ZM 28mm vs. Elmarit 28mm. Am I crazy?

Harry S. · 08-02-2008

Hello RFF.

For the last couple of weeks Ive been wanting the current version Elmarit 28mm f/2.8. The 'problem' is that I already have a very capable ZM Biogon 28mm of the same speed. I really enjoy the Biogon but I find it kind of large when I use a hood, and Im not a big fan of the handling of ZM/CV round hoods.

One of the things I love about RF cameras is their compact size, so I really want the lenses to be as small as possible. My favourite handling lens for this reason is the Nokton 35mm 1.4, and I really would love a 28mm lens that is closer in size to the Nokton.

Now, to pay $1500 on a new lens that doubles one I already have seems a little crazy to me...So I guess I would like to know, is the Elmarit that much better than the Biogon optically? Is it worth buying for this reason as well as being physically smaller?

Thanks for the wisdom :-)
H

back alley · 08-02-2008

most think the zm 28 is the better lens.

noimmunity · 08-02-2008

if it's compact size you want, the 28/3.5 from Cosina Voigtlander is unbeatable. It is half the size of the Nokton you have. Lots of examples from this lens to help you consider whether you want it.

There are other legacy lenses that are tiny, too.

In most situations, not all, the ZM lenses will do fine against flare without a hood.

i had both and decided for the ZM. others have gone the other way. my sense is that if you shoot predominantly B+W, the CV is the winner (unless you always shoot in very high contrast light). i like the look of the ZM in color better, though it is entirely entirely subjective. i knew that whatever my choice, i would always regret not having the other.

handling is important. get the one that feels right!

Avotius · 08-02-2008

Hm......I am in the final stages of preparing a little blurb review to stick up about the zeiss 28, but to put a long story short I think the zeiss could be a sleeper lens in the zm line, and despite the new leica I think its a keeper. The zeiss really is a color photo king, the leica I'm sure would be great for bw and probably no slouch on color either, but the zeiss is half the price....like said above maybe you can try out a cv 28 3.5, now that is a tiny lens and great optical qualities as well.

SolaresLarrave · 08-02-2008

Keep the Zeiss. It's a good lens.

I had once a similar experience, shortly after buying my Hexanon 35/f2. For some reason, I kept longing for a 'cron in the same focal length. With time (and getting used to the lens) I came to the conclusion that my lens was not in any kind of debt with the Leica, so I'm now a happy Konica shooter.

Cron · 08-02-2008

if you only decide because of the smallness between these two lenses you have to go for the Leica (if your fingers are small enough ;-)).
Optically I don't know the Leica 2,8/28 but the Biogon is really great and I don't know if the Leica really can beat it! Normally I use colour slides and therefore I'm really happy with the results the Biogon is able to do

BillBlackwell · 08-02-2008

Quote:

Originally Posted by Harry S.

... Now, to pay $1500 on a new lens that doubles one I already have seems a little crazy to me...

I would agree the question is less than rational. The ZM lenses are still quite compact compared to any SLR and the image quality they produce rival that of Leica's.

Quote:

Originally Posted by Harry S.

... So I guess I would like to know, is the Elmarit that much better than the Biogon optically?

No.

Quote:

Originally Posted by Harry S.

... Is it worth buying for this reason as well as being physically smaller?

No.

Harry S. · 08-02-2008

Thanks Bill (and everyone else who contributed). I'll keep the Biogon and perhaps get that 35mm summicron IV Ive always wanted instead of the Elmarit 28mm.

Captain · 08-03-2008

Many forget that the Current ASPH Elmarit is not as good as its predecessor which is superior wide open. The ASPH version was designed more compact and meant to appeal to M8 owners as their standard wide angle. With the M8 crop factor its edge wide open performance in comparison to the older one no longer matters. Given the Biogon is reputed to be equal the previous version then I think optically you would be taking a step back. Size is really the only advantage to you on the ASPH 28. Keep in mind however that the new Voigtlander 28mm f2 is more compact that its predecessor that may be an option to look at but in my opinion I agree with the others I would stick with the lens you have.

gohaj · 08-03-2008

Quote:

Originally Posted by noimmunity

if it's compact size you want, the 28/3.5 from Cosina Voigtlander is unbeatable. It is half the size of the Nokton you have. Lots of examples from this lens to help you consider whether you want it.

i think canon 28/3.5 is a strong competitor for cv 28/3.5.

gohaj · 08-03-2008

Quote:

Originally Posted by Harry S.

