Is the title Clickbait? Well, maybe a little bit. Voigtlander is on a hot streak, Leica is always good (but at a price few can afford) and these slightly older Zeiss lenses are still quite good. I wanted to make a video talking about my Zeiss ZM lenses that I own. I think these still bring a very good value to M-mount community and can be a great deal. Voigtlander seems to be the company that is pushing the newest and creative lens designs, and are a worthy consideration for someone buying today. Zeiss lenses were a level above Voigtlander especially in the decade from 2005-2015; but in the past several years, Voigtlander has released newly designed lenses with special aspherical glass and vastly improved manufacturing tolarances. When comparing any of the Zeiss lenses to their Leica equivalent, the Zeiss do quite well, and at about 1/3 of the price, they are great values for the money. I am very happy with the kit that I have assembled and show here. There is a different design physiology that went into the Zeiss lenses, mostly of perfecting historical lower-element designs without as much focus on aspherical and special glass use as the most current Voigtlanders. These days we all seem to love just looking at test charts, but that isn't what really matters in real world use. If you want more traditional designs made with modern glass, coatings, and manufacturing processes, then the Zeiss are hard to beat. I do personally prescribe to the idea that lower-element lenses, 5, 6, 8 pieces of glass in a lens give you an end result that is subtly different from modern zoom lenses or designs with 15 or 20 elements in the lens design. I only wish that Zeiss would put more effort into expanding and continuing to develop new lenses in the Leica M-Mount.
I would like to update this by sharing that I bought my first lens in about four years; the Voigtlander 28mm f/1.5, and I like it quite a bit so far. Negatives look good, but haven’t started any scanning yet to do a side-by-side comparison with the underrated Zeiss 28mm f/2.8.
I'm sorry but your video is SUCH a waste of time. Who cares about why you like that ergonomic feature or that other one? Your title says "why Zeiss GLASS" so you should compare lenses of similar focal length from both brands and show RESULTS. In top of that you admit to doing it for clickbait... just stop being annoying mate.
@@chat_rose thank you for your feedback. I’ll admit I’m a pretty low effort channel, especially in comparison to the channels that do this as a full time job.
Yes, a well known fact for decades, since the Carl Zeiss "Classic" Line for Canon EF and Nikon F Mount, also Pentax K and M42 Bajonett Mount since 2005. Nothing new. But the Zeiss Lenses are made by Cosina according to Zeiss specification, Cosina only produces them. Designed by Zeiss, Oberkochen - Germany.
Yes, manufactured, not engineered and designed, only manufactured. Everyone outsources manufacturing, because it's cheaper. You see it with phones, cars, laptops, clothes, jewelry and even food and drinks... Everyone pays someone else to manufacture products for them. It's way, way cheaper than buying twenty half a million dollar CNC machines and then paying for materials and manufacturing all the parts and components yourself - and then doing the assembly as well. Zeiss engineers and designs a lens, gives the blueprints for XYZ lens parts, to the XYZ factory and then that XYZ factory makes these XYZ lens parts for Zeiss and sends the manufactured parts back to Zeiss where the lenses are then assembled. Simple as that. They manufacture the lens parts under a contract, by Zeiss quality standards and with Zeiss approved materials. (Also, the actual glass elements in the lenses are made by Zeiss themselves, they don't outsource glass manufacturing.)
@@nogerboher5266 ZM lenses are completely manufactured by Cosina in Japan, Zeiss no longer developing ZM lenses. Voigtlander does APO Lanthar and others. Zeiss stop manufacturing some lenses and it has been reported that Zeiss will drop ZM line lenses altogether.
@@janfrosty3392 Yes, manufactured by Cosina - it's called outsourcing, everyone does it. Clothing companies do it, food and drink companies do it, car companies do it, tech companies do it, hell, even Coca-Cola doesn't make their own bottles. Almost everyone outsources the manufacturing process because paying someone chump change to manufacture a part or something for you, is cheaper than buying 20-30 CNC machines that cost upwards of 700,000 EUR/USD - especially if you look at long term finances. If you engineer and design a house, then choose the materials that will be used to build it and then give someone blueprints and have them to build it for you to save money on machining and tooling, that doesn't mean they engineered and designed the house, that just means you had them build it for you. Same with Zeiss lenses. Same with Nikon, Canon, Hasselblad, Fuji, Panasonic and Leica image sensors - Sony build most of the sensors on the market - that doesn't mean the sensor is a Sony sensor - it's not - it's only manufactured and assembled by Sony, the sensor and all the tech that comes with it, was all engineered, invented and designed by Nikon, Canon, Fuji or whoever, they just had Sony to build it for them. It's not that hard to understand... Even I outsource grinding of air pressure tools, because I would rather pay 15,000 EUR for a 500 tool batch, than have to buy 6 Okuma 5 axis CNC machines for nearly a million EUR per machine... It would take me over 20 years before we turned that huge of an investment into profit.
The recent voigtlander lenses are just pure gold. Take the 50mm f1.5 nokton ii, it performs almost as good as the summilux asph, but smaller even than the sonnar. Also the 35 ultron v2, small as the Zeiss 2.8, comparable to the Leica summicron asph.
I agree. If I was just getting into the market today, I would strongly consider and likely buy the new 28mm f/2, 35mm f/2, and 50mm f/1.5II. The only reason I am not going to buy those lenses anytime soon is because: what I have works, and I am trying to stop buying anything other than film and developing chemicals.
Nice overview, thanks. The exposure chart on the camera is also an interesting and practical approach! Seems to be a great way to save the need for a light meter while still maintaining a more accurate settings for the yellow filters and as the sunny 16, especially if you prefer a more hands-on and intuitive photography experience.
The Zeiss ZM 28mm 2.8 Biogon is my favorite lens ever. I prefer it over my Leica 24 Elmarit ASPH and 35 Summicron ASPH. The Zeiss 21mm 2.8 is also an absolutely incredible lens.
I am glad that you are another supporter of the Zeiss 28mm f/2.8. Lots of people like to knock it because of its test charts - and I was almost convinced that I needed the new Voigtlander 28mm f/2 - but I have several prints on my wall made with the Zeiss 28mm lens, and it just produces nice, beautiful images.
I agree with flaring on Leica lenses. My 28mm Elmarit is flaring like crazy. It happens in at least one photo per roll, even with the lens hood. Without the lens hood, it affects a good quarter or so of the photos.
I’ve owned and used the 50/f2 and the 50/f1.5, and both were quite impressive, but where Zeiss really shines is in the wide angles. In that range I’ve owned and used the 35/f2, the 21/f2.8 and the 18/f4. These three are as good as the Leica equivalents, and the 18/f4 was better than the Leica, and more fun to use. The 18 is rectilinear, which means that the distortion is very low, and the illumination is even with minimal vignetting. Unfortunately Zeiss has discontinued the 18mm. The Zeiss 18mm optical finder is spectacularly clear and bright, and often found in combination with the lens. I own both the Leica and Zeiss finders at 21mm and the Zeiss is much better.
Nice video! I am a DSLR user and I love Zeiss lenses. My Planar T* 1.4/50 ZE is almost permanently mounted on my Canon. In terms of image quality and character Zeiss is unparalleled! Though modern AF lenses are sharper wide open (specially L series or Sigma’s Art) the color rendition and the bokeh drawing are much better on Planar.
I have most all the Zeiss primes for EF mount. The 50 1.4 suffers from the same issues as the canon 1.4- get the Milvus 1.4! I keep the 50 Makro planar as well.
I tested probably a dozen 50mm lenses number of years ago, including the Sigma Art, Tamron 45, converted Rokkor MC 1.2, both Zeiss, and all Canon offerings at the time. As I previously wrote, the older Zeiss 1.4 wasn’t good- when close-focused within 10’ or so, the bokeh was horrid.
I built a similar lens package over the same time period and echo your comments. I have the 21, 28, 35 and 50 ZM's. I was interested in adding the 85 but have an Elmarit-M 90 that gets so little use that I haven't bothered shuffling things around any more. I'm 95% black/white with 35mm these days (color is so easy with digital and I've become lazy and impatient as I get older). I picked up a Voigtlander Nokton 40mm ƒ1.4 Classic for a CL and while it is actually quite good, it left me wishing for a bit more and I sprung for the ƒ1.2 40mm which is quite the equal of the ZM's that I have. FWIW, I've enjoyed the slightly odd Heliar 50 ƒ3.5 and it tends to get more use than my ZM and Summicron. It separates midtones so well and the negatives print so easily.
Thank you for sharing your experiences. I looked at the 21mm and 25mm Zeiss lenses, but have the Voigtlander LTM 21mm f/4 that meets all my wide angle needs. I have also only heard good things about the 50mm f/3.5. The only thing keeping me from getting it is the fact that I already have four 50mm lenses and the odd filter size. I was really looking at the Leica 90mm as well, but ultimately bought the Zeiss 85mm f/4 when I had the chance to get it new for about $700 in Japan.
I’m close. 15, 21, 28, 50 Makro, 50 1.4 milvus, 85 milvus, 100 Makro. I’m on canon bodies these days. When I had Leica, I had 2 bodies and 2 lenses fail!! How do lenses fail! I left for digital and find Zeiss optics even better.
I cannot comment of Voigtländer lenses because I have never used them. I had, however, used Zeiss lenses on my Nikon SLRs and Contax G1 rangefinders. When I bought my first Leica rangefinder (M6), the first lens I purchased for it was a 35mm f/1.4 Zeiss. I also have a 90mm f/2 Leitz and a 21mm f/1.4 Leitz for my M6. When compared at the same apertures with my 90mm f/2.8 Zeiss and 21mm f/2.8 Zeiss for my Contax rangefinder, I see little difference in image quality.
Thank you for your input. You don’t seem to be bothered by big lenses for your M6 haha. I have also only heard good things about the Zeiss lenses for the Contax rangefinder. I even considered going the route of trying to get an M-mount converted Zeiss 90mm f/2.8 lens.
At one time, I shot Zeiss 21, 28, 45, and 90mm lenses on a Contax G1 rangefinder. I was so impressed with those Zeiss lenses that when I purchased my Leica M6, the first lens I purchased for it was a Zeiss 35mm f/1.4 Distagon ZM.
I have heard so many great things about the Zeiss 35mm f/1.4 ZM and nearly bought one when I was living in Japan. However, most of my shots are f/2.8-8, so I decided that the size and weight was more than I personally wanted to carry on a regular basis. I tend to take a 2 or 3 lens kit with me when I go out to take photos.
@@ZachBie Which lenses do you take with your 35mm when you go out to take photos? My two-lens Leica M kit is the 35mm f/1.4 and the 90mm f/2. My three-lens kit is the 35mm f/1.4, 90mm f/2, and the 21mm f/1.4. On rare occasions, I will add an adapted 14mm f/2.8 Nikon as a fourth lens.
@@Narsuitus I go back and forth with which of the two 35mm Zeiss lenses I take. I have found that the 35/2 better matches my Zeiss 50/1.5; the 35/2.8 almost is too sharp or maybe higher micro contrast when images are put side-by-side with those from the 50/1.5. I am on a day trip today, and I opted to take the 35/2 as my only lens because I wanted to travel light. And I wanted the extra stop because I’m shooting 100 speed film.
Awesome review! I'm still torn between getting the Biogon 35mm 2.8 or the 2.0 - and this review didn't help! haha I have the Planar 50mm living on my M3, and I just got myself an M4-P, for which I'm looking to mount a 35mm lens on. The advantages of the 2.0 would be that it's like using the same lens (as the Planar 50mm) basically, and also getting that one stop of light, if needed. But there was a part of the review where you said it was lacking at 2.0 - and that really threw me off! haha the 35mm 2.8 looks amazing and such a joy to use as it so small. Don't know what to do!
@@matankedar7050 I have a bit of an interesting personal view of these two lenses, and I find that I use the 35mm f/2 more often overall. They are both amazing lenses, with the 35/2 having a bit more balanced rendering, and the 35/2.8 being more sharp and having higher overall contrast. I love the size of the 35/2.8, I think it is a perfect size lens on a rangefinder. The 35/2 isn’t too big, about the same exact size as the 50/2 (if you do quick-moving photography, I’d recommend getting a different color sliver/black from your 50/2 as they will be easy to confuse in the camera bag). The main reason I personally tend to grab the 35/2 is to have the extra stop for when I am shooting indoors or in evening/night. I don’t often use f/2 but I am more comfortable having with me it as a film shooter, especially when I travel. If you ever shoot on digital or know you don’t need f/2, then the 2.8 is a great lens and feels perfect on a Leica rangefinder. The 35/2.8 won’t be too sharp for your 50/2, but I did find that it was too sharp for the Zeiss 50/1.5, and photos shot at the same time and viewed next to each other didn’t balance together as well. This was a very long non-answer, in short both are great, I like the size of the 35/2.8 better, but the 35/2 is great for then the sun starts to set and I am traveling or backpacking, and/or I will likely be both indoors and outdoors.
You make a fair point, that the Leica lens I showed is not comparable to the modern version (which I personally have no interest in owning). I used this one mostly as a size comparison to show that it is smaller, but in real life use, not by a meaningful difference. Leica lenses are good, and I hope I don’t offend you if you are an owner, but I wanted to make the point in the video that there are alternatives that are just as good, and for my uses and preferences better. It is a long video so I don’t fault you if you didn’t watch the whole thing, but I did speak to Zeiss vs modern Leica lenses such as the 50mm Summicron, 35mm Summicron ASPH and 28mm Elmarit M. I like Zeiss lens hoods better and it seems for many people the Zeiss lenses are slightly more flare resistant too, which is important to me as I like to shoot with side lighting and sometimes backlighting. I also like having lenses that are a little less expensive as I take pictures in tropical, desert, and near oceans.
