Tim Gray
Well-known
The word on the street is that Zeiss ZM lenses are designed by Zeiss and built by Cosina, with quality control that has been updated under Zeiss supervision. Not that this is RF related, but I'm assuming the ZE/ZF line of lenses is similar in this regard.
At one point you made a comment about the ZM 21/4.5, which I have (and love). I don't want to 'quote' you since I forget the exact wording, but I thought you said something along the lines of suggesting to Mr. K that he should make a new version of the classic 21/4.5. I hope I didn't misremember that statement - I looked for it but couldn't find it just now. Anyway, the ZM 21/4.5 clearly doesn't have the optical design of the old 21/4.5, yet its design does look similar to the CV 21/4. I interpret this as Cosina driving the design for this lens. Is that true? Do you know about (and can you speak on) the design relationship between Cosina and Zeiss?
I know it doesn't really make a difference. I love my Zeiss ZM lenses, just as I love my Cosina lenses. I'm not trying to be a Zeiss (or Leica, etc.) snob, just curious.
At one point you made a comment about the ZM 21/4.5, which I have (and love). I don't want to 'quote' you since I forget the exact wording, but I thought you said something along the lines of suggesting to Mr. K that he should make a new version of the classic 21/4.5. I hope I didn't misremember that statement - I looked for it but couldn't find it just now. Anyway, the ZM 21/4.5 clearly doesn't have the optical design of the old 21/4.5, yet its design does look similar to the CV 21/4. I interpret this as Cosina driving the design for this lens. Is that true? Do you know about (and can you speak on) the design relationship between Cosina and Zeiss?
I know it doesn't really make a difference. I love my Zeiss ZM lenses, just as I love my Cosina lenses. I'm not trying to be a Zeiss (or Leica, etc.) snob, just curious.
Tom A
RFF Sponsor
The 21f4.5 C Biogon was not a Zeiss idea from the beginning. Mr Kobayashi wanted to make an upgraded version, with even less distorsion than the original. The design concept was to get virtually as close to a distorsion free 21 as was possible.
There has ben a lot of changes in glass technology, coating technology since the original Biogon was "penned". By taking the best parts of various designs and melding them into one, borrowing from the Zeiss and Voigtlander's existing formulas, they managed to produce what is probably the best 21 made.
I dont know what they did in detail - you have to be an optical expert to figure that out -I am only a user. It is the end result that counts anyway.
There has ben a lot of changes in glass technology, coating technology since the original Biogon was "penned". By taking the best parts of various designs and melding them into one, borrowing from the Zeiss and Voigtlander's existing formulas, they managed to produce what is probably the best 21 made.
I dont know what they did in detail - you have to be an optical expert to figure that out -I am only a user. It is the end result that counts anyway.
mgd711
Medium Format Baby!!
I took Tom's advice a year ago and bought the 21/4.5 over the faster version and I couldn't be happier. It's an amazing lens and so far have not needed the extra speed.
If I was just to have 1 lens for my M's it would be this one.
If I was just to have 1 lens for my M's it would be this one.
A great lens for sure, and one of the few lenses I regret selling :bang:
Oh well, I'm glad it found a good home!
mgd711
Medium Format Baby!!
You can always buy another
It's not often I find a bargain but that was a great deal I got from you
You can always buy another
It's not often I find a bargain but that was a great deal I got from you
What I'd really like is one in S-mount
(big hint to Tom A and Pres. K!!!)
Tim Gray
Well-known
Interesting. That's all I wanted to know. Yes, the end result is what counts. It's an amazing lens. I love (most of) the photos I get with it. I will admit that I find shooting 21 a lot tricker than shooting 15 or 28. But when it's on, it's on.
Mister E
Well-known
I also want one in s-mount! I had the m-mount version, but I returned it after having to send it back to Cosina once for repair and then it leaking light in most of the photos I took with it from the mount.
I kept my ZM 18/4 and I like it a lot, just wish it was a bit smaller. I recently got a 21/4 SA as my ultra compact 21mm.
I kept my ZM 18/4 and I like it a lot, just wish it was a bit smaller. I recently got a 21/4 SA as my ultra compact 21mm.
Tim Gray
Well-known
Fortunately mine doesn't leak light (or I haven't noticed it yet).
Mister E
Well-known
Yeah, Luna's leaked just like mine and he was upset. I made him tape his mount up and AFAIK he's been happy since then. Me I didn't need both the 21 and 18 and I like the 18mm FoV more than anything else in this world. Buying this 21/4 SA was stupid of me, but who cares. I really wanted to try that lens.
