Site Sponsors
Results 1 to 15 of 15

Thread: ZM Biogon 28mm f/2.8 vs Ultron 28 f/1.9 or f/2

  1. #1
    Super Duper
    Senior Member
    Godfrey's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2009
    Location
    Near San Jose, California
    Posts
    7,928
    Post Thanks / Like

    ZM Biogon 28mm f/2.8 vs Ultron 28 f/1.9 or f/2

    Similar to the other question I just posed, has anyone used both or all three of these lenses and can you comment on how they compare? I know some folks have said the Ultron 28/2 exhibits focus shift (a pain on M bodies) but this doesn't concern me much at the moment since I'm consider what to buy for a TTL camera (Ricoh GXR+A12 Camera Mount ... I'll be able to see focus shifts very easily and compensate).

    Any thoughts ... thanks in advance! :-)

  2. #2
    Super Duper
    Senior Member
    seakayaker's Avatar
    Join Date
    Apr 2010
    Location
    Seattle, WA
    Posts
    2,889
    Post Thanks / Like

    Re: ZM Biogon 28mm f/2.8 vs Ultron 28 f/1.9 or f/2

    The only one I have used is the Ultron 28/1.9 and I love it.

    Even though this is the LTM mount it is selling new $100.00 higher then the 'M' mount (f2) at Camerquest.

    Samples taken with the M9 can be found here: http://www.flickr.com/photos/2667261...7626465325520/

  3. #3
    Super Duper
    Senior Member
    Godfrey's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2009
    Location
    Near San Jose, California
    Posts
    7,928
    Post Thanks / Like

    Re: ZM Biogon 28mm f/2.8 vs Ultron 28 f/1.9 or f/2

    Thanks Dan.

    I'll probably toss a coin and pick one of the Voigtländers. I like the smaller size and focusing lever of the 28/2, but several people on other forums have sung praises of the 28/1.9 ... but I'd rather have a black one, and CQ only has silver left in stock ... what's a ditherer to do? ;-)

  4. #4
    Super Duper
    Senior Member

    Join Date
    Mar 2009
    Posts
    3,672
    Post Thanks / Like

    Re: ZM Biogon 28mm f/2.8 vs Ultron 28 f/1.9 or f/2

    Hi Godfrey,

    I've shot all three but "NOT" at the exact same time for a well controlled test. I found pretty much what had been described by others (assuming good samples of each). The 28 f2 and 28 f2.8 had higher contrast that the f1.9, which is a much lower contrast lens and appears therefore to have less "punch" and gives the illusion of lower sharpness. The 28mm f2 and f2.8 lenses both had about equal central sharpness with the Zeiss maybe having even more contrast than the f2 and a smigin more resolution..but too close to call. The other differences is the 28 f1.9 seemed to have better sharpness into the corners than the other two lenses at wider apertures. I could easily detect the focus shift with the f2 lens. In higher contrast shooting situations, especially with digital and also shooting B&W, my choice might be be the f1.9 . For color work, less contrasty situations and where ultimate appearance of sharpess and detail is of importance (or desired), I would opt for either the Zeiss of f2 lens. Conclusion: It's less of "is one better than the other"...just different lenses and much depends on personal preferences and primary use. Thats my take.

    Dave (D&A)

  5. #5
    Super Duper
    Senior Member
    Godfrey's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2009
    Location
    Near San Jose, California
    Posts
    7,928
    Post Thanks / Like

    Re: ZM Biogon 28mm f/2.8 vs Ultron 28 f/1.9 or f/2

    Thanks Dave!

    I have a line on a used black Ultron 1.9 and the 2.0 is available at the same price new. I'll toss my coin a little later today. :-)

  6. #6
    Super Duper
    Senior Member

    Join Date
    Mar 2009
    Posts
    3,672
    Post Thanks / Like

    Re: ZM Biogon 28mm f/2.8 vs Ultron 28 f/1.9 or f/2

    Quote Originally Posted by Godfrey View Post
    Thanks Dave!

    I have a line on a used black Ultron 1.9 and the 2.0 is available at the same price new. I'll toss my coin a little later today. :-)
    What do you mean "toss a coin"...I thought you're buying both, keeping one and giving away the other

    Anyhow, between the two, both are nice...just quite different. Let us know which one "won" the coin toss and how you like it.

    Dave (D&A)

  7. #7
    Not Available
    Join Date
    Jul 2009
    Location
    New York
    Posts
    1,864
    Post Thanks / Like

    Re: ZM Biogon 28mm f/2.8 vs Ultron 28 f/1.9 or f/2

    They're all good lenses, really.

    - ZM: Best of the bunch, highest contrast, only f/2.8
    - 1.9: Lower contrast, flares/CAs a bit, fastest of the bunch
    - 2.0: Medium contrast, mid-range speed, focus shift

  8. #8
    Super Duper
    Senior Member
    Godfrey's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2009
    Location
    Near San Jose, California
    Posts
    7,928
    Post Thanks / Like

    Re: ZM Biogon 28mm f/2.8 vs Ultron 28 f/1.9 or f/2

    Quote Originally Posted by D&A View Post
    What do you mean "toss a coin"...I thought you're buying both, keeping one and giving away the other

    Anyhow, between the two, both are nice...just quite different. Let us know which one "won" the coin toss and how you like it.
    LOL! I'm not that wealthy.

