[Leica] Thoughts on the new Zeiss lenses

[scott at adrenaline.com (Scott McLoughlin)]

I don't know. There aren't a whole lot of well written, in depth
reviews handy around on the web. As these emerge, the Zeiss
lenses may well be attractive alternatives (look, price, or quality
depending on the lens) to the current Leica and CV offerings.

We'll see.

Yes, I don't get the 85.  Maybe the exotic wides can carry a
premium, but to me, it's just too darned pricey for a short
tele.

Scott

Don Dory wrote:

>On the one hand, I agree that the introduction of more choice to the M
>system will benefit us all.  Competition should make various suppliers
>rethink business as usual, hopefully thinking through the entire process
>to find a way to make a better product at a better price.
>
>However, I find the interest in the new 50, 35, 28, 25 and 21 to be
>fairly amusing.  All five of those focal lengths have some very nice
>selections available both new and used.  I don't think anybody is
>concerned about the quality of their Summicron latest generation, the 35
>ASPH, the 24 Elmarit or the 21ASPH.  Then you have the entrants from
>Konica, Cosina, Rollei, and others: all of which receive very high marks
>for quality and price.
>
>Comparing new, the 21 Biogon might be of interest if it is the same
>quality as the 21 in the Contax SLR range.  In that formulation it is of
>very high quality and is quite a bit cheaper.
>
>Now, what about the 85?  Why on earth would anyone be greatly interested
>in this lens?  Anybody not satisfied with the sharpness of their 90 APO?
>OK, you want a little more skin friendliness, try the 90 Elmarit, or the
>Cosina 75, or a 85 Nikkor, or a 90 pre ASPH Summicron, or the Konica,
>or...  My major point is that this focal length is full of some very
>nice lenses, all of which are less expensive new, and a lot less
>expensive used.
>
>The 15mm could be of great interest to someone who needs a really wide
>angle lens of the highest quality.  The 15mm Cosina lens is pretty good,
>but a little slow with 5.6 being the best aperture from a quality
>standpoint.  But, drop back and pick up a Pentax 15mm which is extremely
>similar to the prior Zeiss 15 and can be had for $1200-1300. Heck, the
>Pentax will even fit on a pretty fine digital body that together costs
>less than the Zeiss lens all by itself.  This bodes for a really rare
>lens that is only purchased by a few hundred pro's or really dedicated
>amateurs.
>
>So, I guess the major part of the line up is the usual great Zeiss
>quality without any wow factor.  Think about the 50 1.5 Sonnar in 1935,
>WOW!  What about the 21 Biogon in about 1953(Marc will provide the exact
>date), that was an earthshaking lens.  The 85 1.4 in the late 60's was a
>revelation to the Japanese who had taken over the photographic industry.
>Think about the 18mm in the same period as the 85mm, this was a
>statement of superior design ability.
>
>Another 35mm F2 lens, zzzzzzzzz.  Oh boy, a really good 50mm F2 lens,
>pretty much indistinguishable from about six other current lenses on the
>market.  That will put me to sleep, and I love the 50mm focal length.
>
>Now, a digital 1.3 crop body from Zeiss that uses the M mount, that will
>get me digging into the "I hope SWAMBO doesn't find out about this"
>fund.
>
>0.02
>Don
>dorysrus@mindspring.com
>
>
>_______________________________________________
>Leica Users Group.
>See http://leica-users.org/mailman/listinfo/lug for more information
>  
>