[Leica] Thoughts on the new Zeiss lenses

[jls at runbox.com (Jeffery Smith)]

Although I've never done a valid blind study, Zeiss glass and Leica
glass seem to give two different kinds of results. When I think of
Leica, I think of excellent resolution with a bit less color saturation
or contrast. Zeiss seems to give me the opposite results, i.e., nice
saturated colors without quite the pinpoint resolution of Leica. As a
result, I tend to shoot color with Zeiss (and Konica) and B&W with Leica
(and Cosina). So it may not just be more of the same.

Jeffery Smith
New Orleans, LA
http://www.400tx.com



-----Original Message-----
From: lug-bounces+jls=runbox.com@leica-users.org
[mailto:lug-bounces+jls=runbox.com@leica-users.org] On Behalf Of Don
Dory
Sent: Thursday, April 07, 2005 8:30 PM
To: lug@leica-users.org
Subject: [Leica] Thoughts on the new Zeiss lenses

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