@@ZachBie no not at all! No offence taken and I hope I didn’t offend in any way as well. Having owning both Zeiss (both zm and zf2 for Nikon) and Leica m lenses, I can see where you are coming from for the build quality. And I whole heartily agree on the superb Zeiss build for the amount we are paying for. However, if you ever get your hands on a mint copy of, say 50 summilux asph, or even APO, I think the opinion of Zeiss being superior may change. And optically speaking, Leica modern lenses is in fact ahead of Zeiss or voigtlander at the moment. Maybe it will change in the future but for now Leicas optic certainly a leg ahead.
@@luminouswaves2640 I think it would fair to say the Zeiss 35 1.4 distagon has a claim of being better than the modern Leica summilux. check out this very in depth comparison video by thegenericphotographer ruclips.net/video/ry8RR6jJkh8/видео.html
I did a test a/b summicron 28mm M (first version) vs Biogon 28 ZM and while the biogon is excellent the summicron is even better. The rendering of summicron is outstanding, another league. I like the biogon because is not asph. but that s another story. Leica M lenses today are formidable. Some of the ZM too
I have gone through quite a few Leica, Zeiss and Voitlander lenses and at this point I’m absolutely blown away by Voitlanders APO Lanthars. I have the 35, 50 and 90 and I don’t think I have ever used sharper more beautiful glass at almost any price. While I have the Lanthars for my M bodies I tried them out on my RED Raptor 8k with my Aivascope 1.75x anamorphic front. Anamorphic scopes have a way of dramatically emphasizing any imperfections, chromatic aberrations etc in a lens, especially when wide open. Even at F2 when paired with the Aivascope - zero CA - unbelievably clean from corner to corner. I’m absolutely floored with the Lanthars. I like a little character so I have my Summilux and a couple of Zeiss lenses for those occasions but honestly these Lanthars are pretty unreal.
Yes, Voigtlander’s releases since around 2019 have been truly amazing. Their APO lenses are a little big for my tastes and needs as a film shooter, but their new 28mm f/1.5 caught my eye. I am proud to say I haven’t bought a single camera related item since early 2020 and resisted all my temptations. However, the 28mm f/1.5 will likely be purchased this year during a planned Japan trip. My Zeiss 28mm lens produces beautiful photos, but struggles when shooting indoors or at night due to its slower f-stop.
Nice kit and info on ZM lenses. Though it is not fair to compare older Leica designs with relatively modern Zeiss lenses. Price apart, the vast majority of modern Leica M lenses are technically superior to Zeiss and Voigtlander, especially if you take the size into account (best performance/size ratio is what Leica M is about). Voigtlander also has several amazing lenses in the Nokton lineup (such as 35/1.2 and 21/1.4) and a few nice ultrawides you won’t find from any other manufacturer. Their latest apo 35/2 is also amazing, and better than the Biogon 35/2 in almost every respect.
...and it costs a ton more than Zeiss. The Distagon 35/1.4, Biogon 35/2, Biogon 35/2.8 are excellent as 35mm Lenses with M Mount. I don't shoot M, but i have Zeiss >3 decades, and they're also often IQ-wise better than their Leica R counterparts, and cheaper, too.
@@marcp.1752 We all know about Leica prices, unfortunately, but we are just comparing glass here. Price is out of the equation. The Biogon 35/2 is a great lens, but I can’t say excellent wide open. One of its best qualities was geometric distortion correction, which is not a problem anymore in a modern digital photography workflow. And if size is not problem, the Apo-Lanthar VM 35/2 is better than the Biogon 35/2, at the same price.
@@marcp.1752 I own a Biogon 35/2 and compared it with an Apo-Lanthar on an M240 body. The Lanthar is certainly the better lens at f/2, but if you rarely shoot wide open then the Biogon is smaller and probably cheaper to buy used. Bokeh wide open is mediocre on both lenses, but for shallow DoF I’d take a Voigtlander Nokton 35/1.2 (any version) and never look back.
@@dans.8198 I know that the APO Lanthar is quite good, but as everything into life, it comes at a cost - hereby, the size. I don't prefer clinical sharpness, nor perfection. For me, it would be someday the Ultron 35/F2 VM I or -II, if i can get it within my limits, someday. But for now, i am quite happy enough with my gear. And i am not a pixel peeper.
I use m mount glass on my SL2-S. (1) I love prime manual focus (2) size. Of my Zeiss I own the 21mm/2.8 Biogon and the 35mm/1.4 Distagon. Both superb glass.
Excellent video! I own the CZM 35/2, CZM 50/2 and a SUMMICRON-M 90/2. I used to own the ZEISS IKON but regretfully I sold it for $900 in 2014. Now that I am in a better place financially, I can't buy it anymore because it is way overprice. I recently bought a used A7 Mk.II that I will use my gems on.
That 50mm Planar is a great lens, I talked with a Leica Boutique rep because I was thinking about getting a 50 summicron and even he talked me out of it because he said that the Planar is sharper. I would like to try a leica but will prob be either a 28 or 35.
I have a v3 50 Summicron. I like my Planer over the current version Summicron because I really dislike built-in hoods that don’t lock and I believe that the Planar has slightly better flare resistance. I recently picked up a Voigtlander 28mm f/1.5 in Japan, and I am excited to start developing film and scanning negatives so I can compare them against my Zeiss 28mm f2.8 that I took with me to Hawaii last year.
Nice video. Thank you. I own the Zeiss 50/1.5, 50/2. 35/2.8. 28/2.8, and 18/4. The 18/4 is truly an outstanding wide angle. I also have a couple of Leica M lenses 50/2 & 35/2, along with a number of rather old Leica/Leitz LTM lenses, and some Voigtlander too. I need to thin them out. LOL. I've been at it for a long while now. Not sure if you are aware that Zeiss ZM lenses made in Japan are in fact made by Cosina/Voigtlander for Zeiss and to Zeiss specs.
It is my favorite 35mm lens ever. I can say that as long as f/2.8 isn’t too slow, you won’t be disappointed (keep in mind that my reference point is 35mm B&W film). I don’t know if I am going to do a full review anytime soon because of how busy my job is currently - and the amount of work it takes to make those detailed videos.
Great video. May I sugest you make a separarte video on each lens? It would be interesting to know your opinion on each with more detail, and if possible, sample images.
That’s a good idea, and if I had more time, I would like to think I would do it. However, as a film shooter it is a bit hard tracking down each time I used these lenses over the past several years. When I leave the house be it on a walk or a trip, it is kind of what I am feeling that week. Be it a 35mm or. 28mm, and if a 50mm which of the four 50mm lenses that I own. Maybe there is a parallel universe where I have more organization and will to do this.
Over all - in the grand scheme of things, it’s all a matter of taste. For my tastes I have gone all classic Leica from the 50’s and 60’s for black and white. Leica R for colour work and perhaps one day I will invest in a kit of 25, 35, 50mm Zeiss lenses for rangefinder colour work. Particularly, a good way to look at thing’s is to get a lens that serves what Leica or Zeiss DON’T cater for. That is why I also have the CV 21/4 and 35/2.5 - excellent and perfect for my Barnack Leica’s, they are just tiny and don’t get in my way.
I own or have owned these CV lenses: 21/4, 25/4, 35/2.5, 50/1.5, 75/2.5, 90/3.5. Out of those the 21/4 and 75/2.5 are my favorite. CV makes some really great lenses too.
Nice summary of the ZM lenses! Thanks for sharing. Own the CS 1.5/50 ZM as only 50mm, next to 2.4/35 & 75 Leica Summarit-M lenses for analog & digital M. IMO the CS50 performs very well, >7 years of use now. The extra lens hood is still in storage. Never need to use them because of the well T* anti reflex coating. Even prefer the more classic look of the CS50. Ergonomics of the ZM line are the same and you hate or love it, for me the later one. Leica's Summarit-M f/2.4 remakes are also superb with excuse to mechanics. Owned the same focal lengths for the f/2.5 predecessor. Never getting warm with 1.4/35 & 50 ASPH lenses even if superior in near all aspects (excl. subjective ergonomics maybe). Unfortunatelly never own a C/V lens - one day. Also good tip with the ref table at the end of your video.
Focus shift could be a non-issue on digital because you see sharpness in real time at selected aperture; there is no way to check real focus point when shooting film
I have, more or less the same collection of Zeiss m-mount lenses and I'm happy with them. You haven't mentioned the 'Zeiss wobble' problem. It happened to my 2.8/28 but I had it fixed, not by Zeiss but by a repairman in Ho Chi Minh City. Cheers, OX
I was happy to see some camera shops selling and developing film in Vietnam when I traveled there in 2019 and 2020. Yes, I didn’t mention the wobble issue as I haven’t had it happen to me (I heard it is more of an issue with older Zeiss ZM lenses. I did have it with a Voigtlander 50mm f/1.5 V1 though).
@@ZachBie True, a few shops have survived the digital onslaught and Ho Chi Minh City has a small but active film scene. I bought my Zeiss gear -bodies and lenses, some 15 years ago in the US when it was all on sale. Go figure!
@@Jgheiler I’ve handled, but never really used either, but both are very good if you don’t mind the size. Though the 35mm f/1.4 Zeiss is just too big for me and I know I wouldn’t use it very much. I like the Zeiss 35mm f/2 a lot, but it is the biggest I’d want to go on a 35mm lens. I like the lack of flare and distortion and get images I am really with from f/2.8-8 at all distances. If I am shooting in low light then I use f/2, which is a little softer and less contrasty (as is common with most traditionally designed lenses). The Zeiss 35mm f/2.8 is my ideal size for a 35mm lens, but when I am traveling with film, and will be shooting in daylight, inside, and at night, I feel more confident having the extra stop. I bought the Voigtlander 28mm f/1.5 earlier this year, and at some point I will have to do a comparison of my Zeiss 28mm f/2.8 and the Voigtlander 28mm f/1.5. The Zeiss has given me some really strong and pleasing images, but I haven’t scanned any of the film I’ve developed that I shot with the Voigtlander (maybe 40 rolls) due to being busy with life and job changes.
I just realized that you might not have been talking about the Voigtlander APO 35mm f/2. For the newer and small 35mm f/2, I’ve heard that it is about just as good as the Leica 35mm f/2 ASPH, but I know it can have a structured “bokeh” sometimes, but usually not an issue. I shoot at f/4-f/8 probably 80% of the time, but as I’ve had my Zeiss 35mm f/2 for over 8 years now, I know exactly how it is going to perform, and the results with will give me.
Excellent video. I use a mixture of Canon LTM and Leica M lenses, the Zeiss is probably right in the middle of the two (only had the 35/1.4 ZM, liked it a lot)
Yep! I use the Zeiss 43mm hood on my Voigtlander 28mm f/1.5. I bought the Zeiss hoods and all the lenses except for the 35mm f/2 in Japan at a significant discount.
It's too broad a claim to make. David Osborn did a comparison between new and older Leica M and R lenses, Zeiss lenses and Voitlander 50mm lenses. Their prices ranged from about $900 to $4000. The Leica M lenses were a shade better than the rest. The R lenses were not. Then he compared three Nikkor 50mm lenses. The 50mm F1.8 AIS manual lens, the 50mm F1.4 AFD lens and the 50mm F1.8 AFS lens. Those prices varied between $200 and $400. In all three cases the Nikkors were just as good in terms of sharpness, contrast and colour transmission. So this may be disappointing to the fans of the other lenses or shock horror to people who have bought a $4000 Leica lens, but it's simply true. In the case of the Nikkors, the design was a winner when released over 40 years ago and still is today. The only difference is in coatings. Leica also produce some excellent M4/3 primes and they compare well with their own M42 lenses, but cost only a little more than the Nikkors. And guess what? Most of the Zeiss and Voightlanders are made by Cosina in Japan today, and the Leica M4/3 lenses are made by Panasonic in Japan. The day when Carl Zeiss was best with their Jena lenses have passed into history with one exception. The Zeiss lenses on the 500 series Hasselblad. But even those can be had for about $1k. With the latest CNC machines, new lenses can be made the equal or even better than the old hand ground lenses of old. And as a final note, Leica use the same technology today as the others. So whats a brand name worth as opposed to outright quality? A lot. But the images will be the same.
Great video👍 I love these Zeiss lenses. But I cannot install the original Zeiss lens hood on my Zeiss lens when there is a filter on. Is this a common problem? How to fix it? Thanks 🙏🏻
Yes, but….I haven’t uploaded any work since 2018. I was super busy from 2018-2020 and shot about 100-150+ rolls a year, which I then self-developed and scanned, and had 4”x6” prints made of all my decent and good shots (5-20 shots a roll depending on situation/event). I did sell some work to a printer, but as I haven’t heard if they released their project yet, I am going to leave it at that. Since 2020 I’ve slowed down some as work and life picked up and I currently shoot maybe 60-80 rolls a year.
@@ZachBie Respect, You put in the hours. You sound skilled with those cameras, they look a joy to use too. I used to work commercially for five yaers and now dont upload my stils work anywhere either. I might chage that once I start a new project, for now, the process is more enjoyable then the end result.
