens for me. The lens allows very big enlargements to be made (I've gone to 20x30 inches).

Nik
 
J. Borger said:
Unfortunately Putz tests have zero to none relevance for taking real pictures instead of taking pictures of brickwalls or testcharts.
Click to expand...

"Zero to none relevance?" Hmmm . . . I guess you feel strongly about his work. ;)

I wonder why lens designers use precisely the same methods to measure their lens performance. :confused:

Information is information. Puts provides information that would cost hundreds of dollars per lens to obtain otherwise. That information may or may not be useful to some. IHis information does not tell the whole story, but it is what it is.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top Bottom