ZM Biogon f2 35mm perfect 35mm RF lens? Show your examples

The ZM 35 2.0. There was a bullfrog and koi in the water.
Really interesting. Thank you.

There aren’t really any other out-of-focus areas in this thread that look like that. The way it varies with aperture, focus distance and subject is quite amazing.
 
Last edited:
Excellent shots here, but how do you all manage the Biogon's tendency to flare? Can't imagine that everyone's using it with a lens hood, or only shooting with the sun in the back..
 
I already have the 2.8 C-Biogon, but am considering getting the f2 for the days when I may need the extra stop. Can someone who owns both or has compared explain the difference in rendering or magic pixie dust between them? I absolutely love the 2.8 on color neg film, as it almost has a sort of baked-in slide look. Does the f2 have a similar effect at comparable apertures? I assume that wide open would be a little less intense, which is ok.
 
Regarding flare. I guess I've never had an issue with it. But I do always have a hood on my lens. I have both the circular Zeiss hood and a wonderful 3d printed rectangular one. Works really well and looks nice. I think I got it on the Shapeways site.
 
Excellent shots here, but how do you all manage the Biogon's tendency to flare? Can't imagine that everyone's using it with a lens hood, or only shooting with the sun in the back..
All the Zeiss ZM lenses let you think that they hardly flare at all until you get reflections off the chrome hood bayonet and then it flares like crazy. Some people like to photograph at just the ‘wrong’ angle and get flare all the time. Get a tahusa.co lens hood that covers the bayonet and flare goes about as low as it can go for a 35mm format lens unless there is something wrong with your copy.
 
All the Zeiss ZM lenses let you think that they hardly flare at all until you get reflections off the chrome hood bayonet and then it flares like crazy. Some people like to photograph at just the ‘wrong’ angle and get flare all the time. Get a tahusa.co lens hood that covers the bayonet and flare goes about as low as it can go for a 35mm format lens unless there is something wrong with your copy.
Good point.. Considering my shooting style, the chrome ring on the front might be the issue. I don't think there's anything wrong with the glass itself; if I don't shoot against the light, it does a splendid job.
 
The 35/2 Biogon was my second rangefinder lens. I purchased it in 2006 (back when they were black enamel painted) and mostly liked the image output. Unfortunately, my copy was all sorts of fakakte; the focus throw was lumpy and awkward. I lived with that for 10 years before deciding to have it serviced. It was waaay outside of warranty and was apparently non-repairable, but Zeiss/Cosina did a decent-ish thing and only charged me a few hundred buck to replace the entire lens (now black anodized). By that point, I'd decided that there were other options that held my interest longer, so I sold it and moved on.

The wide-open performance is characterful (but not entirely in a way that I like), but stopped down to 2.8 it calms down. I like that the lens is a good balance of sharpness and on b&w, favors darker mid-tones. Today though, there are many options that surpass the old Zeiss, not least of which is the Voigltander 35/2 Ultron (which has a similar balance of sharpness and tonal rendering).

These are from 2006/2007...all wide-open
JHF01434 by Jim Fischer, on Flickr
Zeiss Ikon ZM, Zeiss 35mm f/2 Biogon ZM, Fortepan 100, T-Max Developer

JHF01516 by Jim Fischer, on Flickr
Zeiss Ikon ZM, Zeiss 35mm f/2 Biogon ZM, AGFA APX 100, D-76

JHF01489 by Jim Fischer, on Flickr
Zeiss Ikon ZM, Zeiss 35mm f/2 Biogon ZM, Ilford Delta 400, D-76
 
Last edited:

Thread viewers

Back
Top Bottom