Thank you for the support. I purchased every single one of these camera lenses when I was living in Japan, except for the 35/2. Fujiya Camera is a great store in Tokyo if you ever get a chance to visit. They do tax-free for tourists, and currently, if you’re paying in US dollars the exchange rate is in your favor. Unfortunately, I don’t think they ship internationally, but I never pursued that.
@@ZachBie Very good my friend. Good to know. I lived in Okinawa for some time during my deployments. Again, great content and points. Good to know another Leica shooter. Cheers 🍻
Hi， I try to use a Zeiss Distagon 35mm, f1.4 lens on Leica M10-R , having some focusing issues , "Aliasing" is one of the problems, please help , , , , I really want to make this lens work on the M10-R , Thank you
Hey Zack! Exciting to discover your channel. I love camera gear and photography. You briefly mentioned a Voigtlander 28mm pancake as your favorite 28mm. Can you tell me the full name of that one? I'm interested. I have no 28mm M mount glass
I hope I didn’t say that haha. Voigtlander used to make a 28mm f/3.5 LTM, but I have never shot that lens. Maybe I was talking about the 28mm f/2.8 that is for Nikon F-mount? They recently rereleased that lens in a classic style lens barrel, but it should be the same optics as the lens I have. That along with the 58mm f/1.4 are my favorite lenses for my Nikon film cameras.
Different designs, but both are considered to be high quality. I haven’t shot with any ZF Zeiss lenses, but I had long considered purchasing a 35mm f/2 or a 28mm ZF lens after research showed they were good lenses. I can say that I am quite happy with the Zeiss lenses you see here. And after many hours of research, the new Voigtlander lenses look amazing, but I don’t see enough of a difference to change from what I have here. As I believe I have written elsewhere, if I was buying my first lenses today the Voigtlander 28mm f/2, 35mm f/2, and 50mm f/1.5II would be high on the list. For me smaller lenses are good, so I wouldn’t want some of the f/1.2 or APO lenses. The only lens of mine that feels a hair big is the Zeiss 35mm f/2 ZM; but the pros of the lens make it worth keeping instead of selling for the Voigtlander f/2. (Similar filter size, part of the same system/physical design, good flare resistance and sharpness throughout the frame). I’m not saying that the Voigtlander 35mm f/2 couldn’t be better in some ways, but the differences aren’t big enough for me to buy a new lens and sell an old one.
i shoot on the leica mp, mostly hp5 and fp4, i have the zeiss 28 2.8 already, but i am stuck between the 35 f/2 and the 35 2.8, there isnt a lot information on these lenses and i was wondering if you can give me your opinion about both of these in detail. what are the benefits and cons of both?
I use them both. It also depends on which other lens(es) you are using it with. I took a trip with the 50mm f/1.5 Zeiss and the 35mm f/2.8. The 35mm f/2.8 was so much sharper and a bit more contrasty that I didn’t feel the images from the two lenses always worked together in a series even when they both looked great as stand alone. I often take my 35 f/2.8 if I know I will only be outside and or if I am paring it with my 50mm f/2 Zeiss. And then I take my 35mm f/2 if it is going to be paired with my 50mm f/1.5 or if I might be in lover light settings. The 35mm f/2.8 is nicer on the Leica in size and feel for me though. And that means you might take it more often. I am glad you have the 28mm f/2.8, some people say it’s a “bad” lens based off of its MTF charts. But the images it produces are wonderful. Same can be said for the 50mm f/1.5.
@@ZachBie for now i just have the 28mm. considering the 18,21 2.8 and 25 2.8 and 35 1.4. would love a 50, but if i had the 1.4, i couldnt see me using it as much. not much of a 50 guy anyways, but that doesnt mean i couldnt be convinced. 35 2.8 has more written about it, however the shooting i do mostly necessitates that extra stop. but i do love the images the 2.8 allow, i guess both will have to come along with my leicas! maybe the 2.8 will be sitting on my spare m4-2. if paring with the 28, what 35 would compliment it best? in regards to the 50’s, which one is your favorite, 50 1.5 or the 2
@@maxhernie8053 I have always found that the 35 is pretty close to 28. Based off of that alone, a different focal length might be more useful. If I only had the 28mm and really wanted a 35 and not a 50mm (a 50&35 or a 50&28 are my favorite lenses for a travel or daily 2-lens kit), then I would get the 35mm f/2 because while it is bigger, it is by no means a “big” lens comparison to most full frame lenses, and it offers more flexibility in lower light. Out of the 50mm Zeiss lenses, they are both different. I don’t find the focus shift too much of an issue with the 50mm f/1.5 on film, and I find that it just produces really pleasing lenses. I like the pair my 50mm f/1.5 with the Zeiss 28mm, and I have prints from both on my wall that I took on Hong Kong in 2018 or 2019. The Zeiss media online says the 28mm is great when paired with the 50mm f/2. The f/2 is a clean, great lens that always produces nice images, but with less of the “different” look you get with the f/1.5 when wide open or at f/2. I find 28mm to be a little wide of the type of people on public/ documentary photography I enjoy taking, but if I am doing landscape shots it is a really comfortable focal length. For people photos in a city I like 35mm, and 50mm when I want tighter framing with less subjects in the frame. I struggle to fill the frame at times with a 28mm. A cheap(er) wide lens you could look at picking up too is the Voigtlander 21mm f/4, I find that lens to be outstanding for the price when used on film. And I have the older LTM version too.
@@ZachBie Do you like the zeiss 85 f/4? How does your 85mm work with the framelines, my MP has the .72 viewfinder. would you suggest the 75 or 90mm frames?
@@maxhernie8053 I honestly have some mixed feelings about the Zeiss 85mm f/4. It is a great lens, super sharp, good contrast, fairly compact. I got it new for I think about $670 was was fair, but I sometimes just wish I went with a used Leica 90mm f/2.8 which can be picked up for about $1,100 or so. But, 85/90mm is one of my least used focal length, so maybe it was better to save the money and get something that really matches my existing kit. The issues I have are first that my camera doesn’t have frame lines. So I can’t be exact (not that a rangefinder is ever super exact with framing), and I do think at infinity you’re getting closer to the 75mm frame lines than the 90mm. Second, as someone who mainly shoots 100 film pushed to 200, f/4 can get limiting when I want to keep my shutter speed at 1/125 and above. Shade and indoors can be challenging at times.
I agree with you there. I have a 1968 50mm Summicron which matches my 1968 M4, but my two Zeiss 50’s are what I shoot with 90% of the time. I tend to like the higher contrast and better flare resistance.
The only Zeiss ZM I have bought is the Biogon ZM 1:4/21mm, and that was for its zero distortion, and corner to corner resolution. As for all of the others, .. you can have them. Leica is superior..
Each to their own. I like a lot of the Leica lenses I’ve tried in the store (35/1.4, 50APO) but for the price and on film the extra cost wasn’t worth it in my analysis.
We all start somewhere! I started with a Canon point and shoot in ~2009, then after four years got a Nikon D3200, and slowly moved up from there. You don’t need the expensive gear in this video to make great photos! I have a journalism degree, and was drawn to save for, and after I graduated, slowly buy the gear you see here. If you are interested in film photography I’d recommend a Nikon FM/FM2 with a Nikkor 50mm f/2 lens to get started.
I don't think its better, but it is certainly cheaper, perhaps because they are mostly manufactured outside of Germany. They also render differently to each other. Zeiss is more contrasty, with a cooler rendition. Leica is just as sharp if not more so, but the lower contrast balances the the rendering. Leica has the more of the oldschool look than modern Zeiss lenses.
You are right in that they are more different than better. I do find them better for my needs (price is a factor for me), and I like the Zeiss as well-rounded and flare-resistant lenses. Some Leica lenses are certainly better in some regards, but the difference on film isn’t enough for me to justify the cost. Maybe one day I will pick up the Leica 35mm Summilux, but I don’t feel comfortable committing $5-6k to a single lenses at this point in my life. I know I just wouldn’t be comfortable using and carrying it with me when I travel.
@@ZachBie Yes, I agree. The price is a crucial factor. I already had a 50mm Summicron F2 DR, so I bought a 50mm Zeiss Planar ZM for its clinical rendering. Horses for courses I guess.
35mm f/2.8 is a little smaller. This is in part due to the 43mm vs 46mm filter, and the lens hood for the 28mm is larger as I recall it is for both the 28mm and 25mm lenses.
Great question. I only shoot B&W film, and a yellow filter is considered a standard filter for controlling contrast. It will slightly darken blue light (like the sky) and help the film capture tones more similar to what the human eye see.
A little clickbait will stir the pond. Old Zeiss, Leica and Voigtlander glass was good, but there are new players today. If a lens is made by Cosina but is branded Voigtlander does this encourage Zeiss or others from having good 3rd parties make their consumer stuff? It's still okay, but what do we call it? When Mamiya started rehashing old Zeiss designs for the last of their film cameras, they just called the lenses Mamiya. They may have been improved Biogons or Planars but Mamiya was proud of its own offerings and wasn't giving in to the lore and lure of legacy. The pond has become murky.
@@anthonymiller8979 I have a feeling you are correct there. Zeiss has graduated to optics far beyond camera imagining though I think they still design some of their branded stuff. Not all though. Cosina is more than competent. I do love the old medium format Zeiss glass. It's a look on film that has my attention. Cheers!
No. It will not. The 28mm lens has a 46mm filter and the 35mm has a 43mm filter, so the diameter of the hoods are different. The 28mm hood will fit on the 50mm f/1.5 lens (both 46mm filters), and the 35mm f/2 & f/2.8 hood is the same as the 50mm f/2 hood.
It is my favorite 35mm lenses that I have used (compared to 1 Zeiss, 1 Voigtlander, and four Nikkor F-Mount lenses). I do just wish that it was one stop faster for when I travel. But I guess I do have a 35mm f/2 for that.
@@graycheng888 the 35mm f/2.8 is a smaller lens which I like, and I find that the 35mm f/2 at f/2 during day time looks a little washed out and lacking contrast. The 35mm f/2 stopped down to f/2.8 starts to sharpen up and provide more contrast, but still less micro contrast than the 35mm f/2.8. In my experience (only on 35mm B&W film) the 35mm f/2.8 is a better lens in pretty much every way, except that it doesn’t open up to f/2 - which I only need and use in low light and indoors. The next trip that I take I’ll likely bring my 35mm f/2 and 50mm f/2. So it is still a good lens, and I feel more comfortable traveling and knowing that I can shoot in lower light.
@@graycheng888 also I have found that the high contrast and sharpness of the 35mm f/2.8 doesn’t match as well when shot alongside the Zeiss 50mm f/1.5. When I took them both on a trip in 2019, And looked at final film scans side-by-side, the 35mm f/2.8 was noticeably sharper and had more contrast than the 50mm f/1.5. I don’t know if it would be noticeable to someone who wasn’t a photographer, but when traveling and creating a body of work that will be viewed together, I like my lenses to all have a somewhat similar look to them. So if I am taking the 50mm f/1.5, then the more neutral-contrast 35mm f/2 is a better match, or I also like to take the 28mm f/2.8 Zeiss ZM.
Hmmm, that’s a good question. Mine doesn’t pull them up when I have any 50mm lens on. But my 50mm frame lines are present when using a 90mm or 135mm lens. (However, my 135mm Leica lens doesn’t bring up the correct frame lines on my M3).
Too big for me, that’s the main reason. And I don’t often need f/1.4 to want to carry the heavier lens. Maybe if I had a mirrorless body I could also use it on, but for a film M, I’d got Voigtlander if I wanted a 35mm f1.4 (and I almost did buy the ver II of the lens, but decided more gear isn’t needed).
Good video. Personally, for the most part, I think Leica lenses are overrated. I've had 3 different versions of the Summicron 35mm, and was not impressed by any of them. Maybe I just had bad copies? I don't know. I am impressed by the Summicron 40mm though. I just ordered the Zeiss 35mm 2.8 actually, and I'm very much looking forward to receiving it.
Thank you for your input. I agree with you on your Leica lens viewpoint. The film rangefinder cameras bodies are the best there is, but the competition in the modern lens market is fierce. I have been really impressed with how well the new Voigtlander lenses have performed too, especially their new 28mm f/2. When you can, please share your thoughts on the 35mm f/2.8, I will want to hear if you love it as much as I do.
@@ZachBie - Will do. Voigtlander makes some great glass too. I have their 40mm F2 pancake for my Nikon F3 and DF. Amazing glass! I'd like to get the Voigtlander 50mm 1.5 MC lens, but that will have to wait for now. I'll be using the Zeiss 35mm 2.8 on my film body Leica MP. I agree with you on the Leica film bodies.
@@BeingWolfy despite having owned probably 25-35 Nikkor film lenses, my favorites and most used are the Voigtlander 28mm f/2.8, 40mm f/2 and all time favorite F-mount lens is the 58mm f/1.4. I did a 15-day trip to Vietnam with a FM3a and 28mm f/2.8, 58mm f/1.4, and a Nikon Series E 100mm f/2.8 (brought as it is the lightest weight short tele). I then ditched the 100mm as the image quality didn’t match the two Voigtlander lenses, and took the 28mm and 58mm lenses on a month long SE Asia trip the next year. I’m trying to resist the urge to buy the new Voigtlander 28mm f/2, 35mm f/2 and 50mm f/1.5 M-mount lenses. What I have here is a well rounded kit and I have to tell myself a new lens wouldn’t improve my photography at all.
