abumac
Well-known
Is there a big difference? Or is only a question of the price? Anybody out there who could answer this?
back alley
IMAGES
big difference in quality of images made?
the zm 25 is stunning.
the cv is very good.
if you use it alot then i would get the zm lens.
if it's gonna be a part time lens then the cv.
i have the zm but still might get a cv 25 because the size makes it a perfect fit for the r4m.
what camera will you be putting the lens on? that would be a deciding factor for me.
the zm 25 is stunning.
the cv is very good.
if you use it alot then i would get the zm lens.
if it's gonna be a part time lens then the cv.
i have the zm but still might get a cv 25 because the size makes it a perfect fit for the r4m.
what camera will you be putting the lens on? that would be a deciding factor for me.
Huck Finn
Well-known
ZM has a max ap of f/2.8 & is bigger.
CV has max ap of f/4 & is smaller.
CV has max ap of f/4 & is smaller.
Last edited:
Avotius
Some guy
no doubt, if I had the money I would get the ZM no questions asked
triplefinger
Well-known
the CV is no slouch, but the ZM25 is without peer by any maker.
my 2 cents, i have the ZM25
my 2 cents, i have the ZM25
Joe Mondello
Resu Deretsiger
I just reviewed Sean Reid's reeviews of the Zeiss and CV 25s and the Elmarit 24.
Go to www.reidreviews.com and subscribe (hey Sean am I getting a commission yet?) His completely unbiased and wonderfully exhaustive reviews of RF lenses are simply without peer IMO.
You are asking about performance differences between a $1,300 lens (Zeiss) and a $330 lens (CV), so the $36 or so it costs to get on Reid Reviews will be money very well spent!
Go to www.reidreviews.com and subscribe (hey Sean am I getting a commission yet?) His completely unbiased and wonderfully exhaustive reviews of RF lenses are simply without peer IMO.
You are asking about performance differences between a $1,300 lens (Zeiss) and a $330 lens (CV), so the $36 or so it costs to get on Reid Reviews will be money very well spent!
abumac
Well-known
I want to put it on a M6 and a R-D1s.
mervynyan
Mervyn Yan
what frame line will it bring up on Leica MP? I don't want to use the external finder. thx.
visiondr
cyclic iconoclast
mervyn,
The ZM 25mm Biogon brings up the 28 mm frame lines. This is one of the best lenses I've ever used.
The ZM 25mm Biogon brings up the 28 mm frame lines. This is one of the best lenses I've ever used.
x-ray
Veteran
I have both the CV in S-nikon RF mount and the ZM 25. The CV is a really fine piece of glass and would probably serve 99% of the RFF shooters very well but there's no question the ZM is better in all respects. The M CV 25 is not RF coupled and the construction is Ok but not great. The ZM is superb in construction, a full stop faster and RF coupled. Zeiss claims the 25 is their sharpest lens in M mount and it might very well be. The ZM is exceptionally sharp edge to edge at every aperture and extremely flare resistant. Contrast is very good as well as being tack sharp. The beauty of this lens in my opinion is the classis creamy look with exceptional edge to edge sharpness and contrast without being harsh. Having said all of this the CV is a super value and will perform on a pro level for only a few $$'s. Also the CV comes with a finder.
jobo
Established
I think you meant to say the 'LTM CV 25'. The new (soon available) M CV 25 is coupled and does not come with a finder; it is smaller and might also be worth waiting for if you need coupling (eg, on a digital body).x-ray said:
2c, /J
Grober
Well-known
The "old" CV 25 in screwmount is a bargain by any standard but the ZM 25 is clearly in a league of its own.
I had the ZM 25 and sold it (on this forum!) only because there were too many issues, some mechanical and some personal, to fuly integrate it with my new M8. Optically, the ZM 25 Biogon is stunning.
-g
I had the ZM 25 and sold it (on this forum!) only because there were too many issues, some mechanical and some personal, to fuly integrate it with my new M8. Optically, the ZM 25 Biogon is stunning.
-g
x-ray
Veteran
jobo said:
Yes, my error, LTM. Very good glass and excellent value.
sepiareverb
genius and moron
First rolls of color shot through the ZM25 are back, truly stunning. The hype ain't hype- this is a great lens.
abumac
Well-known
I have my Zeiss 25 now. I used it past weekend on my R-D1s. Outstanding.
Terao
Kiloran
You know, this thread really isn't helping 
Having sold a load of gear planning to get an M8 that I don't think I'll bother with now I think its time for some nice glass as a treat
Having sold a load of gear planning to get an M8 that I don't think I'll bother with now I think its time for some nice glass as a treat
Paul T.
Veteran
I owned the CV 25 and got rid - I liked the FOV but found its 'look' underwhelming- high contrast, somehow bland. Not a fault that afflicts other CV lenses like, for instance, the excellent 75mm. I intend to buy the Zeiss at some point. In fact I'm horribly tempted by the more compact, cheaper, upcoming 21/4.5. I'm dreading seeing really good reports of it...
Edit: on reflection, a prime cause of the 'look' of my CV 25mm was probably because I would always use small apertures, because it zone focuses. This meant more or less everything was in focus and perhaps contributed to what I thought was its sterile look. This might be less of a problem with the new, coupled M-mount version of the lens.
Edit: on reflection, a prime cause of the 'look' of my CV 25mm was probably because I would always use small apertures, because it zone focuses. This meant more or less everything was in focus and perhaps contributed to what I thought was its sterile look. This might be less of a problem with the new, coupled M-mount version of the lens.
Last edited:
BillBingham2
Registered User
From what I have seen, the new CV 25 M is a step up in quality of build. May not be the same as the ZI, but much better than the LTM.
With speed comes size and for the average RFFer size can be an issue. For me, the 25 is my carry everywhere lens. I have it in LTM and Nikon S and love it.
I would want to spend a week or two with the ZI before I plunked down the $$$$$ for her, just to see. I've seen the same focal lenght lens, even from the same company look very different. My Nikkor F 24/2.8 has a VERY different distortion feel to it than my 25/4 CV does.
The cost of the CV lens (LTM version) is low enough you might get both.
B2 (;->
With speed comes size and for the average RFFer size can be an issue. For me, the 25 is my carry everywhere lens. I have it in LTM and Nikon S and love it.
I would want to spend a week or two with the ZI before I plunked down the $$$$$ for her, just to see. I've seen the same focal lenght lens, even from the same company look very different. My Nikkor F 24/2.8 has a VERY different distortion feel to it than my 25/4 CV does.
The cost of the CV lens (LTM version) is low enough you might get both.
B2 (;->
Honus
carpe diem
I'm in the same boat as Paul T. I have the CV 25mm, and have used it both on my M2 as my wide and on my R-D1 as a 35mm equiv. lens. I don't mind the zone focusing, but the lens doesn't get me excited when I look at the negatives or RAW files. The Zeiss 25mm, however, has my attention. Like Paul, though, the soon to come Zeiss 21/4.5 is also a possibility. Decisions, decisions...
Olsen
Well-known
The Carl Zeiss Biogon 25 mm 2,8 is simply the best lense I have ever owned. I use it regularly on my Leica MP, Zeiss Ikon or M8. - Not only that; I own a Hasselblad SWC905 (Biogon 38 mm 4,5 on MF) which is practically the same lense on a MF format. I want to be burried with that camera, the best I have. You, Abumac, who are a german, buy a piece of remarkable german industrial history when buying this lense.
The Carl Zeiss Biogon 25 mm 2,8 is a must.
The Carl Zeiss Biogon 25 mm 2,8 is a must.