Hello RFF.

For the last couple of weeks Ive been wanting the current version Elmarit 28mm f/2.8. The 'problem' is that I already have a very capable ZM Biogon 28mm of the same speed. I really enjoy the Biogon but I find it kind of large when I use a hood, and Im not a big fan of the handling of ZM/CV round hoods.

One of the things I love about RF cameras is their compact size, so I really want the lenses to be as small as possible. My favourite handling lens for this reason is the Nokton 35mm 1.4, and I really would love a 28mm lens that is closer in size to the Nokton.

Now, to pay $1500 on a new lens that doubles one I already have seems a little crazy to me...So I guess I would like to know, is the Elmarit that much better than the Biogon optically? Is it worth buying for this reason as well as being physically smaller?

Thanks for the wisdom :-)
H

think you should stick to your ZM Biogon 28mm. If you are concern about the size, look for Canon 28/3.5 or CV 28/3.5 instead. For B&W, Canon 28/3.5 seems better than CV 28/3.5.

noimmunity · 08-03-2008

Quote:

Originally Posted by gohaj

i think canon 28/3.5 is a strong competitor for cv 28/3.5.

I agree, Gohaj, and I see in your following post that you give the edge to the Canon. Interesting! I would think the CV is definitely higher contrast and may even preserve highlight detail better, but I don't think I have seen enough from the Canon to judge that. What is your experience? Some of the other cognoscenti around here may pipe in as the sun winds its way around the world; the CV 28/3.5 has some devoted aficionados!

There are other possibilities, too. The Avenon 28/3.5 comes to mind, as would an M-Hexanon... I tried to nod/prod in that direction with the catch-all "legacy lenses" bit. The good thing is that any of these choices would only be a fraction of the cost of trading in the ZM Biogon for a Leica lens.

Once Avotius posts his review of the ZM 28 Biogon, I wonder if the used prices won't start to rise a bit? Used ZM 28s always seem to go for much less than other used ZM Biogons. If Harry decides to sell, maybe he should wait a bit...

sanmich · 08-03-2008

Quote:

Originally Posted by gohaj

i think canon 28/3.5 is a strong competitor for cv 28/3.5.

I am considering a 28mm myself.
If I'm not mistaking, all LTM canon lenses have a close focus limitation of 1m which I find very limitating for wides.

Captain · 08-03-2008

Quote:

For B&W, Canon 28/3.5 seems better than CV 28/3.5.

Strange, Tom A maintains the Voigtlander 28mm f3.5 is superb for black and white.

Avotius · 08-03-2008

If you are really chomping at the bit, and yes I know there is a strangely small amount of talk abuot the 28 biogon, I am right now writing up my mini report about this lens complete with all sorts of images taken in all sorts of situations. It should be up by tomorrow at least and if im lucky tonight. The 28 biogon is really great, I did some black and white shots on TRI-X and they came back really great, minus a developing problem (thin negatives, not my fault!). When I stick my report up here, you are all in for a treat!

Dektol Dan · 08-03-2008

Except for color rendition I can see little difference between the pre ASPH Leica 28 and the Zeiss. Both are similar size. Although type of film definitely has a part to play I find the Zeiss very blue in daylight. At first glance it turns all film in Ektachrome, but then on closer examination it is subtracting orange and yellow. In the attached shots the desert scape is definitely yellow orange or red orange, but not in the photograph. Also look for the flare in the sunrise shot. The sun was pretty far out of the picture. However, flare is always a problem with wide angle lenses so it really does a fine job of controlling it. A ZM hood was used in all shots.

Dektol Dan · 08-03-2008

Monument Valley Arizona colors are pretty well known.
Here's what the Biogon does to them.