@@ZachBie - I'll have to look into the Voigtlander 28mm 2.8. I have the Nikkor 28mm 3.5 which I like. I've been wanting to try the fm3a for quite some time, but I'm a left eye shooter and concerned about having to have the film winder pulled out in order for the meter to work. I'm Afraid it will stick out too much and my forehead will get in the way of me seeing well through the virefinder. I haven't ever seen one in person to try it.
@@BeingWolfy the Voigtlander 28mm is really hard to find now as it was discontinued several years ago. I think it never caught on as there were so many cheap Nikkor lenses at the time. I have owned the Nikkor 28mm f/2.8 but found it weak at infinity when doing landscapes, and I have two 28mm f/2 which are good and have a classic rendering, but bigger, heavier, and less sharp than the Voigtlander. I checked, and I actually took my 28mm f/2 Nikkor on my first Vietnam trip, and not the Voigtlander. I have a Nikon FM, FM2N, and FM3a, and paid $45, $250, $500 respectively. The FM3a is my favorite for a few small reasons. It has match-needle metering which is my favorite for quasi zone system metering (but hard to see in low light), it has TTL flash metering with the SB-600 which is great for events, and it has the A Mode which I just use for lowlight landscapes on a tripod with good results. The FM2N is the best value if you don’t need the above.
Schneider 90mm 2.8 on a Rolleiflex 6008. Medium format always beats 35mm. Leica is still a 'miniature' camera. Ricoh Rikenon lenses are superb too. Be more inclusive.
I don’t disagree with you. My Mamiya C330 or RZ67 both take much, much better pictures. But, as someone who enjoys documentary and travel type photography the most, I accept some reduction in quality for portability and flexibility.
What lenses do you like that have with more character? I have an old Nikkor 5cm f/2 LTM lens, the Zeiss 50mm Sonnar, and some old Nikkor F-Mount lenses as my classic designs “character lenses.”
@@ZachBie character is really subjective, l lean more towards a soft painterly glow in lenses. I have too many to count, but some of my favs are. Summilux 50 pre asph, summarit 50, summaron 35s, canon 50mm 1.5 ltm is wonderful. Theres so many lenses that are clinically sharp, great contrast and colors. Zeiss does a good job of it. I find digital photography is just too perfectly clean. Maybe im old school, but i dont mind the grittiness of film and grain.
@@lelandfitz1762 fast and slow is in reference to the f-stop of the lens and how much light it can let in to expose the film, not the focal length, which is usually measured in mm like the 90mm and 28mm you noted. So my new Voigtlander 28mm f/1.5 lets in about four times the light than my Zeiss 28mm f/2.8. About one stop of light from f/1.5 to f/2, and then another stop from f/2 to f/2.8. Each stop is doubling or halving the exposure when you open up or close down the lens. Hopefully that helps some. A “fast” lens is great for shooting indoors or at night.
Haha the good old clickbait title. I would say that they are just different. The 35/1.2 is going to be better in some ways, but it is also slightly bigger and heavier than the Zeiss 35/2 (which is about the biggest I want for a 35mm M-mount lens). I have found that when I travel I like to carry a 28 and 50 or a 35 and 50 kit, and I don’t want it to be any heavier than it has to be. A film M body, a Rollei 35T, small flash, 5-8 rolls of film and I am set for the day. And I’ve learned the hard way that if I am carrying my camera kit for 12-18 hours, I really don’t want anything more that the 6lbs or so the above already weighs.
@@ZachBie You discovered something new. Obviously Zeiss lenses are excellent. But why people who are really experts in using Leica don't use Zeiss lenses ?! Thy use Leica lenses or Voightlander. Maybe they are stupid. But you are really smart. You must tell them that news :). By the way, it's not good clickbait title because in the future I'm not going to watch someone who is saying something like that :).
Zeiss does not make any of the mentioned lenses (never did).All Voigtlander and Zeiss lenses are made by Cosina in very same factory and probably by the same people.If you take latest versions of Voigtlander and Leica's they beat the crap out of these branded Zeiss lenses.The question is why would you buy Zeiss over new Voigtlander? For Leica is story pretty c!ear.
Correct, Cosina is the manufacturer of both Voigtlander and Zeiss branded lenses. The argument that I make in the video is that for the time period Zeiss lenses were first released, and from say 2005-2015, they were the true middle ground in price, built better than most of the Voigtlander lenses of the early 2000s, and (just about) matched in optical quality while still cost much, much less than Leica lenses. I say that the most recent Voigtlander (2020-2021) lenses are some of the best on the market. And they are a no-brainer if just entering the market today. Nevertheless, I am very satisfied with my Zeiss lenses, which I find to be well balanced traditional optical designs unlike the brand new ASPH Voigtlander designs. My decision making was also influenced by the fact that I bought all of my lenses except for one in Japan and they cost 2/3 ($300-400 less) than the retail in the United States.
Cosina is the manufacturer, but isn't it Zeiss who has designed the lenses? At least that was the case with Zeiss Icon ZM rangefinder camera. Zeiss designed it and Cosina just manufactured it. In a similar fashion Apple products are designed in California, USA and manufactured in China.
I’ve got to say, you are all alone in your opinion. It could be because you shoot monochrome film. There’s a history of the manufacturers here you don’t understand. Clearly the modern Voigtländer and Leica lenses are superior, both in design and glass formulas. Of the three manufacturers Zeiss went a different direction than Leica and Voigtländer. Zeiss focused on more simple designs that were lighter and more easily produced for the German war effort. Leica designs are more more complicated, harder to manufacturer, and produce and hence more expensive. Zeiss pioneered lens coatings (cheaper) in an effort to lighten their designs, and overcome their lack of sophisticated glass proprietary formulas Leica and Voigtländer had, it’s rumored Voigtländer conducted espionage against Leica to get Leica glass formulas during the war years. All Voigtländer lenses made at Cosina are made with glass billets supply by Germany, and it’s a real toss up as to the build quality between modern Voigtländer (handmade in Japan) vs Leica lenses (handmade in Germany). The only modern Zeiss ZM lens matching up to Voigtländer or Leica is the 35mm F1.4 distigon, but even that lens now under performs the new offerings from both Voigtländer and Leica. I think you went down the rabbit hole with Zeiss M lenses.
@@ZachBie The title; Zeiss M lenses are better than Voigtländer and Leica glass. Simply not true. Not in anyway, not design, not in build quality....and chromatic aberration is very much a problem with Zeiss M glass....almost a show stopper.
@@williaminbody205 I’m guessing you didn’t read the video description or watch the whole video (I don’t blame you as it ended up being quite long). I stated that the modern Voigtlander lenses are some of the most interesting lenses on the market today and that the Leica lenses are good (I don’t think very many people accuse Leica of producing bad lenses). These Zeiss lenses are in some ways just as good as Leica lenses, and for me personally have some features that I like better than Leica. The point of this video is to share some personal opinions after building a collection of Zeiss lenses and using them for the past five years. There is also the value for money. Leica lenses are sometimes better, but again a big point was for 1/3 to 1/4 of the cost of a Leica, you are getting often comparable optics.
Why do you need so many lenses ? Is that make you be a better photographer ? I try to understand. I am 71 yo and use Leica since i was 16 yo. I usually always use the same Leica 50mm f1,2 since then.
Why this is better then that. All great gear. Start making photo's and stop wasting your time on this. I have an M11 with the new summiluxes. My Friend has M9 and shoots very often better pictures 😁
Yes, all great gear. Voigtlander, Zeiss, and Leica don’t sell bad lenses, especially not in 2023. Not sure it is a waste of time though. I haven’t bought a single lens/camera/accessory since early 2020, but I have shot a couple hundred rolls of film.
LOL.......click bait title. Maybe your "lack of knowledge" is at the core of your fault. Voigtlander was a camera company way before Zeiss and Leica. People buy these type of lenses to achieve a certain "look" and obviously for the quality factor as well. I would never say one of these three lenses manufacturer is better than the other, that's just a ridiculous thing to say.
The Hexar lenses are also quite good. Their 35mm f/2 would be a good choice too. I’m not sure on the current prices though. Voigtlander also would be an excellent choice.
I read the description of your video BEFORE posting my first comment, so my criticism of Zeiss ZM lenses still stands, this isn’t just my personal criticism, my criticism is widely shared by everyone who has used a Zeiss ZM lens
You are thinking of the "housing" of the Lenses, but the Lens elements are a different story, Leica Lens elements are not always the best AND other brands do also made Lenses for Leica ! I have Voigtländer APO-Lanthar Lenses which are built like a tank AND performs outstanding in image quality at a fraction of the overprized Leica Lenses !!! Leica today are for snob and fanbois. I have Leica R Lenses which I am happy with, but todays Leica Lenses are NOT worth their price !
I'm sorry but your video is SUCH a waste of time. Who cares about why you like that ergonomic feature or that other one? Your title says "why Zeiss GLASS" so you should compare lenses of similar focal length from both brands and show RESULTS. In top of that you admit to doing it for clickbait... just stop being annoying mate.
That you for your criticism of my accent, it added a lot to this comment section. Have a wonderful rest of your day. Unfortunately I have a journalism degree and photography minor, so I really wasted years of education and mentoring from several newspaper photographers each with over 40 years of professional experience.
@@ZachBie Dear Zach B , nothing personal. Just note that Zeiss is almost two hundred years old famous German brand of optics manufacturer and as such deserves some respect. At least when pronouncing its name, which has nothing to do with accent, but rather education. At my alma mater (I'm also a journalism graduate, but nearly 50 years ago), my German professor would have killed me if I pronounced the word Zeiss like you do. However, this does not diminish the quality of the Zeiss product 😀 Have a nice day...
Is the title Clickbait? Well, maybe a little bit. Voigtlander is on a hot streak, Leica is always good (but at a price few can afford) and these slightly older Zeiss lenses are still quite good.
I wanted to make a video talking about my Zeiss ZM lenses that I own. I think these still bring a very good value to M-mount community and can be a great deal.
Voigtlander seems to be the company that is pushing the newest and creative lens designs, and are a worthy consideration for someone buying today. Zeiss lenses were a level above Voigtlander especially in the decade from 2005-2015; but in the past several years, Voigtlander has released newly designed lenses with special aspherical glass and vastly improved manufacturing tolarances. When comparing any of the Zeiss lenses to their Leica equivalent, the Zeiss do quite well, and at about 1/3 of the price, they are great values for the money. I am very happy with the kit that I have assembled and show here.
There is a different design physiology that went into the Zeiss lenses, mostly of perfecting historical lower-element designs without as much focus on aspherical and special glass use as the most current Voigtlanders.
These days we all seem to love just looking at test charts, but that isn't what really matters in real world use. If you want more traditional designs made with modern glass, coatings, and manufacturing processes, then the Zeiss are hard to beat. I do personally prescribe to the idea that lower-element lenses, 5, 6, 8 pieces of glass in a lens give you an end result that is subtly different from modern zoom lenses or designs with 15 or 20 elements in the lens design. I only wish that Zeiss would put more effort into expanding and continuing to develop new lenses in the Leica M-Mount.
I would like to update this by sharing that I bought my first lens in about four years; the Voigtlander 28mm f/1.5, and I like it quite a bit so far. Negatives look good, but haven’t started any scanning yet to do a side-by-side comparison with the underrated Zeiss 28mm f/2.8.
I'm sorry but your video is SUCH a waste of time. Who cares about why you like that ergonomic feature or that other one? Your title says "why Zeiss GLASS" so you should compare lenses of similar focal length from both brands and show RESULTS. In top of that you admit to doing it for clickbait... just stop being annoying mate.
@@chat_rose thank you for your feedback. I’ll admit I’m a pretty low effort channel, especially in comparison to the channels that do this as a full time job.
Are the Zeiss Loxia set for Sony E-Mount pretty much built on these?
Voightlander and Zeiss ZM lenses are both manufactured by Cosina in Japan.
Yes, a well known fact for decades, since the Carl Zeiss "Classic" Line for Canon EF and Nikon F Mount, also Pentax K and M42 Bajonett Mount since 2005. Nothing new. But the Zeiss Lenses are made by Cosina according to Zeiss specification, Cosina only produces them. Designed by Zeiss, Oberkochen - Germany.
Yes, manufactured, not engineered and designed, only manufactured. Everyone outsources manufacturing, because it's cheaper. You see it with phones, cars, laptops, clothes, jewelry and even food and drinks... Everyone pays someone else to manufacture products for them. It's way, way cheaper than buying twenty half a million dollar CNC machines and then paying for materials and manufacturing all the parts and components yourself - and then doing the assembly as well. Zeiss engineers and designs a lens, gives the blueprints for XYZ lens parts, to the XYZ factory and then that XYZ factory makes these XYZ lens parts for Zeiss and sends the manufactured parts back to Zeiss where the lenses are then assembled. Simple as that. They manufacture the lens parts under a contract, by Zeiss quality standards and with Zeiss approved materials. (Also, the actual glass elements in the lenses are made by Zeiss themselves, they don't outsource glass manufacturing.)
So?
@@nogerboher5266 ZM lenses are completely manufactured by Cosina in Japan, Zeiss no longer developing ZM lenses. Voigtlander does APO Lanthar and others. Zeiss stop manufacturing some lenses and it has been reported that Zeiss will drop ZM line lenses altogether.
@@janfrosty3392 Yes, manufactured by Cosina - it's called outsourcing, everyone does it. Clothing companies do it, food and drink companies do it, car companies do it, tech companies do it, hell, even Coca-Cola doesn't make their own bottles. Almost everyone outsources the manufacturing process because paying someone chump change to manufacture a part or something for you, is cheaper than buying 20-30 CNC machines that cost upwards of 700,000 EUR/USD - especially if you look at long term finances.
