[Leica] Zeiss Wide Angle 35mm f/2 Biogon T* ZM

[bamboozld at gmail.com (K Landdeck)]

Wendy,

Yeah, it shouldn't be controversial.  You asked for opinions on an m- 
mount lens and got a range of impressions and advice from different  
people, which you can use or disregard as you see fit.  That's how  
it's supposed to work, anyway.  Of course, everyone's criteria or  
calculus for making decisions like this is different (for some it's  
cost, for others a specific aspect of image quality, for others  
ergonomics, etc., etc.), so I trust all the substantive responses are  
written merely in the spirit of providing you with information about  
our experiences in actual use, rather than some foregone conclusion  
(based on prejudices, assumptions, and untested general principles)  
that is baby-fed to you.

My strongly worded post was not due to your query, nor the real topic,  
nor even people who have used the Biogon and hated it or have a  
different experience than mine.  (It's not a religious topic with  
me.)  I only object to the aggressive, dismissive tone Mark used  
because he assumed (wrongly) that I was new and unknowledgeable.  That  
sort of condescending, almost intimidating, tone leveled at a presumed  
newcomer is saddening and only serves to cement certain stereotypes  
about Leica users -- my post was directed solely at that attitude, not  
your question.  :)


Kevin

=============
Only connect.
=============
my photography:
http://www.flickr.com/photos/shudaizi/

bamboozld at gmail.com









On Feb 27, 2010, at 12:01 AM, Wendy Thurman wrote:

> I didn't realize this was such a controversial subject!
>
> Wendy
>
> On Sat, Feb 27, 2010 at 12:01 PM, K Landdeck <bamboozld at gmail.com>  
> wrote:
>
>> Mark,
>>
>> I have been on list for quite a while (though I don't post often as  
>> I'm
>> quite busy writing my dissertation), so no welcome necessary, but I  
>> will say
>> that attitudes such as yours are why I have almost unsubbed from  
>> this list
>> multiple times in the past year: thank you so much for your  
>> condescending
>> attitude ("warp dimension"??).
>>
>> My post was full of "Zeiss this and Zeiss that" because that's what  
>> Wendy
>> asked for.  Unlike your post (which is based on a second-hand  
>> assessment of
>> production facilities, outright speculation and comparison with  
>> equipment
>> made decades ago), I actually have used the Biogon lens extensively  
>> and have
>> used my Leica Summicron 35 ASPH extensively as well (though I  
>> haven't had it
>> as long as the Biogon).  I am speaking from experience on both  
>> sides and
>> make direct comparisons based on that experience of use, looking at  
>> the
>> RESULTS I have gotten from both lenses.  And, you will note (or  
>> would if you
>> actually read my post fully) that I acknowledged both positives and
>> negatives of the Biogon.
>>
>> You are welcome to your opinions that are based on price-prejudice  
>> and
>> absolutely no experience with the specific items in question -- I  
>> prefer to
>> actually have experience with something before I pipe in and when I  
>> do so it
>> will be my honest and balanced opinion (to the best of my  
>> abilities). :-)
>>
>> All Best,
>>
>> Kevin
>>
>> =============
>> Only connect.
>> =============
>>
>> my photography:
>> http://www.flickr.com/photos/shudaizi/
>>
>> bamboozld at gmail.com
>>
>> Welcome to the LUG Kevin, the ZM Biogon 35 a very nice lens made by
>>> the very nice largest lens company in the world located in Japan.
>>> Its a ZM lens we refer to on the LUG.
>>> It cost a thousand dollars.
>>> A Summicron cost three thousand dollars.
>>> You want to compare them straight across you think that's wise?
>>> The ZM lenses are made in the same faculty that twenty other major
>>> brand named lenes are made. Within viewing distance of each other.
>>> Your post is full of Zeiss lenses are this and  Zeiss lenses  are
>>> that. A Zeiss lens cost three thousand or more dollars and are made
>>> in Germany with high tolerances amazingly high quality control and
>>> expensive choice glass types. For a hundred years.
>>> I own a half dozen for my Hasselblad system.
>>> The feel, look and quality has no resemblance at all to the nifty
>>> cheep stuff Cosina makes for them in Japan - with the Zeiss name on
>>> it. You want to call them a Zeiss lens you're fooling nobody but
>>> yourself. In another time warp dimension can you compare something
>>> straight across which cost a three times difference. Is made to way
>>> less tolerances. Well less quality glasses. Designed for an entirely
>>> different market. You want to save money?
>>> Get a CV or ZM lens for your Leica.
>>> You want a "world glass optic" you have to pay some real Leica money
>>> for it.
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>> [Rabs]
>>> Mark William Rabiner
>>>
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>
>> _______________________________________________
>> 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