    But I figure ... If I pick up the Ultron 28/2 and love it on the GXR-M, but then a year from now I buy an M9 and its focus shift drives me batty, I can always then buy the Summicron-M 28/2 or Zeiss ZM 28/2.8 and sell off the Ultron for most of what I paid for it.

    Of course, Leica should have their own LIVE camera out by then so it's quite likely that I will just buy one of those bodies and use these lenses on it, presuming that it is compatible with Leica M-bayonet mount. (Can't see why they wouldn't do that, but ya never know ...)

    Whatever I get right now, it will sit in its box for a few weeks while I countdown to the Ricoh A12 Camera Mount arrival. !!!

  9. #9
    Super Duper
    Senior Member
    Godfrey's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2009
    Location
    Near San Jose, California
    Posts
    7,928
    Post Thanks / Like

    Re: ZM Biogon 28mm f/2.8 vs Ultron 28 f/1.9 or f/2

    Quote Originally Posted by Double Negative View Post
    They're all good lenses, really.

    - ZM: Best of the bunch, highest contrast, only f/2.8
    - 1.9: Lower contrast, flares/CAs a bit, fastest of the bunch
    - 2.0: Medium contrast, mid-range speed, focus shift
    Thanks! That's pretty much what I figured. Since I'm working with a TTL camera for the time being, I think the coin just fell on the Ultron 28/2 side ... save a bit of money, no mount adapter needed, smaller and faster than the f/1.9 model.

  10. #10
    Senior Member thrice's Avatar
    Join Date
    Aug 2009
    Posts
    1,265
    Post Thanks / Like

    Re: ZM Biogon 28mm f/2.8 vs Ultron 28 f/1.9 or f/2

    Quote Originally Posted by Godfrey View Post
    faster than the f/1.9 model.
    You misspelled slower

  11. #11
    Super Duper
    Senior Member
    Godfrey's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2009
    Location
    Near San Jose, California
    Posts
    7,928
    Post Thanks / Like

    Re: ZM Biogon 28mm f/2.8 vs Ultron 28 f/1.9 or f/2

    Quote Originally Posted by thrice View Post
    You misspelled slower
    LOL ... thanks for the correction. :-)

  12. #12
    Senior Member
    Join Date
    Feb 2011
    Posts
    449
    Post Thanks / Like

    Re: ZM Biogon 28mm f/2.8 vs Ultron 28 f/1.9 or f/2

    I had the Ultron f2 while waiting for a 28mm Summicron and it was a very nice lens, except the focus shift drove me up the wall. Sometimes it doesn't matter, a big scene with nothing specific that is the point of focus, f/8, and its a joy to use. But as soon as I wanted to pick out a subject or work closer I'd need to focus bracket on the M9 and hope for the best. For other cameras I can imagine it would be terrific.

    Steve

  13. #13
    Super Duper
    Senior Member
    Godfrey's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2009
    Location
    Near San Jose, California
    Posts
    7,928
    Post Thanks / Like

    Re: ZM Biogon 28mm f/2.8 vs Ultron 28 f/1.9 or f/2

    Thanks Steve!

    I placed an order for the Ultron 28/2 yesterday. I'm sure it will work fine on the GXR. I'll find out just how difficult it is on the rangefinder bodies in the future... if I get there. I'm not sure what the future holds ... plans can always change. ;-)

  14. #14
    Super Duper
    Senior Member

    Join Date
    Mar 2009
    Posts
    3,672
    Post Thanks / Like

    Re: ZM Biogon 28mm f/2.8 vs Ultron 28 f/1.9 or f/2

    Quote Originally Posted by thrice View Post
    You misspelled slower
    Maybe, maybe not. Aren't you on the other side of the world where therefore things are either backwards to, or mirror images of, our side?

    Dave (D&A)
    Last edited by D&A; 20th August 2011 at 07:21.

  15. #15
    Super Duper
    Senior Member

    Join Date
    Mar 2009
    Posts
    3,672
    Post Thanks / Like

    Re: ZM Biogon 28mm f/2.8 vs Ultron 28 f/1.9 or f/2

    Quote Originally Posted by Godfrey View Post
    Thanks Steve!

    I placed an order for the Ultron 28/2 yesterday. I'm sure it will work fine on the GXR. I'll find out just how difficult it is on the rangefinder bodies in the future... if I get there. I'm not sure what the future holds ... plans can always change. ;-)
    I recall when Voigtlander released their initial series of lenses years ago (in the film era only) and the 28mm f1.9 was among them. It's interesting to see how this then upstart company made some initial offerings that even today are highly regarded and even more of a financial bargin considering prices of many other manufacturer's lenses these days. Of course some of their optical properties reflected use on film.

    Good luck with their 28mm f2, another very fine lens (especially if used on a system whereby dealing with it's focus shift is much easier).

    Dave (D&A)
    Last edited by D&A; 20th August 2011 at 07:22.

Tags for this Thread

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •