ZM lenses: usability

[vincentbenoit]

As much as the new Ikon body makes me drool, I have to admit that the ZM lenses leave me cold. I'm not questioning the image quality, which I'm sure is outstanding, but a few design choices which in my opinion compromise the usability of these lenses (in particular the 28, 35 and 50, which are the ones of interest to me):

- They're big. I value portability, so size matters. Here's how the ZM lenses compare to the equivalent Leica models in terms of barrel length:
- 50/2: Zeiss 51mm, Leica 43.5mm
- 35/2: Zeiss 54mm, Leica 34.5mm
- 28/2.8: Zeiss 51mm, Leica 41.4mm
Gosh, that Zeiss 35 is huge...

- The 1/3-stop aperture click feature is overkill IMHO. Whilst this might appeal to slide shooters, the extra clicks certainly make it more difficult to keep track of the selected aperture when keeping the eyes at the viewfinder. For my use (fast-paced B&W work, essentially) I'd rather have 1/2-stop clicks.

- The large, expensive hoods. I can't see myself using one of these, if only because of their sheer size. The T* coatings are supposed to make the ZM lenses very resistant to flare anyway, so are such large hoods really required? It'd be nice if smaller hoods were available aside the full-size ones, à la Voigtländer.

- The chrome finish of hood mount bothers me. When not using the hood (as I'd be tempted to do), the shiny metal is sure to attract attention.

Whaddyathink?

Cheers
Vincent

 

[Paul T.]

Are you sure you've quoted correct measurements? Zeiss's quoted measurements include the parts enclosed within the body. Check the cosina site for conventional measurements so you can compare like with like. And, er, have you seen these lenses? Because the 50mms look pretty identical in size to me. THe wide angles are larger - this could be a function of the fact that they're optimised for digital sensors, so that the light rays should hit the sensor at a more acute angle, and give less vignetting. Look at Putts' site for more on this.

 

[Huck Finn]

Vincent, your comparison of lens dimensions is not accurate. Leica & Zeiss measure their lenses differently. Leica measures their lenses without the lens mount, i.e. only the length of the lens that protrudes beyond the camera body. Zeiss measures their lenses with the lens mount included. You can find the Zeiss lens lengths measured the same way as Leica's at www.cosina.co.jp on the Zeiss pages. I know that it's confusing. Here is the comparison of the 3 lenses you're interested in:

- 50/2: Zeiss 43.5 mm, Leica 43.5 mm
- 35/2: Zeiss 43.3 mm, Leica 34.5 mm
- 28/2.8 Zeiss 37.7 mm, Leica 41.4 mm

As you can see, the 50s are the same size, the Leica 35 is much smaller, the Zeiss 28 is a little smaller. Actually, none of these lenses are big. All are much smaller than SLR lenses. The Leica 35 Summicron is marvellously compact, but the Zeis 35 is the same as the 50 Summicron - certainly not huge.


I agree with you about the hoods; I don't see why they'd really be necessary, given the coatings. Regarding price, fortunately there are generic alternatives that are much cheaper even if anyone does want a hood.

people have used completely chrome lenses for generations without attracting undue attention, so I don't see why a little finish on the perimeter of front element should be a factor.

 

[vincentbenoit]

Thanks for pointing my mistake re lens dimensions. I misinterpreted the numbers I got from the zeissikon website. Admittedly I haven't actually seen any of the ZM lenses yet.

As for the chrome finish, I just don't like shiny things... But you're right, it's no big deal.

 

[aizan]

if you don't use hoods, at least use a gooood filter for protection. i doubt you have to worry about the chrome nose. 1/3 stops are nice for slides and digital. they're fine for negs, too....

 

[Huck Finn]

Thanks for pointing my mistake re lens dimensions. I misinterpreted the numbers I got from the zeissikon website. Admittedly I haven't actually seen any of the ZM lenses yet.

As for the chrome finish, I just don't like shiny things... But you're right, it's no big deal.

Vincent, I had the same problem when I first saw these numbers & thought the Zeiss lenses were much bigger. I only realized that there was an issue because I had my camera with a 50 Summicron mounted on it when I went to a photo show last fall & saw the Zeiss lenses. The Zeiss 50 was the same size as my Summicron. After some research, I eventually got the explanation & the correct information.

I read somewhere that the chrome finish is a traditional touch on Zeiss lenses. I don't know if that's true, but it may be the explanation. Funny thing is that Cosina used the same finish on the CV 40 Nokton for some reason.

Cheers,
Huck

 

[sockeyed]

Here's a discussion about how the Voigtlander hoods fit on the Zeiss lenses:
http://www.rangefinderforum.com/forums/showthread.php?t=9502

They are 1/2 the price, and it sounds like they're compatible.

 

[peter_n]

Usability? You forgot the nobby thing on the focus ring.

 

[RObert Budding]

None of these lenses are big compared to my medium format lenses!

As for 1/3 stop clicks - I'm used to no clicks on my 50 year old Zeiss lenses. Pure analog aperture!

Robert

 

[sgy1962]

My qualm with the Zeiss lenses are their speed. With rangefinder photography (i.e., available light) I want at least an F/2, and many of their lenses have a max. aperture of 2.8.

 

[peter_n]

I would only go for a fast lens to use it wide open for the DOF effect. Just bump up the speed of your film and f2.8 should be fine. 400ASA films are really excellent these days and Neopan 1600 is fantastic.

 

[rover]

Personally, I will hold my opinion until I own or use one of the Zeiss lenses. For instance, I love my 35 Summicron, optically it is supreme, but ergonomically it is poorly designed, and quality wise, it is held together by glue. By no means an example of "superior Leica build quality."

Nobody is perfect.

 

[peter_n]

What do you find ergonomically poor about the 35 Summicron? Just curious.

 

[rover]

The lens is too small and the lever is too big between the camera and hood. With the hood on it it is no smaller than anyother lens. It is a personal opinion, but I actually like a bigger lens. I liked the Ultron, and have mounted a ZI 35 on my camera and liked that. The focusing "hump" may seem strange, but I found it to be a postive modification of a big lever. I actually like the small "sticks" on the small CV lenses too. Again, just my opinion.

 

[Photar]

quality wise, it is held together by glue

Could you elaborate on this? This lens is on my wish list. You don't mean that literally, do you?

 

[rover]

Unfortunately, yes glue.

That said, let me say again that it is a marvelous lens optically. That is why I have it. There are plenty of post about this, see the second to last post on this recent thread at Photo.net for a good quick explanation of the problem.

http://www.photo.net/bboard/q-and-a-fetch-msg?msg_id=00D8MV

My lens had this condition when I got it and it was repaired for about $30. The lens elements were aligned and there was no need for any other service to it. Unfortunately, the only fix is to re-glue it. The seal of the glue is broken by the placing and removing of filters and the hood. You just have to be careful when doing these things. Mine is the 4th version "King-o-Bokeh" 35 Summicron. Apparently the change of construction started with this lens and has continued with the current 35 Summicron and Summilux.

I would never say not to buy these lenses because of this. Just be aware of it and ask when shopping.

 

[Photar]

Thank you, rover. I was not aware of this problem.