Zeiss ZM vs Voigtlander lenses..

[ajpat]

Hi,

I need to buy a 25 mm lens for my M8. How do these 2 lenses from Zeiss and Voigtlander stack up against one another in terms of image quality? Erwin Puts claims the Zeiss 25 is as good as the Leica 24mm lens and the Voigtlander a distant third.

Thanks in advance.

ajpat

 

[Doug]

The 25 Voigtlander is a stop slower at f/4, much smaller, and very good optically; it has developed a fine reputation, and well-favored in Sean Reid's reviews. Of course it's much less expensive too. If you need f/2.8, then the Zeiss Biogon and Leica Elmarit are in the running, your choice on the cost issue. I don't have the Elmarit, but do use both the 25 Biogon (quite outstanding) and Skopar lenses.

 

[ajpat]

Doug,

Thanks. I believe the VM lens has a fair bit of light fall off compared to the zeiss?

ajpat

 

[BNF]

I've come around to the thinking that the differences of prints on paper/slides in my own shooting has not benefited from expensive glass.

For this reason, I am moving towards all VC gear (out of Leica M, M glass, ZM glass). I have not seen a difference that comes close to justifying the price difference. That may not answer your question, but it may point you in the direction I have decided to take.

 

[Sam N]

Doug,

Thanks. I believe the VM lens has a fair bit of light fall off compared to the zeiss?

ajpat

I know that the Voigtlander 15/4.5 and 21/4 have a lot of light fall off, but the 25/4 is actually not that bad (I have all three... should probably sell one). That said, the Zeiss 25/2.8 probably has even less falloff than the 25/4, especially at F4.

 

[sockeyed]

BNF makes a very good point. In controlled circumstances you can spot differences between Voigtlander and Zeiss glass, but in practice they both deliver the goods. I have the CV 35mm f/1.4 that has been criticized for ugly bokeh wide open and focus shift on the M8. When I look at my negs from this lens, however, I can't see any reason why I would want any other lens. I'll save the difference for film and other lenses.

I did compare the CV 25/4 (which I own) and the ZM 25/2.8 (which I borrowed). At f/4 I actually found the CV to be a hair sharper in the centre and the ZM visibly sharper in the edges. Consistancy across the frame is what Zeiss is known for, so this is no surprise. My conclusion was that in real world shooting I would be equally happy with the CV. The one-stop hit in speed in some ways is made up in the huge reduction in size of the lens itself.

CV 25mm f/4, Fuji NPH, Colombo Sri Lanka

 

[back alley]

in day to day use, especially for the web, there is little to complain about regarding either brand.
for large prints perhaps the difference is more noticeable.
i had some nice shots from the cv lenses and no regrets.

i decided to go with only the zeiss lenses more for personal than esthetic reasons.

 

[squirrel$$$bandit]

Zeiss lenses feel awesome to use. That was my impression with the G system and is how I feel about the 28/2.8 I've been using these past few weeks.

Got no complaints about any CV product, though...

 

[jky]

nice pic, Ben.

 

[ajpat]

Thanks for all the thoughts--ajpat