Luna has the best RF kit ever, he just needs to get his M2 CLAed: M2, Ikon, 21/4.5, 35/1.2 and ZM 50/2.
goo0h
Well-known
how does this compare to the ZM 25?
Tim Gray
Well-known
Nate - did it leak on Leicas and Ikons?
I liked the ZM 35 a lot for what it was. But, alas, 35mm wasn't the right focal length for me, so I sold it (I like 28mm a lot more). Both of them have little distortion. I think the 21/4.5 might be sharper, not in any important way. It does vignette more.
I liked the ZM 35 a lot for what it was. But, alas, 35mm wasn't the right focal length for me, so I sold it (I like 28mm a lot more). Both of them have little distortion. I think the 21/4.5 might be sharper, not in any important way. It does vignette more.
Mister E
Well-known
It leaked on the moon, Leicas and Ikons.
Tim Gray
Well-known
Haha ok. Maybe I'll test for leaks. Maybe I won't and just be happy in my ignorance.
Hey, I'm coming to Japan in early December. It'd be cool to meet up but unfortunately I won't be in Okinawa, so it's unlikely...
Hey, I'm coming to Japan in early December. It'd be cool to meet up but unfortunately I won't be in Okinawa, so it's unlikely...
Mister E
Well-known
Where are you going? I'd normally be up for flying wherever, but I'm going back to Cambodia/Thailand again for a week in November which will use up all of my vacation and my daughter is due 1/25/2011 so I have to be careful about traveling after November. Anyway, PM me the details. I'd love to meet up if I can make it up there.
As for checking your lens, forget about it. If you haven't seen leaks on your film then you don't have them. I had a few on every roll and is was very obvious. Out of the ZMs 18/4, 21/4.5, 25/2.8, 28/2.8 and 50/2 the only one that leaked was the 21mm.
Luna
Well-known
Yep. I am really happy with the lens and upset that Zeiss has yet to respond to a few dozen inquires about the issue.
haha, thanks. I'll get it CLA'd early next year. It feels good to not have to comb through the internet for deals on lenses.
ChipMcD
Well-known
I bought this lens on the strength of the 38mm f4.5 Biogon on my Hasselblad SWC, which is an oddball camera, but that instantly became my favorite. The experience with the 'blad steered me toward the f4.5 over the f2.8, and the lower price was a nice bonus. I haven't used the 21mm a lot yet, but it definitely has the same lack of distortion, if you hold it level, that the 38mm has on the 'blad. It seems very sharp too. In normal pictorial use, I don't notice the vignetting, but I'm sure its baked in. Hard to go wrong with the 21 f4.5, I think, but I haven't had the pleasure of comparing it to the 3.8 SA, and the more modern Leica 21s are out of reach for now.
Tom A
RFF Sponsor
The concept of the 21f4.5 C Biogon was an improved version of the classic Contax mount 21f4.5 from the 50's - and a 35mm lens that did emulate the quality of the 38;4.5 Biogon in 120 in lack of distorsion.
I rarely regret selling or trading something off - but when i dumped my Hasselblad kit in the early 60's (stopped doing commercial photography in toxic environments) - held one of my SWC's in my hand "Should I keep just one?). Sanity prevailed and I sold it too - I know full well my penchant for aquiring more stuff once I have s system of any kind.
Still miss it though - the 120 negs from a SWC are a thing of beauty - but so are the 35 mm negs from the 21f4.5 - and my back is not complaining as much.
I rarely regret selling or trading something off - but when i dumped my Hasselblad kit in the early 60's (stopped doing commercial photography in toxic environments) - held one of my SWC's in my hand "Should I keep just one?). Sanity prevailed and I sold it too - I know full well my penchant for aquiring more stuff once I have s system of any kind.
Still miss it though - the 120 negs from a SWC are a thing of beauty - but so are the 35 mm negs from the 21f4.5 - and my back is not complaining as much.
Tim Gray
Well-known
I was actually drawn to this lens by means of the SWC. I bought an SWC earlier this year and used it for a couple months. Awesome camera, awesome negatives. I just realized I would be much happier with an equivalent lens on my M. I sold it and the 21/4.5 turned up used the first day I seriously started to look for one. I REALLY like this lens.
leicashot
Well-known
Whats the deal with this lens on the M9. I've read on this forum that it's not 100% compatible. Is there truth to this statement?