By the way, for anyone interested in a rectilinear lens for Architecture, artwork copy, interiors etc., this one has no visible distortion. The T* on the lens is a proprietary Zeiss trade mark for their own multi-coating. This is a feature of Zeiss lenses and is important to note when buying earlier Made in Germany Zeiss optics. The earliest Hasselblad lenses prior to T* coating exhibited flare making it imperative to use the designated lens hoods/shades for optimum results. The T*coating permits a higher degree of light transmission, resulting in slightly clearer colours and higher contrast. 👌 Thanks for the video!
I have this lens and the similar Zeiss 50mm F2 (shot on an M240). Both are incredible lenses with jaw-dropping sharpness and extremely little distortion. Honestly some of the best glass I've used on any system.
Dude your street photography is really really strong! I’m definitely in the same camp. 35mm is my go-to focal length for the types of things I like to shoot on film
I’ve had the f2 version since 2012 and it’s outlasted all other lenses I’ve owned regardless of system. Even a 50mm summicron. Zeiss ZM lenses are superb.
I use this lens on an M10. It seems to easily out-resolve the sensor even wide open, has great contrast, minimal chromatic aberration and coma, no distortion, and it really is tiny and light. It may not be a bokeh monster but I find subjects at moderate distances do pop out nicely at 2.8. I have since purchased the VM 35/1.4 as a knee-jerk reaction to the low-light performance of this one but I’m coming back around 😅
I used Leica M during the 90s and 2000s and got back into film and rangefinders just this year. In my opinion there is little reason to go for Leica lenses in these day and age. The competition really pulled their sock up and is on a level with Leica with respect of a pleasant character of the image as well as sharpness and resolution. 🎉
I used this lens on my M2, but ended up sticking with the 35 Ultron f2. The Biogon was nice, but I preferred the size of the Ultron. Stopped down I couldn’t really tell a difference between the two.
The Canon LTM 35mm f/2 is also a really good performer and also very compact. It does have an oddball 40mm filter thread and they are quite old so most copies out there are looking rough, but it's another option.
I love these lenses and regardless of what body they attach to…they perform amazingly well as it is obviously in the pudding. Always good to see you Hashem!
Beautiful lens! This was my first 35mm on Leica too. I loved it, super sharp, compact and amazing colours. But like many others I discovered the 35/2 Ultron and haven’t looked back. I think the Biogon might have just a touch more resolution but it’s not something I could ever see in a print (mostly in the darkroom). In terms of size and weight the Ultron is quite similar but offers an extra stop. If f/2.8 is fast enough then the Biogon is slightly higher performing.
Not finished the video yet but commenting about how your presented images are so consistent - wonderful work and genuinely inspiring me to get back out and shoot! My eyes see more with a 50mm but I am tempted to retry 35mm after this!
I like the lens. i run it together with Leica 50/2,4 Summarit, also tiny lens. Both quite fine on Digital as well, curently sitting on SL-2S and tried it on new M11 too. No issues there, can handle the 60 MPX just fine. Now waiting for my Leica MP, so the film fun can begin :)
I bought my m6 with a 35mm voigtlander f1.4 nokton classic. I always curious about this Zeiss lens since i have the Zeiss planar 50. Great video. Maybe i will give this a try and sell the voigtlander..
Great review of this lens! Seeing your other videos, I know you also use the Nikon ZF. How does this lens perform on the Nikon Z sensor stack? Would love to know this combo! I also have the Thypoch 35mm 1.4 so I'm trying to see how they would compare on the ZF. Thank you!
I'm going to go whole hog for the Zeiss 35mm 1.4 even with the size.. the image quality is phenomenal. Unless someone can tell me if the 35mm F2 is as sharp in the centre as I've heard its soft at F2
I’ve had the 35/2 for 7 years, and it is a wonderful lens. I think that at f/2 the Zeiss 35mm f/1.4 is a sharper lens - but it is also too big for me and my preferences.
First, quite a few stunning images in this review. I can't find anything in this review with which to disagree. I've owned/used 35V4 Cron, 35/2 ASPH, Voightlander 35/2.5 and the Zeiss 35/1.4 and the 35/2.8 Biogon ZM, which lives on an M262. The Biogon may be the best 35mm lens I've ever used on my Leicas in terms of image quality (as good or BETTER than my 35/2 ASPH), size and weight. It pairs like the V4 Cron. If you want to shoot wide open the 1.4 Zeiss is amazing, but you pay for it in size and weight. Also, the Voightlander LH-6 hood is less expensive than the Zeiss branded and works perfectly. Probably the same item rebranded. ;)
I think this lens wont be the best choice for that, older lenses with less coatings and sharpness will probably create that look more. One example I like is the Takumar Pentax lenses :-)
The only thing the stops me from buying is that bump instead of a regular tab 😢…I’ll probably save money for a second hand Summicron, now I have the nokton 35mm 1.4, is not that bad for black and white and printing in the darkroom……I don’t know if lens taab are still produced, do you considered it instead of ttartisan?
Anyone have experience with both this lens and the Biogon 35 f/2? I've had the f/2 for the past year, but I'd like something with a smaller form factor. I'm thinking about the Ultron (I desperately want a focusing tab), but there are a lot of things I like about the ZM series.
The Zeiss 35mm f/2 was my first M lens back in 2016, and I’ve owned it since. I like the size of the 35mm f/2.8 better, and the contrast and sharpness is a little punchier. For background I shoot only B&W film as I self-develop and scan. That said I still haven’t gotten rid of my 35/2 as I do sometimes need the extra stop when shooting in early mornings/late evenings/indoors. Also I find the 35/2 better matches the look of the 50/1.5 Zeiss. I took the 35/2.8 and the 50/1.5 on a trip together and when reviewing final images I found that there was sometimes a stark sharpness difference between the two. In closing, both are great lenses, but don’t think that the 35/2 is bad. I sometimes wish it was a little smaller, but it makes great images and is a well rounded lens with the extra stop when you need it.
Thanks! I don't consistently use any one colour film. However, the shots you're seeing here would be majority Kodak Pro Image, Fuji Superia Xtra/Premium, and Kodak Vision3