If you engineer and design a house, then choose the materials that will be used to build it and then give someone blueprints and have them to build it for you to save money on machining and tooling, that doesn't mean they engineered and designed the house, that just means you had them build it for you.
Same with Zeiss lenses. Same with Nikon, Canon, Hasselblad, Fuji, Panasonic and Leica image sensors - Sony build most of the sensors on the market - that doesn't mean the sensor is a Sony sensor - it's not - it's only manufactured and assembled by Sony, the sensor and all the tech that comes with it, was all engineered, invented and designed by Nikon, Canon, Fuji or whoever, they just had Sony to build it for them.
It's not that hard to understand...
Even I outsource grinding of air pressure tools, because I would rather pay 15,000 EUR for a 500 tool batch, than have to buy 6 Okuma 5 axis CNC machines for nearly a million EUR per machine... It would take me over 20 years before we turned that huge of an investment into profit.
it would have been nice to see photo examples to go with the lenses.
The recent voigtlander lenses are just pure gold. Take the 50mm f1.5 nokton ii, it performs almost as good as the summilux asph, but smaller even than the sonnar. Also the 35 ultron v2, small as the Zeiss 2.8, comparable to the Leica summicron asph.
I agree. If I was just getting into the market today, I would strongly consider and likely buy the new 28mm f/2, 35mm f/2, and 50mm f/1.5II.
The only reason I am not going to buy those lenses anytime soon is because: what I have works, and I am trying to stop buying anything other than film and developing chemicals.
I am so thankful for Voigtlander these days, I am glad that they are still out there and killing it.
Nice overview, thanks. The exposure chart on the camera is also an interesting and practical approach! Seems to be a great way to save the need for a light meter while still maintaining a more accurate settings for the yellow filters and as the sunny 16, especially if you prefer a more hands-on and intuitive photography experience.
The Zeiss ZM 28mm 2.8 Biogon is my favorite lens ever. I prefer it over my Leica 24 Elmarit ASPH and 35 Summicron ASPH. The Zeiss 21mm 2.8 is also an absolutely incredible lens.
I am glad that you are another supporter of the Zeiss 28mm f/2.8. Lots of people like to knock it because of its test charts - and I was almost convinced that I needed the new Voigtlander 28mm f/2 - but I have several prints on my wall made with the Zeiss 28mm lens, and it just produces nice, beautiful images.
Have either of you guys tried the elmarit 28mm v4 or asph? I'm looking at both of those as well as the Zeiss and newest Voight
My 28 f2 is my favorite! Closest modern lens to the Hollywood 28.
@@ZachBie I thought that I read that Voightlander & Zeiss lenses are made by the same company in Japan.
@@autodidact537 yes, the company the owns Voigtlander makes the Zeiss lenses.
I use the 35mm f2.8 biogon alongside my Leica glass and I just can't fault the lens. This is a great review and thank you for posting it 👍
I agree with flaring on Leica lenses. My 28mm Elmarit is flaring like crazy. It happens in at least one photo per roll, even with the lens hood. Without the lens hood, it affects a good quarter or so of the photos.
I appreciate your input. Leica makes some really great lenses, but sometimes people refuse to acknowledge any shortcomings they may have.
I’ve owned and used the 50/f2 and the 50/f1.5, and both were quite impressive, but where Zeiss really shines is in the wide angles. In that range I’ve owned and used the 35/f2, the 21/f2.8 and the 18/f4. These three are as good as the Leica equivalents, and the 18/f4 was better than the Leica, and more fun to use. The 18 is rectilinear, which means that the distortion is very low, and the illumination is even with minimal vignetting. Unfortunately Zeiss has discontinued the 18mm. The Zeiss 18mm optical finder is spectacularly clear and bright, and often found in combination with the lens. I own both the Leica and Zeiss finders at 21mm and the Zeiss is much better.
Nice video! I am a DSLR user and I love Zeiss lenses. My Planar T* 1.4/50 ZE is almost permanently mounted on my Canon. In terms of image quality and character Zeiss is unparalleled! Though modern AF lenses are sharper wide open (specially L series or Sigma’s Art) the color rendition and the bokeh drawing are much better on Planar.
I have most all the Zeiss primes for EF mount. The 50 1.4 suffers from the same issues as the canon 1.4- get the Milvus 1.4! I keep the 50 Makro planar as well.
Nice!! .. I've also been looking into obtaining that lens.
I tested probably a dozen 50mm lenses number of years ago, including the Sigma Art, Tamron 45, converted Rokkor MC 1.2, both Zeiss, and all Canon offerings at the time. As I previously wrote, the older Zeiss 1.4 wasn’t good- when close-focused within 10’ or so, the bokeh was horrid.
I built a similar lens package over the same time period and echo your comments. I have the 21, 28, 35 and 50 ZM's. I was interested in adding the 85 but have an Elmarit-M 90 that gets so little use that I haven't bothered shuffling things around any more. I'm 95% black/white with 35mm these days (color is so easy with digital and I've become lazy and impatient as I get older). I picked up a Voigtlander Nokton 40mm ƒ1.4 Classic for a CL and while it is actually quite good, it left me wishing for a bit more and I sprung for the ƒ1.2 40mm which is quite the equal of the ZM's that I have. FWIW, I've enjoyed the slightly odd Heliar 50 ƒ3.5 and it tends to get more use than my ZM and Summicron. It separates midtones so well and the negatives print so easily.
Thank you for sharing your experiences. I looked at the 21mm and 25mm Zeiss lenses, but have the Voigtlander LTM 21mm f/4 that meets all my wide angle needs. I have also only heard good things about the 50mm f/3.5. The only thing keeping me from getting it is the fact that I already have four 50mm lenses and the odd filter size. I was really looking at the Leica 90mm as well, but ultimately bought the Zeiss 85mm f/4 when I had the chance to get it new for about $700 in Japan.
I’m close. 15, 21, 28, 50 Makro, 50 1.4 milvus, 85 milvus, 100 Makro.
I’m on canon bodies these days. When I had Leica, I had 2 bodies and 2 lenses fail!! How do lenses fail! I left for digital and find Zeiss optics even better.
I cannot comment of Voigtländer lenses because I have never used them.
I had, however, used Zeiss lenses on my Nikon SLRs and Contax G1 rangefinders.
When I bought my first Leica rangefinder (M6), the first lens I purchased for it was a 35mm f/1.4 Zeiss.
I also have a 90mm f/2 Leitz and a 21mm f/1.4 Leitz for my M6. When compared at the same apertures with my 90mm f/2.8 Zeiss and 21mm f/2.8 Zeiss for my Contax rangefinder, I see little difference in image quality.
Thank you for your input. You don’t seem to be bothered by big lenses for your M6 haha. I have also only heard good things about the Zeiss lenses for the Contax rangefinder. I even considered going the route of trying to get an M-mount converted Zeiss 90mm f/2.8 lens.
At one time, I shot Zeiss 21, 28, 45, and 90mm lenses on a Contax G1 rangefinder. I was so impressed with those Zeiss lenses that when I purchased my Leica M6, the first lens I purchased for it was a Zeiss 35mm f/1.4 Distagon ZM.
I have heard so many great things about the Zeiss 35mm f/1.4 ZM and nearly bought one when I was living in Japan. However, most of my shots are f/2.8-8, so I decided that the size and weight was more than I personally wanted to carry on a regular basis. I tend to take a 2 or 3 lens kit with me when I go out to take photos.
@@ZachBie
Which lenses do you take with your 35mm when you go out to take photos?
My two-lens Leica M kit is the 35mm f/1.4 and the 90mm f/2.
My three-lens kit is the 35mm f/1.4, 90mm f/2, and the 21mm f/1.4.
On rare occasions, I will add an adapted 14mm f/2.8 Nikon as a fourth lens.
@@Narsuitus I go back and forth with which of the two 35mm Zeiss lenses I take. I have found that the 35/2 better matches my Zeiss 50/1.5; the 35/2.8 almost is too sharp or maybe higher micro contrast when images are put side-by-side with those from the 50/1.5.
I am on a day trip today, and I opted to take the 35/2 as my only lens because I wanted to travel light. And I wanted the extra stop because I’m shooting 100 speed film.
Awesome review! I'm still torn between getting the Biogon 35mm 2.8 or the 2.0 - and this review didn't help! haha I have the Planar 50mm living on my M3, and I just got myself an M4-P, for which I'm looking to mount a 35mm lens on. The advantages of the 2.0 would be that it's like using the same lens (as the Planar 50mm) basically, and also getting that one stop of light, if needed. But there was a part of the review where you said it was lacking at 2.0 - and that really threw me off! haha the 35mm 2.8 looks amazing and such a joy to use as it so small. Don't know what to do!
@@matankedar7050 I have a bit of an interesting personal view of these two lenses, and I find that I use the 35mm f/2 more often overall. They are both amazing lenses, with the 35/2 having a bit more balanced rendering, and the 35/2.8 being more sharp and having higher overall contrast.
I love the size of the 35/2.8, I think it is a perfect size lens on a rangefinder. The 35/2 isn’t too big, about the same exact size as the 50/2 (if you do quick-moving photography, I’d recommend getting a different color sliver/black from your 50/2 as they will be easy to confuse in the camera bag).
The main reason I personally tend to grab the 35/2 is to have the extra stop for when I am shooting indoors or in evening/night. I don’t often use f/2 but I am more comfortable having with me it as a film shooter, especially when I travel. If you ever shoot on digital or know you don’t need f/2, then the 2.8 is a great lens and feels perfect on a Leica rangefinder. The 35/2.8 won’t be too sharp for your 50/2, but I did find that it was too sharp for the Zeiss 50/1.5, and photos shot at the same time and viewed next to each other didn’t balance together as well.
This was a very long non-answer, in short both are great, I like the size of the 35/2.8 better, but the 35/2 is great for then the sun starts to set and I am traveling or backpacking, and/or I will likely be both indoors and outdoors.
I feel like the Leica comparison wasn’t exactly fair. You should atleast get the Leica lens from same period and similar condition.
You make a fair point, that the Leica lens I showed is not comparable to the modern version (which I personally have no interest in owning). I used this one mostly as a size comparison to show that it is smaller, but in real life use, not by a meaningful difference.
Leica lenses are good, and I hope I don’t offend you if you are an owner, but I wanted to make the point in the video that there are alternatives that are just as good, and for my uses and preferences better. It is a long video so I don’t fault you if you didn’t watch the whole thing, but I did speak to Zeiss vs modern Leica lenses such as the 50mm Summicron, 35mm Summicron ASPH and 28mm Elmarit M.
I like Zeiss lens hoods better and it seems for many people the Zeiss lenses are slightly more flare resistant too, which is important to me as I like to shoot with side lighting and sometimes backlighting. I also like having lenses that are a little less expensive as I take pictures in tropical, desert, and near oceans.
@@ZachBie no not at all! No offence taken and I hope I didn’t offend in any way as well. Having owning both Zeiss (both zm and zf2 for Nikon) and Leica m lenses, I can see where you are coming from for the build quality. And I whole heartily agree on the superb Zeiss build for the amount we are paying for. However, if you ever get your hands on a mint copy of, say 50 summilux asph, or even APO, I think the opinion of Zeiss being superior may change. And optically speaking, Leica modern lenses is in fact ahead of Zeiss or voigtlander at the moment. Maybe it will change in the future but for now Leicas optic certainly a leg ahead.
@@luminouswaves2640 hahaha there is zero doubt in my mind that a $4,000-8,000 lenses is better. Maybe one day I’ll be able to try one out.
@@luminouswaves2640 I think it would fair to say the Zeiss 35 1.4 distagon has a claim of being better than the modern Leica summilux. check out this very in depth comparison video by thegenericphotographer
ruclips.net/video/ry8RR6jJkh8/видео.html
I did a test a/b summicron 28mm M (first version) vs Biogon 28 ZM and while the biogon is excellent the summicron is even better. The rendering of summicron is outstanding, another league. I like the biogon because is not asph. but that s another story. Leica M lenses today are formidable. Some of the ZM too
I have gone through quite a few Leica, Zeiss and Voitlander lenses and at this point I’m absolutely blown away by Voitlanders APO Lanthars. I have the 35, 50 and 90 and I don’t think I have ever used sharper more beautiful glass at almost any price.
While I have the Lanthars for my M bodies I tried them out on my RED Raptor 8k with my Aivascope 1.75x anamorphic front. Anamorphic scopes have a way of dramatically emphasizing any imperfections, chromatic aberrations etc in a lens, especially when wide open. Even at F2 when paired with the Aivascope - zero CA - unbelievably clean from corner to corner. I’m absolutely floored with the Lanthars.
I like a little character so I have my Summilux and a couple of Zeiss lenses for those occasions but honestly these Lanthars are pretty unreal.
Yes, Voigtlander’s releases since around 2019 have been truly amazing. Their APO lenses are a little big for my tastes and needs as a film shooter, but their new 28mm f/1.5 caught my eye. I am proud to say I haven’t bought a single camera related item since early 2020 and resisted all my temptations. However, the 28mm f/1.5 will likely be purchased this year during a planned Japan trip. My Zeiss 28mm lens produces beautiful photos, but struggles when shooting indoors or at night due to its slower f-stop.
