Archived posting to the Leica Users Group, 2010/02/26

[Author Prev] [Author Next] [Thread Prev] [Thread Next] [Author Index] [Topic Index] [Home] [Search]

Subject: [Leica] Zeiss Wide Angle 35mm f/2 Biogon T* ZM
From: thurmanphoto at gmail.com (Wendy Thurman)
Date: Sat, 27 Feb 2010 10:18:16 +0430
References: <f681deda1002262059p49eb4aaga0091f77e3b54a5@mail.gmail.com> <4B83F5AF-442D-43C3-A42A-1B6C4FD92D73@gmail.com> <b530ac231002262136x383d7245n405f6dc763b16b8b@mail.gmail.com>

Thanks to all for the comments.  The Zeiss is a front-runner for me; I'll
see if it's doable around tax-refund time.  While I would love to have the
Leica counterpart, the 50 lux wounded the bank account :)

Wendy

On Sat, Feb 27, 2010 at 10:06 AM, Daniel Tan <taniel.dan at gmail.com> wrote:

> I've got a 2/35 Biogon (and a 35 UC Hexanon).
> The Biogon's centre might not be quite as sharp as the cron asph, but has
> better edge sharpness. Bokeh is fine.
>
> I do have two gripes with the Biogon though
> 1) It's big for a 2/35 lens. It's only a tiny bit shorter than my 50
> Millenium Lux and 50 MHexanon, though it's not as heavy nor has as large a
> diameter as the two.
> 2) Build quality isn't that great. Mine has developed some slack in the
> focusing helicoid. I have a feeling this can be corrected though. My 2/50
> Planar M didn't have this issue, but I feel that the build quality in some
> ways isn't even as good as some of the voigtl?nders...
>
> On the plus side, it has 1/3 stop aperture d?tentes. Also I prefer the
> character of the pictures that come out of it.
>
> :Dan
>
>
>
> On 27 February 2010 15:20, Jefffery Smith <jsmith342 at gmail.com> wrote:
>
> > It is a very good lens but I don't have any sample pictures I can put my
> > hand on at the moment. I don't think you would be disappointed. My
> feelings
> > are that Zeiss has never really produced a bad lens, and the recent
> M-mount
> > lenses are all very high quality. There are some focusing isuues with the
> > 50/1.5 Sonnar, but the others are very high quality. And there isn't much
> > out there to compete with it now that Konica is not longer in business
> and
> > producing the 35/2 Hexanon. The 35/2.5 M Skopar (Voigtlander) is "nice"
> and
> > the 35/1.7 Ultron (Voigtlander) is better, but the Zeiss is better in
> build
> > quality than the 35/1.7.
> >
> > My gut feeling is that they rank in this order:
> > 35/2 Summicron (tops)
> > 35/2 Biogon and 35/2 Hexaonon - tied
> > 35/1.7 Ultron
> > 35/2.5 Skopar
> >
> > And if you want to play with fire,
> >
> > 35/1.2 Nokton (it's big, it's heavy, and it can be finicky, but it's
> fast!)
> >
> > Jeffery
> >
> >
> > On Feb 26, 2010, at 10:59 PM, Wendy Thurman wrote:
> >
> > > I'm not necessarily in the lens market; I feel I should stick with the
> 50
> > > lux I have as I learn the Leica system.  One of these days I'll
> want/need
> > a
> > > wider lens.  While of course a Leica 35 cron is, well, a Leica, I would
> > > appreciate opinions or experiences any of you may have with this lens.
> >  It's
> > > affordably priced and appears to be generally well-regarded.
> > >
> > > Thanks,
> > >
> > > Wendy
> > >
> > > _______________________________________________
> > > Leica Users Group.
> > > See http://leica-users.org/mailman/listinfo/lug for more information
> >
> >
> > _______________________________________________
> > Leica Users Group.
> > See http://leica-users.org/mailman/listinfo/lug for more information
> >
>
> _______________________________________________
> Leica Users Group.
> See http://leica-users.org/mailman/listinfo/lug for more information
>


Replies: Reply from sonc.hegr at gmail.com (Sonny Carter) ([Leica] Zeiss Wide Angle 35mm f/2 Biogon T* ZM)
In reply to: Message from thurmanphoto at gmail.com (Wendy Thurman) ([Leica] Zeiss Wide Angle 35mm f/2 Biogon T* ZM)
Message from jsmith342 at gmail.com (Jefffery Smith) ([Leica] Zeiss Wide Angle 35mm f/2 Biogon T* ZM)
Message from taniel.dan at gmail.com (Daniel Tan) ([Leica] Zeiss Wide Angle 35mm f/2 Biogon T* ZM)