Archived posting to the Leica Users Group, 2005/04/04

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

Subject: [Leica] Re: [CVUG] Zeiss Biogon T 35mm F2
From: mark at rabinergroup.com (Mark Rabiner)
Date: Mon Apr 4 22:21:37 2005

On 4/2/05 8:06 PM, "Karen Nakamura" <mail@gpsy.com> typed:

> 
> At 4:11 PM -0800 05.4.2, Philip Kwong wrote:
>> Here's a review of the 35mm F2
>> http://dc.watch.impress.co.jp/cda/review/2005/03/28/1240.html
>> 
> 
> I've posted a very rough abbreviated translation of the main points on my
> blog:
> 
> http://www.photoethnography.com/blog/archives/2005/04/link_carl_zeis.html
> 
> 
> It's a very very very lengthy review, so I couldn't do everything.
> 
> 
> Karen Nakamura


Not to not let Biogons be Biogons but what the heck really is a Biogon?
It's been suggested on some website I just goggled that the word has come to
be meaningless.
Used to have meaning.
Now no longer does.

It's come to mean a wide angle lens which protrudes back more into the
camera body than other lenses normally do..
But not necessary a true non retrofocus wide angle lens.
Is this Biogon 35mm F2 a retrofocal design or not?

The Distagon a retrofocal wide angel design not protruding far back into the
body. And so on.

I'm under an impression that I think is probably wrong.
Here is is:
In rangefinder photography we have a wide angle advantage because we can use
true wide angle lenses. Lens which are not just teles turned upside down and
put under intense computer scrutiny.

But with the M6 we've now a meter in the camera. (with the M5 that is)
And those lenses cant just go right back to the film plan anymore.
They have to make room for the meter's path.

But I'ts my understanding which I now question that this is relative.
That it can still protrude back further than the glass made for SLR's
typically do, with out the mirrors locked up that is.

Is that right?
I can easily see how it might not be.
To retrofocus or not to retrofocus. That is the question.

Is there such a thing as a lens which is not strictly retro but is more so
than another lens is? Like our 24 ASPH for instance?
Or are they either retro or not retro. And there is no sliding scale.

The new Biogon looses two whole stops in the corners.
I find that immensely gratifying. Why?
Because it suggests that this really is a non retrofocus wide angel lens.

And if it is retrofocus I'd consider buying it.
Seeing how it tests out against my current ASPH Summicron.
And conceivably getting rid of the Summicron if it tests out like I think it
might. 
In other words. "trade in" the ASPH Summicron for the Biogon.

But we'll see.

Symmetrical design does not suggest "Biogon" to me.

Or it would be NogoiB.

Mark Rabiner
Photography
Portland Oregon
http://rabinergroup.com/





=========================================================
To Unsubscribe: Send email to leica-request@freelists.org with 'unsubscribe'
in the Subject field. The acknowledgment that you then receive MUST be
replied to per instructions. You may also log in to the Web interface to
unsubscribe.


Mark Rabiner
Photography
Portland Oregon
http://rabinergroup.com/





Replies: Reply from miki at arbos.net (MIKIRO) ([Leica] Re: [CVUG] Zeiss Biogon T 35mm F2)