100% agreement on the ZM 35/2.8. It was better than my 35/2 ASPH on my M262. The ASPH was sold off long ago. :)
Leica's 28. 2.8 is better than the cron. It's be great to compare both.
Nice kit and info on ZM lenses. Though it is not fair to compare older Leica designs with relatively modern Zeiss lenses. Price apart, the vast majority of modern Leica M lenses are technically superior to Zeiss and Voigtlander, especially if you take the size into account (best performance/size ratio is what Leica M is about). Voigtlander also has several amazing lenses in the Nokton lineup (such as 35/1.2 and 21/1.4) and a few nice ultrawides you won’t find from any other manufacturer. Their latest apo 35/2 is also amazing, and better than the Biogon 35/2 in almost every respect.
...and it costs a ton more than Zeiss. The Distagon 35/1.4, Biogon 35/2, Biogon 35/2.8 are excellent as 35mm Lenses with M Mount. I don't shoot M, but i have Zeiss >3 decades, and they're also often IQ-wise better than their Leica R counterparts, and cheaper, too.
@@marcp.1752 We all know about Leica prices, unfortunately, but we are just comparing glass here. Price is out of the equation.
The Biogon 35/2 is a great lens, but I can’t say excellent wide open. One of its best qualities was geometric distortion correction, which is not a problem anymore in a modern digital photography workflow. And if size is not problem, the Apo-Lanthar VM 35/2 is better than the Biogon 35/2, at the same price.
@@dans.8198 You know what, i do know both lenses. The latter one (Series I, "classic look") was just being sold
@@marcp.1752 I own a Biogon 35/2 and compared it with an Apo-Lanthar on an M240 body. The Lanthar is certainly the better lens at f/2, but if you rarely shoot wide open then the Biogon is smaller and probably cheaper to buy used. Bokeh wide open is mediocre on both lenses, but for shallow DoF I’d take a Voigtlander Nokton 35/1.2 (any version) and never look back.
@@dans.8198 I know that the APO Lanthar is quite good, but as everything into life, it comes at a cost - hereby, the size. I don't prefer clinical sharpness, nor perfection. For me, it would be someday the Ultron 35/F2 VM I or -II, if i can get it within my limits, someday. But for now, i am quite happy enough with my gear. And i am not a pixel peeper.
Cosina makes voigtlander and zeiss. All Otus, Milvus, Classic, and ZM Leica mount lenses are made in Japan by Cosina.
Good video, but I went the opposite direction and use Leica lenses only. Well I only have two Summilux 28 + 50, a good combo for me.
Both very good lenses!
Between Leicas SL lenses and a few of the m lenses, I dont know that I could ever shoot anything else personally..
I have the outstanding Voigtländer APO-Lanthar 35mm 2.0 Aspherical, very highly recommended.
I use m mount glass on my SL2-S. (1) I love prime manual focus (2) size. Of my Zeiss I own the 21mm/2.8 Biogon and the 35mm/1.4 Distagon. Both superb glass.
Exactly why I'm on here searching...I was looking for Some nice M glass for my Lecia SL2-S as well. LOL
Great review, and thank you for no background muzak
Excellent video! I own the CZM 35/2, CZM 50/2 and a SUMMICRON-M 90/2. I used to own the ZEISS IKON but regretfully I sold it for $900 in 2014. Now that I am in a better place financially, I can't buy it anymore because it is way overprice. I recently bought a used A7 Mk.II that I will use my gems on.
That 50mm Planar is a great lens, I talked with a Leica Boutique rep because I was thinking about getting a 50 summicron and even he talked me out of it because he said that the Planar is sharper. I would like to try a leica but will prob be either a 28 or 35.
I have a v3 50 Summicron.
I like my Planer over the current version Summicron because I really dislike built-in hoods that don’t lock and I believe that the Planar has slightly better flare resistance. I recently picked up a Voigtlander 28mm f/1.5 in Japan, and I am excited to start developing film and scanning negatives so I can compare them against my Zeiss 28mm f2.8 that I took with me to Hawaii last year.
So envious of your canon lens. I can’t find this anywhere now.
Nice video. Thank you. I own the Zeiss 50/1.5, 50/2. 35/2.8. 28/2.8, and 18/4. The 18/4 is truly an outstanding wide angle. I also have a couple of Leica M lenses 50/2 & 35/2, along with a number of rather old Leica/Leitz LTM lenses, and some Voigtlander too. I need to thin them out. LOL. I've been at it for a long while now.
Not sure if you are aware that Zeiss ZM lenses made in Japan are in fact made by Cosina/Voigtlander for Zeiss and to Zeiss specs.
The current Zeiss and Voigtlander lenses owned and made by Cosina in Japan. I wonder what the differences would be?
Cosina does NOT own Zeiss !!!
Would love to see a 35mm f2.8 ZM review.
It is my favorite 35mm lens ever. I can say that as long as f/2.8 isn’t too slow, you won’t be disappointed (keep in mind that my reference point is 35mm B&W film).
I don’t know if I am going to do a full review anytime soon because of how busy my job is currently - and the amount of work it takes to make those detailed videos.
Great video. May I sugest you make a separarte video on each lens? It would be interesting to know your opinion on each with more detail, and if possible, sample images.
That’s a good idea, and if I had more time, I would like to think I would do it. However, as a film shooter it is a bit hard tracking down each time I used these lenses over the past several years. When I leave the house be it on a walk or a trip, it is kind of what I am feeling that week. Be it a 35mm or. 28mm, and if a 50mm which of the four 50mm lenses that I own. Maybe there is a parallel universe where I have more organization and will to do this.
Over all - in the grand scheme of things, it’s all a matter of taste. For my tastes I have gone all classic Leica from the 50’s and 60’s for black and white. Leica R for colour work and perhaps one day I will invest in a kit of 25, 35, 50mm Zeiss lenses for rangefinder colour work. Particularly, a good way to look at thing’s is to get a lens that serves what Leica or Zeiss DON’T cater for. That is why I also have the CV 21/4 and 35/2.5 - excellent and perfect for my Barnack Leica’s, they are just tiny and don’t get in my way.
I own or have owned these CV lenses: 21/4, 25/4, 35/2.5, 50/1.5, 75/2.5, 90/3.5.
Out of those the 21/4 and 75/2.5 are my favorite.
CV makes some really great lenses too.
I have Leica R Lenses, they are very good, but not as sharp and great resolution as modern Lenses for 60 megapixels sensor.
Nice summary of the ZM lenses! Thanks for sharing.
Own the CS 1.5/50 ZM as only 50mm, next to 2.4/35 & 75 Leica Summarit-M lenses for analog & digital M. IMO the CS50 performs very well, >7 years of use now. The extra lens hood is still in storage. Never need to use them because of the well T* anti reflex coating. Even prefer the more classic look of the CS50. Ergonomics of the ZM line are the same and you hate or love it, for me the later one. Leica's Summarit-M f/2.4 remakes are also superb with excuse to mechanics. Owned the same focal lengths for the f/2.5 predecessor. Never getting warm with 1.4/35 & 50 ASPH lenses even if superior in near all aspects (excl. subjective ergonomics maybe). Unfortunatelly never own a C/V lens - one day. Also good tip with the ref table at the end of your video.
Focus shift could be a non-issue on digital because you see sharpness in real time at selected aperture; there is no way to check real focus point when shooting film
I have, more or less the same collection of Zeiss m-mount lenses and I'm happy with them. You haven't mentioned the 'Zeiss wobble' problem. It happened to my 2.8/28 but I had it fixed, not by Zeiss but by a repairman in Ho Chi Minh City. Cheers, OX
I was happy to see some camera shops selling and developing film in Vietnam when I traveled there in 2019 and 2020. Yes, I didn’t mention the wobble issue as I haven’t had it happen to me (I heard it is more of an issue with older Zeiss ZM lenses. I did have it with a Voigtlander 50mm f/1.5 V1 though).
@@ZachBie True, a few shops have survived the digital onslaught and Ho Chi Minh City has a small but active film scene. I bought my Zeiss gear -bodies and lenses, some 15 years ago in the US when it was all on sale. Go figure!
Most Leica glass aside from their most expensive mechanical stuff is manufactured in Japan too.
Ok, what do you recommend: zeiss 35mm f1.4 ir voitglander 35mm f2 apo lanthar?
@@Jgheiler I’ve handled, but never really used either, but both are very good if you don’t mind the size. Though the 35mm f/1.4 Zeiss is just too big for me and I know I wouldn’t use it very much.
I like the Zeiss 35mm f/2 a lot, but it is the biggest I’d want to go on a 35mm lens. I like the lack of flare and distortion and get images I am really with from f/2.8-8 at all distances. If I am shooting in low light then I use f/2, which is a little softer and less contrasty (as is common with most traditionally designed lenses).
The Zeiss 35mm f/2.8 is my ideal size for a 35mm lens, but when I am traveling with film, and will be shooting in daylight, inside, and at night, I feel more confident having the extra stop.
I bought the Voigtlander 28mm f/1.5 earlier this year, and at some point I will have to do a comparison of my Zeiss 28mm f/2.8 and the Voigtlander 28mm f/1.5. The Zeiss has given me some really strong and pleasing images, but I haven’t scanned any of the film I’ve developed that I shot with the Voigtlander (maybe 40 rolls) due to being busy with life and job changes.
I just realized that you might not have been talking about the Voigtlander APO 35mm f/2. For the newer and small 35mm f/2, I’ve heard that it is about just as good as the Leica 35mm f/2 ASPH, but I know it can have a structured “bokeh” sometimes, but usually not an issue.
I shoot at f/4-f/8 probably 80% of the time, but as I’ve had my Zeiss 35mm f/2 for over 8 years now, I know exactly how it is going to perform, and the results with will give me.
Excellent video. I use a mixture of Canon LTM and Leica M lenses, the Zeiss is probably right in the middle of the two (only had the 35/1.4 ZM, liked it a lot)
I have two Nikon LTM lenses that I like a lot too. A 5cm f/2 and a 13.5cm f/3.5. There is something special about old LTM lenses.
The Zeiss and Voigtlander 43mm hoods are interchangeable. Try it.
Yep! I use the Zeiss 43mm hood on my Voigtlander 28mm f/1.5.
I bought the Zeiss hoods and all the lenses except for the 35mm f/2 in Japan at a significant discount.
Eventually it is these modern Zeiss rendering/look onto the films you use, regardless of the brand of camera body you use…
I love my Voightlander glass.
Which lenses do you have? Their modern stuff is pretty good.
It's too broad a claim to make. David Osborn did a comparison between new and older Leica M and R lenses, Zeiss lenses and Voitlander 50mm lenses. Their prices ranged from about $900 to $4000. The Leica M lenses were a shade better than the rest. The R lenses were not. Then he compared three Nikkor 50mm lenses. The 50mm F1.8 AIS manual lens, the 50mm F1.4 AFD lens and the 50mm F1.8 AFS lens. Those prices varied between $200 and $400. In all three cases the Nikkors were just as good in terms of sharpness, contrast and colour transmission. So this may be disappointing to the fans of the other lenses or shock horror to people who have bought a $4000 Leica lens, but it's simply true. In the case of the Nikkors, the design was a winner when released over 40 years ago and still is today. The only difference is in coatings.
Leica also produce some excellent M4/3 primes and they compare well with their own M42 lenses, but cost only a little more than the Nikkors. And guess what? Most of the Zeiss and Voightlanders are made by Cosina in Japan today, and the Leica M4/3 lenses are made by Panasonic in Japan.
The day when Carl Zeiss was best with their Jena lenses have passed into history with one exception. The Zeiss lenses on the 500 series Hasselblad. But even those can be had for about $1k.
With the latest CNC machines, new lenses can be made the equal or even better than the old hand ground lenses of old. And as a final note, Leica use the same technology today as the others. So whats a brand name worth as opposed to outright quality? A lot. But the images will be the same.
Great vid ! One question , what frame does the Leica body chose when you put a 85mm Zeiss lense on it ? The 90mm frame ?
Yes, the 90mm frame line.
Great video👍 I love these Zeiss lenses. But I cannot install the original Zeiss lens hood on my Zeiss lens when there is a filter on. Is this a common problem? How to fix it? Thanks 🙏🏻
I am guessing that this is a filter issue, maybe you have a filter that has a wider housing than normal? I would try another filter if possible.
@@ZachBie Thank you for your suggestion. I will try another filter🤓
Are you on the socails?. .....Would enjoy to see your work with your lenses.
Yes, but….I haven’t uploaded any work since 2018.
I was super busy from 2018-2020 and shot about 100-150+ rolls a year, which I then self-developed and scanned, and had 4”x6” prints made of all my decent and good shots (5-20 shots a roll depending on situation/event). I did sell some work to a printer, but as I haven’t heard if they released their project yet, I am going to leave it at that. Since 2020 I’ve slowed down some as work and life picked up and I currently shoot maybe 60-80 rolls a year.
@@ZachBie Respect, You put in the hours. You sound skilled with those cameras, they look a joy to use too.
I used to work commercially for five yaers and now dont upload my stils work anywhere either. I might chage that once I start a new project, for now, the process is more enjoyable then the end result.
Great video. Where do you order the Zeiss hoods?
Thank you for the support. I purchased every single one of these camera lenses when I was living in Japan, except for the 35/2. Fujiya Camera is a great store in Tokyo if you ever get a chance to visit. They do tax-free for tourists, and currently, if you’re paying in US dollars the exchange rate is in your favor. Unfortunately, I don’t think they ship internationally, but I never pursued that.
