Costo Kim
Established
I'm using zm planar with significant wobble for a few years
I've bought it second hand in this state and no deterioration noticed
and I cannot see any troubles with sharpness wide open and/or stopped down
I've bought it second hand in this state and no deterioration noticed
and I cannot see any troubles with sharpness wide open and/or stopped down
Last edited:
dyao
Well-known
my 35/2 has no wobble but it has slight play in the focus ring.
Colin G.
Established
can someone explain the wobble in simple terms? my 50/2 planar's focus ring has some play, is that the wobble?
FrozenInTime
Well-known
In my case I can pull in and out on the focus mount of the lens and there is movement between the lens mount and the focus ring.
So I can wobble the lens front from side to side, and everything moves except the part of the lens screwed to the M-mount bayonet.
There is enough movement to be seen by eye and to make a clacking noise.
So I can wobble the lens front from side to side, and everything moves except the part of the lens screwed to the M-mount bayonet.
There is enough movement to be seen by eye and to make a clacking noise.
mathomas
Well-known
My 25mm and 35mm Biogons are solid.
My 50mm Planar has just a tiny bit of focus ring play.
My 50mm Sonnar was just great until I banged it against a piece of furniture, then the optical unit became obviously wobbly and rattled when shaken. I took some test photos, and they looked pretty good, but I sent it in for service anyway. $245 later, it's solid as a rock again (as it should be!).
My 50mm Planar has just a tiny bit of focus ring play.
My 50mm Sonnar was just great until I banged it against a piece of furniture, then the optical unit became obviously wobbly and rattled when shaken. I took some test photos, and they looked pretty good, but I sent it in for service anyway. $245 later, it's solid as a rock again (as it should be!).
bobbyrab
Well-known
I had a 25mm develop a wobble which Zeiss replaced as they said it wasn't economic to repair it, so I would assume that there may be different causes as I know others have fixed the problem by tightening the back of the lens, I tried myself to do this, but there was no looseness to tighten. i would assume also that most of these bad lenses will show up fairly quickly, and in the UK at least Zeiss cover the lenses for three years. Has anyone had their lens develop a wobble after a longer number of years?
awilder
Alan Wilder
Not problen with ZM lenses but never gave it hard knocks or kept them long enough to tell. I did once get a Titanium 50 Summilux that appeared LN but the lens barrel had play or slight wobble within the mount and was returned for refund. I've also seen some slight play of the lens barrel within the focusing mount of several Leica lenses like the 90/2 pre-asph., 180/3.4 R and even a new 50 Summmicron M SE (special edition). I attribute some of this to the front heavy lens barrel causing play to develop.
sanmich
Veteran
I discovered a while ago that some lenses sound like something is free inside when you shake them a bit. I think it has something to do with the aperture blades or mechanism but this is just a wild guess.
Of course yours could be a totally different story related with the focus issue.
raid
Dad Photographer
ZM lenses are modern lenses that have been made in recent years. They should not display any wobble. Comparing a ZM lens to Summicron DR is comparing lenses that are ages apart. Compare a ZM to the last version Summicron.
MCTuomey
Veteran
Not intending to cast aspersions at Zeiss generally, or engage in Leitz v Zeiss quality assurance debates, I would appreciate Zeiss management considering a no-cost or at least discounted repair of any of its ZM lenses that develop barrel wobble or focus ring play, regardless whether the lens is under warranty. I paid about $350 to have Zeiss address play in the focus rings of two ZMs. I don't think it's too much to ask that a focus ring be consistently damped and without play. It's certainly not too much to expect that barrel wobble not occur on relatively new lenses.
Last edited:
ferider
Veteran
The DR Summicron should be the reference in build quality for all other M lenses and manufacturers ...
Chriscrawfordphoto
Real Men Shoot Film.
I think Raid meant that after 50 yrs even the very best constructed things can be worn, especially if used heavily. I've certainly seen old Leica lenses that were in bad mechanical shape. A current Summicron is still a VERY well made lens compared to most modern lenses and is more likely to be in perfect condition because its not as old as a DR.
raid
Dad Photographer
This is what I meant.
In any experiment, you want to hold as many factors constant as possible. Age is such a factor.
If this thread is about reaching some useful conclusions on some new lenses, such as the ZM line of lenses, it is best if we compare lenses of similar vintages and prices.
Roland is right about the incredible craftmanship that went into the rigid Summicron and its DR cousin.
Last edited:
raid
Dad Photographer
It is understood, Roland, but after many years, "things" can happen with a lens.
leicashot
Well-known
Received my 50 Planar yesterday. Not only is it nice and tight and smooth, but it's sharper wide open than my Cron 50 V5 I just returned, and only a tad behind my Noct 0.95 at the same aperture f/2. For about 1/3 price, I am very very pleased. Really loving the performance for price value of the Zeiss....oh and do I need to remind you all of the UNBELIEVABLE performance of the 100/2 for SLR's?!? That is probably the best performing lens I've ever used.
Go Zeiss and don't look back.
Go Zeiss and don't look back.
leicashot
Well-known
no way
no way
This lens should have ZERO wobble. The test sample I received from Leica has zero movement and seemed better built than the previous model.
no way
This lens should have ZERO wobble. The test sample I received from Leica has zero movement and seemed better built than the previous model.
raid
Dad Photographer
There is so much praise for the optical qualities of ZM lenses that one day I must get me one to try out. I wonder if ZM lenses are any "better" optically than Zeiss lenses for the Contax G1/G2. The G1/G2 lenses are amazingly good lenses.
Last edited:
Benjamin Marks
Veteran
Raid: I have not done a side to side comparison, my sense is that the strengths are distributed slightly different ways. For instance, the 45 mm G-Planar was so good that I actually bought a G2 in order to be able to use it. When the 50 mm Planar came out in M-mount, I ran out and bought one hoping it would have the same magic. It's a great lens, very sharp, and in many ways comparable to the 50 Summicron, but for whatever reason it didn't touch me the same way that the 45 mm lens did. Having said that, my current favorite lenses are Zeiss M-mount lenses. These include the 21 mm Biogon, the 35 mm/f:2.8 C-Biogon and the 50/1.5 Sonanr. Just can't say enough about these lenses. The one way in which they are similar to the G-mount lenses is in their color rendition. As for the G-mount lenses, I loved the 45 but merely liked the 35 and 90. I chalk this up to personal taste, as the images from these lenses were technically excellent but missing a certain something that makes you go, "wow, images from this lens are always just so special." Other lenses that have that quality for me recently have been the Konica Hexar AR 57/1.2, the Nikon 105/2 DC, the Sigma 50/1.4 and the 21 and 35 Biogons I mentioned above.
Edit: I am in the no-wobble camp.
Edit: I am in the no-wobble camp.
Last edited:
raid
Dad Photographer
Benjamin: I am fond of the 45mm Planar and the 90mm Sonnar from the G1 line.
Still, I favor the very old CZJ 5cm 1.5 over the G1 lenses. I am after a certain overall optical profile from the lenses that I like using the most. The rigid Summicron is a close second to the CZJ lens.
Still, I favor the very old CZJ 5cm 1.5 over the G1 lenses. I am after a certain overall optical profile from the lenses that I like using the most. The rigid Summicron is a close second to the CZJ lens.
Krosya
Konicaze
I keep telling you all - buy Hexanons! 