Zeiss Biogon 35/2 T*: Thoughts/experiences appreciated

demian

Established
Local time
3:11 PM
Joined
Mar 6, 2005
Messages
80
Hello

New to the forum. Appreciate and enjoy the people here from what I have seen. The air is not insecure, bitter, and cynical as others that will remain unmentioned....<grin> It's a pleasure.


That said, I have researched all I can find online regarding this lens. (searches, forums, etc). I use an Mp and Leica lenses only for what I do and although I have friends with Contax, I have schooled myself only recently on Zeiss optics and therefore have no direct experience.

From all I have been able to gather online and what I have read:

This lens compares rather well to the pre ASPH 35/2 Summicron.

It is not as contrasty as teh Summicron and not as sharp at center as the Summicron but retains a flat field better than all other compared lenses (that is Leica, Voigt, Canon).

Also what is interesting (apparently) is how it renders out of focus objects with very nice transitions and corner to corner sharp focus.


As a note, I do not prescribe to the ideas and/or logic of "pixel counting," mtf graphs and the like.

And i realize these things are so subjective and one really needs to try for themselves. It is a very personal choice how a lens "draws" and the qualites one is searching for.

That all said, and information being rather difficult to come by on these lenses from users that is, are there any who would be willing to describe their experiences with this lens? Confirm what has been said above? Its performance wide open *in the real world*?

I would also be very interested how the results appeal *above all* emotionally to you. Do you feel there are some subtlties that make it simply not cut it with you personally? (those personal qualities which feign description...)

Also, I recall reading *somewhere* that Zeiss black lenses had a reputation for wearing fast. That is, the finish was not very strong and was prone to wearing prematurely. True / false?

Can anyone substantiate this. I read it somewhere online (a review or something) but after a while as you know it all becomes mush in the brain where you viewed this and that...


Thanks in advance all who reply. I do genuinely appreciate it.
I realize it isn't easy these sort of Q's.

D
 
This lens is a joy to use.

I like its performance wide open.

The contrast is nice as is the bokeh.

It does not flare. Oddly, I like it's color performance more than B&W

I think it is an excellent value.

Mine (silver) has held up well.

The only downside to this lens is it is longer than other 35s. However it is light.

willie
 
Last edited:
india044.jpg


india038.jpg


india036.jpg


india037.jpg
 
Many thanks to all who replied.

I apologize, although the images above are *very* helpful. I did find after the post posts regarding this lens.


And upon mailing "x-ray" directly, he was incredibly kind to relay his thoughts from his apparent vast experience(s).


Many thanks once again.

Ah hell, I never thought about flickr. Thank you.

Is the colour naturally so saturated and wonderful? (Of course being in India helps..)

Oh, one final query. The rendering of details within the highlights? (I am speaking mostly of B/W work) What is found (and/or felt) by all of you.

Kind regards
D
 
Last edited:
Rendering in highlight areas is more a function of proper eposure and particularly developement. The film / developer combination plays a bigger part here than the lens. I find the detail to be excellent through out the entire tonal range.

Although I shoot mainly color film I will say that the contrast of a lens is more important in color. Even in color the contrast of one film vs another, velvia vs astia, is quite dramatic. A contrasty lens will render nicely on astia which has a longer tonality and a lower contrast lens will look better on velvia that is quite contrasty in itself. In B&W the exposure determines shadows and the processing determines high light density. In B&W it's very easy to adjust contrast in process, scanning and printing in the darkroom.

I really feel the Biogon has a nice balance of contrast, flare resistance and resolution over the entire field at every aperture. Everyone has a different view of ideal but for my needs the Biogon is near ideal.
 
I know the version 4 35mm Summicron is supposed to be the "King of Bokeh" but every time I see shots with the new ZM 35 Biogon I think its time for abdication.
 
Vladimir, that one with the fishing nets is very interesting. I like that quite a bit. I have this lens but have hardly used it. I'll have to give it more of a chance. Now that I have the new 28mm/2.8 Leica ASPH lens, the 35mm/2 Biogon seems so big and long!
 
Back
Top Bottom