@@ZachBie Very good my friend. Good to know. I lived in Okinawa for some time during my deployments. Again, great content and points. Good to know another Leica shooter. Cheers 🍻
Excellent video, thanks. I own a Sonnar 50 and like it a lot. Is so lightweight for a 1.5 lens!
Hi， I try to use a Zeiss Distagon 35mm, f1.4 lens on Leica M10-R , having some focusing issues , "Aliasing" is one of the problems, please help , , , , I really want to make this lens work on the M10-R , Thank you
Do you still use it? I am toying with the idea. Your experience shared might help.
Hey Zack! Exciting to discover your channel. I love camera gear and photography. You briefly mentioned a Voigtlander 28mm pancake as your favorite 28mm. Can you tell me the full name of that one? I'm interested. I have no 28mm M mount glass
I hope I didn’t say that haha. Voigtlander used to make a 28mm f/3.5 LTM, but I have never shot that lens.
Maybe I was talking about the 28mm f/2.8 that is for Nikon F-mount? They recently rereleased that lens in a classic style lens barrel, but it should be the same optics as the lens I have. That along with the 58mm f/1.4 are my favorite lenses for my Nikon film cameras.
@@ZachBie yes the Voigts for Nikon mount are moan worthy, apparently. One day I will acquire them 🤤
In England, Ross obtained a licence to make Tessars. Ross own lenses are even sharper than anything by Zeiss.
How do the biogon series compare to the distagon ZF series? Are they at par?
Different designs, but both are considered to be high quality.
I haven’t shot with any ZF Zeiss lenses, but I had long considered purchasing a 35mm f/2 or a 28mm ZF lens after research showed they were good lenses.
I can say that I am quite happy with the Zeiss lenses you see here. And after many hours of research, the new Voigtlander lenses look amazing, but I don’t see enough of a difference to change from what I have here.
As I believe I have written elsewhere, if I was buying my first lenses today the Voigtlander 28mm f/2, 35mm f/2, and 50mm f/1.5II would be high on the list. For me smaller lenses are good, so I wouldn’t want some of the f/1.2 or APO lenses.
The only lens of mine that feels a hair big is the Zeiss 35mm f/2 ZM; but the pros of the lens make it worth keeping instead of selling for the Voigtlander f/2. (Similar filter size, part of the same system/physical design, good flare resistance and sharpness throughout the frame). I’m not saying that the Voigtlander 35mm f/2 couldn’t be better in some ways, but the differences aren’t big enough for me to buy a new lens and sell an old one.
Essayez les APO LANTHAR 35 et 50MM chez Voigtlander !. Les optiques Zeiss sur cahier des charges ... sont fabriqués aussi par Cosina !
The Zeiss M-mount Lenses was made by Cosina ! Cosina also makes Voigtländer Lenses !!!
Yes, I am aware.
i shoot on the leica mp, mostly hp5 and fp4, i have the zeiss 28 2.8 already, but i am stuck between the 35 f/2 and the 35 2.8, there isnt a lot information on these lenses and i was wondering if you can give me your opinion about both of these in detail. what are the benefits and cons of both?
I use them both. It also depends on which other lens(es) you are using it with.
I took a trip with the 50mm f/1.5 Zeiss and the 35mm f/2.8. The 35mm f/2.8 was so much sharper and a bit more contrasty that I didn’t feel the images from the two lenses always worked together in a series even when they both looked great as stand alone.
I often take my 35 f/2.8 if I know I will only be outside and or if I am paring it with my 50mm f/2 Zeiss. And then I take my 35mm f/2 if it is going to be paired with my 50mm f/1.5 or if I might be in lover light settings.
The 35mm f/2.8 is nicer on the Leica in size and feel for me though. And that means you might take it more often.
I am glad you have the 28mm f/2.8, some people say it’s a “bad” lens based off of its MTF charts. But the images it produces are wonderful. Same can be said for the 50mm f/1.5.
@@ZachBie for now i just have the 28mm. considering the 18,21 2.8 and 25 2.8 and 35 1.4. would love a 50, but if i had the 1.4, i couldnt see me using it as much. not much of a 50 guy anyways, but that doesnt mean i couldnt be convinced.
35 2.8 has more written about it, however the shooting i do mostly necessitates that extra stop. but i do love the images the 2.8 allow, i guess both will have to come along with my leicas! maybe the 2.8 will be sitting on my spare m4-2. if paring with the 28, what 35 would compliment it best?
in regards to the 50’s, which one is your favorite, 50 1.5 or the 2
@@maxhernie8053 I have always found that the 35 is pretty close to 28. Based off of that alone, a different focal length might be more useful. If I only had the 28mm and really wanted a 35 and not a 50mm (a 50&35 or a 50&28 are my favorite lenses for a travel or daily 2-lens kit), then I would get the 35mm f/2 because while it is bigger, it is by no means a “big” lens comparison to most full frame lenses, and it offers more flexibility in lower light.
Out of the 50mm Zeiss lenses, they are both different. I don’t find the focus shift too much of an issue with the 50mm f/1.5 on film, and I find that it just produces really pleasing lenses. I like the pair my 50mm f/1.5 with the Zeiss 28mm, and I have prints from both on my wall that I took on Hong Kong in 2018 or 2019. The Zeiss media online says the 28mm is great when paired with the 50mm f/2. The f/2 is a clean, great lens that always produces nice images, but with less of the “different” look you get with the f/1.5 when wide open or at f/2.
I find 28mm to be a little wide of the type of people on public/ documentary photography I enjoy taking, but if I am doing landscape shots it is a really comfortable focal length. For people photos in a city I like 35mm, and 50mm when I want tighter framing with less subjects in the frame. I struggle to fill the frame at times with a 28mm.
A cheap(er) wide lens you could look at picking up too is the Voigtlander 21mm f/4, I find that lens to be outstanding for the price when used on film. And I have the older LTM version too.
@@ZachBie Do you like the zeiss 85 f/4? How does your 85mm work with the framelines, my MP has the .72 viewfinder. would you suggest the 75 or 90mm frames?
@@maxhernie8053 I honestly have some mixed feelings about the Zeiss 85mm f/4. It is a great lens, super sharp, good contrast, fairly compact. I got it new for I think about $670 was was fair, but I sometimes just wish I went with a used Leica 90mm f/2.8 which can be picked up for about $1,100 or so. But, 85/90mm is one of my least used focal length, so maybe it was better to save the money and get something that really matches my existing kit.
The issues I have are first that my camera doesn’t have frame lines. So I can’t be exact (not that a rangefinder is ever super exact with framing), and I do think at infinity you’re getting closer to the 75mm frame lines than the 90mm.
Second, as someone who mainly shoots 100 film pushed to 200, f/4 can get limiting when I want to keep my shutter speed at 1/125 and above. Shade and indoors can be challenging at times.
The only lens on my Leica MD262 is the Zeiss 50mm f/2 Planar ZM. I don't need to upgrade to a Leica lens, it`s that good...!
I agree with you there. I have a 1968 50mm Summicron which matches my 1968 M4, but my two Zeiss 50’s are what I shoot with 90% of the time. I tend to like the higher contrast and better flare resistance.
How are Jena lenses
The only Zeiss ZM I have bought is the Biogon ZM 1:4/21mm, and that was for its zero distortion, and corner to corner resolution.
As for all of the others, .. you can have them.
Leica is superior..
Each to their own.
I like a lot of the Leica lenses I’ve tried in the store (35/1.4, 50APO) but for the price and on film the extra cost wasn’t worth it in my analysis.
@@ZachBieTrying "in the store" is hardly sufficient to assess image quality.
me who cant afford any of these lenses: hmm interesting
We all start somewhere!
I started with a Canon point and shoot in ~2009, then after four years got a Nikon D3200, and slowly moved up from there. You don’t need the expensive gear in this video to make great photos! I have a journalism degree, and was drawn to save for, and after I graduated, slowly buy the gear you see here. If you are interested in film photography I’d recommend a Nikon FM/FM2 with a Nikkor 50mm f/2 lens to get started.
I don't think its better, but it is certainly cheaper, perhaps because they are mostly manufactured outside of Germany. They also render differently to each other. Zeiss is more contrasty, with a cooler rendition. Leica is just as sharp if not more so, but the lower contrast balances the the rendering. Leica has the more of the oldschool look than modern Zeiss lenses.
You are right in that they are more different than better.
I do find them better for my needs (price is a factor for me), and I like the Zeiss as well-rounded and flare-resistant lenses. Some Leica lenses are certainly better in some regards, but the difference on film isn’t enough for me to justify the cost. Maybe one day I will pick up the Leica 35mm Summilux, but I don’t feel comfortable committing $5-6k to a single lenses at this point in my life. I know I just wouldn’t be comfortable using and carrying it with me when I travel.
@@ZachBie Yes, I agree. The price is a crucial factor. I already had a 50mm Summicron F2 DR, so I bought a 50mm Zeiss Planar ZM for its clinical rendering. Horses for courses I guess.
which is smaller when mounted on the camera the 28mm 2.8 vs 35mm 2.8, thanks in advance
35mm f/2.8 is a little smaller. This is in part due to the 43mm vs 46mm filter, and the lens hood for the 28mm is larger as I recall it is for both the 28mm and 25mm lenses.
@@ZachBie appreciate the response, just picked up the 35 2.8, thank you
@@kaeknows it is a great lens and I hope you enjoy it.
Hi... why you use light yellow filter on your lenses?
Great question. I only shoot B&W film, and a yellow filter is considered a standard filter for controlling contrast. It will slightly darken blue light (like the sky) and help the film capture tones more similar to what the human eye see.
A little clickbait will stir the pond. Old Zeiss, Leica and Voigtlander glass was good, but there are new players today. If a lens is made by Cosina but is branded Voigtlander does this encourage Zeiss or others from having good 3rd parties make their consumer stuff? It's still okay, but what do we call it? When Mamiya started rehashing old Zeiss designs for the last of their film cameras, they just called the lenses Mamiya. They may have been improved Biogons or Planars but Mamiya was proud of its own offerings and wasn't giving in to the lore and lure of legacy. The pond has become murky.
I think Cosina has been making many of the Zeiss lenses. Not sure which models and series but definitely the SLR Classic series
@@anthonymiller8979 I have a feeling you are correct there. Zeiss has graduated to optics far beyond camera imagining though I think they still design some of their branded stuff. Not all though. Cosina is more than competent. I do love the old medium format Zeiss glass. It's a look on film that has my attention. Cheers!
Bro your lens green like a ninja turtle
hi
i just wondering
28mm zm lens hood fit to 35mm c biogon?
cheers
No. It will not. The 28mm lens has a 46mm filter and the 35mm has a 43mm filter, so the diameter of the hoods are different.
The 28mm hood will fit on the 50mm f/1.5 lens (both 46mm filters), and the 35mm f/2 & f/2.8 hood is the same as the 50mm f/2 hood.
@@ZachBie thank you so much mate!!
nice collection. I regularly use the 35 2.8.
It is my favorite 35mm lenses that I have used (compared to 1 Zeiss, 1 Voigtlander, and four Nikkor F-Mount lenses). I do just wish that it was one stop faster for when I travel. But I guess I do have a 35mm f/2 for that.
@@ZachBie why you like ZM 35mm f2.8 more than 35mm f2 ZM?
@@graycheng888 the 35mm f/2.8 is a smaller lens which I like, and I find that the 35mm f/2 at f/2 during day time looks a little washed out and lacking contrast. The 35mm f/2 stopped down to f/2.8 starts to sharpen up and provide more contrast, but still less micro contrast than the 35mm f/2.8.
In my experience (only on 35mm B&W film) the 35mm f/2.8 is a better lens in pretty much every way, except that it doesn’t open up to f/2 - which I only need and use in low light and indoors.
The next trip that I take I’ll likely bring my 35mm f/2 and 50mm f/2. So it is still a good lens, and I feel more comfortable traveling and knowing that I can shoot in lower light.
@@ZachBie Wow, what a detailed information! Thank you for your sharing and have a nice trip!
@@graycheng888 also I have found that the high contrast and sharpness of the 35mm f/2.8 doesn’t match as well when shot alongside the Zeiss 50mm f/1.5. When I took them both on a trip in 2019, And looked at final film scans side-by-side, the 35mm f/2.8 was noticeably sharper and had more contrast than the 50mm f/1.5.
I don’t know if it would be noticeable to someone who wasn’t a photographer, but when traveling and creating a body of work that will be viewed together, I like my lenses to all have a somewhat similar look to them. So if I am taking the 50mm f/1.5, then the more neutral-contrast 35mm f/2 is a better match, or I also like to take the 28mm f/2.8 Zeiss ZM.
Why does my M3 show 90mm frame lines with my Zeiss 50mm f2 ?
Hmmm, that’s a good question. Mine doesn’t pull them up when I have any 50mm lens on. But my 50mm frame lines are present when using a 90mm or 135mm lens. (However, my 135mm Leica lens doesn’t bring up the correct frame lines on my M3).
It is all about the optics.
With the new Voigtlaender APO lens line-up, your video title is untrue click-bait.
Why don't you have the 35mm f1.4....arguably the best of zm lens
Too big for me, that’s the main reason. And I don’t often need f/1.4 to want to carry the heavier lens. Maybe if I had a mirrorless body I could also use it on, but for a film M, I’d got Voigtlander if I wanted a 35mm f1.4 (and I almost did buy the ver II of the lens, but decided more gear isn’t needed).
