@@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.
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.
@@davidharris8797 I’ve gotten these resolved twice since I purchased them. The first time by Baker’s and the second time locally in Southern California. Bakers did a better job, and in the future I’m most likely going to be sending all my boots back to Baker’s over a local shop. The arch support was changed and reduced, I am guessing due to the way they sanded the midsoles before applying the new outsoles. I also think I’ll be sending these in for a rebuild next year or the following. Probably doing all dark brown waxed flesh lowers.
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.
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.
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.
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.
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.
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 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.
For Street Photography, I cannot decide what type of camera I should choose between rangefinders and SLRs. They both have pros and cons. I’ve been shooting with SLR since the beginning of photography lessons decades ago and I’ve never used a rangefinder. Should I pick one up and just try to see if I like it or not? What’s your thoughts? Thx! 🎉
I prefer a rangefinder with a 35mm or 50mm lens for street photography. I took a Nikon SLR FM series camera on a few multi-week trips in SE Asia and found I could usually only take one picture before the subject noticed the sound of the mirror slap. With one of my film Leica’s I can often take a few photos of a scene unfolding without drawing as much attention to myself because of the camera’s sound. I also found that it is easier for my to focus with a rangefinder in low light. I had a little difficulty with my Nikon and a Voigtlander 58mm f/1.4 and 28mm f/2.8 wide open photographing indoors.
@@ZachBie Yes, indeed, SLR cameras’ are loud on releasing shutters. I had a FM before. Okay, it seems to me that parallax isn’t a big concern for you? I’m so used to do cropping in camera, what I see is what I get. Maybe I should forget about it and start fresh with rangefinder cameras and try getting used to it?
@@silvestersze9968 I recall my FM Series cameras have 93% viewfinder coverage, so it still isn’t perfect and you get a little more than you can see. The rangefinders are usually similar with a little additional image captured outside of the frame lines when photographing far away subjects. An SLR is better when I am trying to photograph through a chain link fence and can be nice with a 28mm or wider lens to see how distortion is impacting my image (tilting my camera up or down). Though rangefinder wide angle lenses are usually smaller and I find can be sharper than my Nikkor AI and AIS lenses. I do tend to like my SLRs better when shooting 85mm or longer lenses. Also SLR’s are the best option for close up photography.
@@ZachBie I see. Thanks for your input. This’s really helpful. As I love Street Photography, I’m trying different focal lengths between 28mm and 50mm. My favorite for now is 35mm. So, according to what you have just said in the above, if I wanted to use a 28mm wide angle then I would probably want to use a SLR for a job. I want to pick a ‘right lens’ for myself after reading a quote from one of my favorite photographers: “The best lens for you is one that feels that matches your personality.” - Joel Meyerowitz
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 :).
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.
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.
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.
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 🍻
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.
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.
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 🙏🏻
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.
Do you still have your bounty hunters? I would love to see an update video to see how they've aged over the past 6 years since this video. Also, have you ever posted these on r/goodyearwelt?
I have not posted them to Reddit. Though I recently did just have them resoled with a full-length 430 mini-lug sole. I think I am going to continue to wear and enjoy them, and then possibly to a rebuild ~5 years down the road in full-black chromexcel.
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.
B+W F-Pro UV Filter instead of a 43mm Zeiss T* UV isn't that good idea..filter is good, have them also, but on Zeiss, only Zeiss UV/MC Protector filters.
@@ZachBie Well, for the most part, you won't see a difference, vs. scientific tests, but i think it's better to use Zeiss. I have Contax(Kyocera) and Zeiss UV filters on my Contax/Zeiss lenses. The T* (speaken: T-Star) antireflective mulitcoating is excellent.
@@marcp.1752 I have one of the 43mm Zeiss filters that I picked up with my 84mm f/4 lens, but I am shooting with a yellow filter 80% of the time unless it is overcast, indoors, low light.
@@ZachBie I see. Well, i'm not using a yellow filter anymore. I know from the old days, a yellow filter usually eats up +1 stop, a orange filter +2 stops, and a red filter +3 stops into general. And since the difference is negledgible, with digital, i simulate the filter in post. With 35mm film of course, there's no option like that. Here we do have way much overcast light during the week, so it's pretty normal. I'd wish for a new version of the Zeiss Ikon ZM rangefinder, or perhaps a digital one (albeit i do shoot 90% film these years...)
@@marcp.1752 I am looking on getting my first digital camera since I bought a Nikon D750 in 2016, I am thinking the Fuji X100V replacement if one comes out at the end of the year or early next year. Or maybe the new Nikon Mirrorless bodies. I really only use my digital camera for “scanning” my film negatives and the occasional portrait shoot request from friends that I decide to take on.
Don’t worry, I put them back soon after I made this video. I actually use Nick’s beaded kilties as I find they have a better shape and are a little wider at the top. I’m just waiting to find time to take these boots in for their third set of soles.
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.
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.
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 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.