Good video. Personally, for the most part, I think Leica lenses are overrated. I've had 3 different versions of the Summicron 35mm, and was not impressed by any of them. Maybe I just had bad copies? I don't know. I am impressed by the Summicron 40mm though. I just ordered the Zeiss 35mm 2.8 actually, and I'm very much looking forward to receiving it.
Thank you for your input. I agree with you on your Leica lens viewpoint. The film rangefinder cameras bodies are the best there is, but the competition in the modern lens market is fierce. I have been really impressed with how well the new Voigtlander lenses have performed too, especially their new 28mm f/2.
When you can, please share your thoughts on the 35mm f/2.8, I will want to hear if you love it as much as I do.
@@ZachBie - Will do. Voigtlander makes some great glass too. I have their 40mm F2 pancake for my Nikon F3 and DF. Amazing glass! I'd like to get the Voigtlander 50mm 1.5 MC lens, but that will have to wait for now. I'll be using the Zeiss 35mm 2.8 on my film body Leica MP. I agree with you on the Leica film bodies.
@@BeingWolfy despite having owned probably 25-35 Nikkor film lenses, my favorites and most used are the Voigtlander 28mm f/2.8, 40mm f/2 and all time favorite F-mount lens is the 58mm f/1.4.
I did a 15-day trip to Vietnam with a FM3a and 28mm f/2.8, 58mm f/1.4, and a Nikon Series E 100mm f/2.8 (brought as it is the lightest weight short tele). I then ditched the 100mm as the image quality didn’t match the two Voigtlander lenses, and took the 28mm and 58mm lenses on a month long SE Asia trip the next year.
I’m trying to resist the urge to buy the new Voigtlander 28mm f/2, 35mm f/2 and 50mm f/1.5 M-mount lenses. What I have here is a well rounded kit and I have to tell myself a new lens wouldn’t improve my photography at all.
@@ZachBie - I'll have to look into the Voigtlander 28mm 2.8. I have the Nikkor 28mm 3.5 which I like. I've been wanting to try the fm3a for quite some time, but I'm a left eye shooter and concerned about having to have the film winder pulled out in order for the meter to work. I'm Afraid it will stick out too much and my forehead will get in the way of me seeing well through the virefinder. I haven't ever seen one in person to try it.
@@BeingWolfy the Voigtlander 28mm is really hard to find now as it was discontinued several years ago. I think it never caught on as there were so many cheap Nikkor lenses at the time. I have owned the Nikkor 28mm f/2.8 but found it weak at infinity when doing landscapes, and I have two 28mm f/2 which are good and have a classic rendering, but bigger, heavier, and less sharp than the Voigtlander. I checked, and I actually took my 28mm f/2 Nikkor on my first Vietnam trip, and not the Voigtlander.
I have a Nikon FM, FM2N, and FM3a, and paid $45, $250, $500 respectively. The FM3a is my favorite for a few small reasons. It has match-needle metering which is my favorite for quasi zone system metering (but hard to see in low light), it has TTL flash metering with the SB-600 which is great for events, and it has the A Mode which I just use for lowlight landscapes on a tripod with good results. The FM2N is the best value if you don’t need the above.
Schneider 90mm 2.8 on a Rolleiflex 6008. Medium format always beats 35mm. Leica is still a 'miniature' camera. Ricoh Rikenon lenses are superb too. Be more inclusive.
I don’t disagree with you.
My Mamiya C330 or RZ67 both take much, much better pictures. But, as someone who enjoys documentary and travel type photography the most, I accept some reduction in quality for portability and flexibility.
Is more personal preference. I have a 50 sonnar which is lovely, but still prefer lenses more character.
Leica > Voigtlander > zeiss
What lenses do you like that have with more character?
I have an old Nikkor 5cm f/2 LTM lens, the Zeiss 50mm Sonnar, and some old Nikkor F-Mount lenses as my classic designs “character lenses.”
@@ZachBie character is really subjective, l lean more towards a soft painterly glow in lenses. I have too many to count, but some of my favs are. Summilux 50 pre asph, summarit 50, summaron 35s, canon 50mm 1.5 ltm is wonderful.
Theres so many lenses that are clinically sharp, great contrast and colors. Zeiss does a good job of it. I find digital photography is just too perfectly clean. Maybe im old school, but i dont mind the grittiness of film and grain.
Zeiss and Voigtlander are made by the same company in Japan...Cosina!!
You’re correct, it would have helped it I mentioned that more clearly.
Nice M3! :)
Why do English speaking phtographers refer to lenses as fast and slow? I get it with film ISO but what does a 90mm make faster than a 28mm?
@@lelandfitz1762 fast and slow is in reference to the f-stop of the lens and how much light it can let in to expose the film, not the focal length, which is usually measured in mm like the 90mm and 28mm you noted.
So my new Voigtlander 28mm f/1.5 lets in about four times the light than my Zeiss 28mm f/2.8. About one stop of light from f/1.5 to f/2, and then another stop from f/2 to f/2.8. Each stop is doubling or halving the exposure when you open up or close down the lens.
Hopefully that helps some. A “fast” lens is great for shooting indoors or at night.
Such a cute size.
Hi thank you very good.
You claim that your Zeiss 35 mm f2.0 is better than for example Voightlander Nokton 35 mm f/1.2 Aspherical ? Don't exaggerate :).
Haha the good old clickbait title.
I would say that they are just different. The 35/1.2 is going to be better in some ways, but it is also slightly bigger and heavier than the Zeiss 35/2 (which is about the biggest I want for a 35mm M-mount lens).
I have found that when I travel I like to carry a 28 and 50 or a 35 and 50 kit, and I don’t want it to be any heavier than it has to be. A film M body, a Rollei 35T, small flash, 5-8 rolls of film and I am set for the day. And I’ve learned the hard way that if I am carrying my camera kit for 12-18 hours, I really don’t want anything more that the 6lbs or so the above already weighs.
@@ZachBie You discovered something new. Obviously Zeiss lenses are excellent. But why people who are really experts in using Leica don't use Zeiss lenses ?! Thy use Leica lenses or Voightlander. Maybe they are stupid. But you are really smart. You must tell them that news :).
By the way, it's not good clickbait title because in the future I'm not going to watch someone who is saying something like that :).
Zeiss does not make any of the mentioned lenses (never did).All Voigtlander and Zeiss lenses are made by Cosina in very same factory and probably by the same people.If you take latest versions of Voigtlander and Leica's they beat the crap out of these branded Zeiss lenses.The question is why would you buy Zeiss over new Voigtlander? For Leica is story pretty c!ear.
Correct, Cosina is the manufacturer of both Voigtlander and Zeiss branded lenses.
The argument that I make in the video is that for the time period Zeiss lenses were first released, and from say 2005-2015, they were the true middle ground in price, built better than most of the Voigtlander lenses of the early 2000s, and (just about) matched in optical quality while still cost much, much less than Leica lenses.
I say that the most recent Voigtlander (2020-2021) lenses are some of the best on the market. And they are a no-brainer if just entering the market today.
Nevertheless, I am very satisfied with my Zeiss lenses, which I find to be well balanced traditional optical designs unlike the brand new ASPH Voigtlander designs.
My decision making was also influenced by the fact that I bought all of my lenses except for one in Japan and they cost 2/3 ($300-400 less) than the retail in the United States.
@@ZachBie Yeah they are different then modern asph or Leica Apo design, and you are right about Japan prices.
Cosina is the manufacturer, but isn't it Zeiss who has designed the lenses? At least that was the case with Zeiss Icon ZM rangefinder camera. Zeiss designed it and Cosina just manufactured it. In a similar fashion Apple products are designed in California, USA and manufactured in China.
@@1111undici1111 Think that Zeiss Otus lens line is made in Oberkochen ,the rest is licensed to several different makers among them is also Cosina.
Leica also have some Lenses made by other brands !
Great video.
I’m glad you enjoyed it.
This is your wrong opinion. Leica has sharp optics like Zeiss and has optics with a pattern (which Zeiss doesn’t have - it’s too regular and boring)
I’ve got to say, you are all alone in your opinion. It could be because you shoot monochrome film. There’s a history of the manufacturers here you don’t understand. Clearly the modern Voigtländer and Leica lenses are superior, both in design and glass formulas. Of the three manufacturers Zeiss went a different direction than Leica and Voigtländer. Zeiss focused on more simple designs that were lighter and more easily produced for the German war effort. Leica designs are more more complicated, harder to manufacturer, and produce and hence more expensive. Zeiss pioneered lens coatings (cheaper) in an effort to lighten their designs, and overcome their lack of sophisticated glass proprietary formulas Leica and Voigtländer had, it’s rumored Voigtländer conducted espionage against Leica to get Leica glass formulas during the war years. All Voigtländer lenses made at Cosina are made with glass billets supply by Germany, and it’s a real toss up as to the build quality between modern Voigtländer (handmade in Japan) vs Leica lenses (handmade in Germany). The only modern Zeiss ZM lens matching up to Voigtländer or Leica is the 35mm F1.4 distigon, but even that lens now under performs the new offerings from both Voigtländer and Leica. I think you went down the rabbit hole with Zeiss M lenses.
I apologize, but I don’t understand part of your comment. Which opinion am I all alone in?
@@ZachBie The title; Zeiss M lenses are better than Voigtländer and Leica glass. Simply not true. Not in anyway, not design, not in build quality....and chromatic aberration is very much a problem with Zeiss M glass....almost a show stopper.
@@williaminbody205 I’m guessing you didn’t read the video description or watch the whole video (I don’t blame you as it ended up being quite long). I stated that the modern Voigtlander lenses are some of the most interesting lenses on the market today and that the Leica lenses are good (I don’t think very many people accuse Leica of producing bad lenses).
These Zeiss lenses are in some ways just as good as Leica lenses, and for me personally have some features that I like better than Leica.
The point of this video is to share some personal opinions after building a collection of Zeiss lenses and using them for the past five years. There is also the value for money. Leica lenses are sometimes better, but again a big point was for 1/3 to 1/4 of the cost of a Leica, you are getting often comparable optics.
Why do you need so many lenses ? Is that make you be a better photographer ? I try to understand. I am 71 yo and use Leica since i was 16 yo. I usually always use the same Leica 50mm f1,2 since then.
Increase their manufacturing tolerances…. 😅 Fairly sure u have no idea what you are talking about. If so please quote.
Why this is better then that. All great gear. Start making photo's and stop wasting your time on this. I have an M11 with the new summiluxes. My Friend has M9 and shoots very often better pictures 😁
Yes, all great gear. Voigtlander, Zeiss, and Leica don’t sell bad lenses, especially not in 2023. Not sure it is a waste of time though. I haven’t bought a single lens/camera/accessory since early 2020, but I have shot a couple hundred rolls of film.
So what ?
LOL.......click bait title. Maybe your "lack of knowledge" is at the core of your fault. Voigtlander was a camera company way before Zeiss and Leica. People buy these type of lenses to achieve a certain "look" and obviously for the quality factor as well. I would never say one of these three lenses manufacturer is better than the other, that's just a ridiculous thing to say.
I bought a konica hexar rf in mint condition, without lens, now i am looking for a 35mm lens, could be voigtländer or zeiss, not leica.. thanks....BM
The Hexar lenses are also quite good. Their 35mm f/2 would be a good choice too. I’m not sure on the current prices though. Voigtlander also would be an excellent choice.
Zeiss ZM lenses are definitely NOT better than Leica M lenses; because Zeiss ZM lenses rattle thus are poorly made.
See the video description.
I read the description of your video BEFORE posting my first comment, so my criticism of Zeiss ZM lenses still stands, this isn’t just my personal criticism, my criticism is widely shared by everyone who has used a Zeiss ZM lens
@@FART-REPELLENT thank you for sharing your opinion. I hope you have a great rest of you day. Cheers.
You are thinking of the "housing" of the Lenses, but the Lens elements are a different story, Leica Lens elements are not always the best AND other brands do also made Lenses for Leica ! I have Voigtländer APO-Lanthar Lenses which are built like a tank AND performs outstanding in image quality at a fraction of the overprized Leica Lenses !!! Leica today are for snob and fanbois. I have Leica R Lenses which I am happy with, but todays Leica Lenses are NOT worth their price !
lol, massive click bait, so blocked now.
I'm sorry but your video is SUCH a waste of time. Who cares about why you like that ergonomic feature or that other one? Your title says "why Zeiss GLASS" so you should compare lenses of similar focal length from both brands and show RESULTS. In top of that you admit to doing it for clickbait... just stop being annoying mate.
Boo hoo 😢 😂 good thing it’s not your video…cry about it some more. It’s his opinion
Ugly hoods blocking my view
That’s why they are vented.
Shoot on CL…no problem!
If someone pronounces the name Zeiss as you do, then it's clear to me that you don't know much about photography. Wasted time, sorry.
That you for your criticism of my accent, it added a lot to this comment section. Have a wonderful rest of your day.
Unfortunately I have a journalism degree and photography minor, so I really wasted years of education and mentoring from several newspaper photographers each with over 40 years of professional experience.
@@ZachBie Dear Zach B , nothing personal. Just note that Zeiss is almost two hundred years old famous German brand of optics manufacturer and as such deserves some respect. At least when pronouncing its name, which has nothing to do with accent, but rather education. At my alma mater (I'm also a journalism graduate, but nearly 50 years ago), my German professor would have killed me if I pronounced the word Zeiss like you do. However, this does not diminish the quality of the Zeiss product 😀 Have a nice day...