ZF35/2, Leica 35 'Lux ASPH, Canon 35L: experiences?

[robmac]

Put three prints of the same subject, same body (say a Canon w/adapters), same shooting aperture, etc with no PP other than some USM (e.g. no trying to equalize colors, contrast) and I suspect most viewers would pick the ZF or Leica prints over the Canon's:

Better micro and macro contrast, more accurate color (no Canon over-the-top reds and yellowish greens) and with the Zeiss, more of a 3D 'pop' effect.

Sharpness-wise it would be fair to call them on-par (or close enough not to matter), the greater differentiators will be how the shooter prefers their macro/micro contrast, color, temp, skin tones, CA, etc.

Another lens to consider is the Leica 35 Summicron. Easily adapts to an EOS body (summilux not so much unless you shoot APS-C) and a hell of an optic. ZF beats it WO, but after that....

 

[fotografz]

While I have most of the ZF line, I've not used the ZF35/2 ... yet. As far as the ZFs I do own, I guess I've been lucky as none have build quality issues at all. My ZF100/2 focus is perfectly dampened with just the right amount of resistance.

I have used the Leica M35/LUX and Canon 35/1.4L extensively. The Leica on film bodies and the M8 ... and 3 different 35/1.4Ls on an EOS1V, and most all of the Canon digital bodies: from cropped frame, to the 5D, to all the 1 series including the 1DsMKIII. I especially despised the 5D camera in almost every ergonomic and tactile respect ... and can only hope Canon totally redesigns it's replacement for the sake of Canon lovers.


If, (BIG IF) one doesn't care about AF, then I'd own none of the Canon lenses below 85mm ... However, I can say that the 35/1.4 is the best of the worst. I do not care for distortion to the degree delivered by Canon wide angle lenses including the 35/1.4L, nor do I care for them on Canon digital bodies with their aggressive sensor filters. In addition, Leica and Zeiss micro contrast is a massivly different optical look compared to anything Canon produces.


I tried everything with my Canons ... adapted Leica R to them, and especially adapted C/Y Zeiss optics like the 28/2 and a few zooms ... plus a Conrus converted Zeiss N24-85/3.5 that retains full auto aperture functions and AF on the Canons. I was most certainly not alone in this quest to use something else, anything else other than Canon wides.

After years of this, I surrendered.

I can say if one wants to use the excellent ZF line with all the color rendition and 3D pop associated with Zeiss optics, and doesn't care about AF that much, then IMHO the weapon to consider is the D700. I could not focus my ZFs wide open very well on the D300, a BrightScreen magnifier helped, but upon getting the D700 my manual focus hit ratio increased dramatically ... and even "dramatically" is an understatement.

 

[LCT]

...I could not focus my ZFs wide open very well on the D300, a BrightScreen magnifier helped, but upon getting the D700 my manual focus hit ratio increased dramatically ... and even "dramatically" is an understatement.

You mean with the built-in focus screen of D700?

 

[robmac]

Am close to the same position Marc was one re: surrendering. While I like what my 1Ds2 delivers and the ease of focusing with it, am getting tired of using adapters, stop-down, etc.

The new ZE line would help - but (assuming the rumors bear out) it still limits you to EOS or ZE for auto-stop down. With Nikon, you'd have ZF, CV, Nikon MF and AF - including the new stellar AF wide zooms.

 

[fotografz]

You mean with the built-in focus screen of D700?

Yes, the screen from the factory is much easier for me to focus with ... and the D700 focus confirmation, which I do use, is also easier to see and adjust to compared to the D300 (IMO, and direct recent experience with both cameras using the same ZF lenses.)

 

[fotografz]

Am close to the same position Marc was one re: surrendering. While I like what my 1Ds2 delivers and the ease of focusing with it, am getting tired of using adapters, stop-down, etc.

The new ZE line would help - but (assuming the rumors bear out) it still limits you to EOS or ZE for auto-stop down. With Nikon, you'd have ZF, CV, Nikon MF and AF - including the new stellar AF wide zooms.

Not to mention that with the non-CPU ZFs you can program them into the D300, D700 and D3 so the casmera is working with the aperture info ... I don't think Canon has that feature.

 

[LCT]

Great thanks.

 

[NonFiction]

Damn, Marc, you're not helping my tendency to lean toward the D700. Obviously at this point, waiting to see what Canon's got in the offing is called for. I haven't yet owned a 5D but from some limited experiences with it do agree that the replacement has much to improve upon, in terms of ergonomics and general gearheady tactile niceness.

Not for nothing is the Nikon looking like a winner. Curious too, though, to see if Zeiss does release the 35/2 in an EOS mount. That would be downright nifty.

 

[Stuart Richardson]

For me, the switch to Nikon from Leica (I still use it) was pretty easy. The layout of the cameras (I use the D3 and F6) is very intuitive, very ergonomic and you can tell that they were designed by someone who understood how photographers work. I used a 5D for awhile, and I got the opposite impression. I did like the camera, but I just did not like it nearly as much as the D3. One of the key points of annoyance for me was the on/off/wheel switch. Why? Why couldn't they just have the on off switch on the release like every other camera? That way you bring it to your eye while turning the switch and you are ready to go. With Canon you need to look at the back of the camera and move your hand from the shooting position to turn the camera on, and make sure you did not turn it too far to actuate the wheel, because god forbid you do that -- then your nose will turn that damn wheel and your focus points will be all over the place.

Anyway, that is a bit of an exaggeration, but it is a snippet of my relative experience with the cameras. The only caveat I have here -- beware Nikon manual focus. Try before you buy. All Nikon manual focus lenses have their focus and their aperture run the opposite direction from Leica, Hasselblad, Rollei, Canon, Mamiya, Fuji and most other camera makers I have used. This means that if you still shoot frequently with Leicas and so on, you will find yourself turning the lens in the wrong direction. It is a pain in the ass. Luckily the manual focus indicators on the Nikon point in the proper direction, so if you just look in the viewfinder it will tell you which way to turn though. It is still a pain -- I keep thinking, "I want infinity, so turn the lens counter-clockwise", but it is clockwise on the Nikons. It is amazing how these things become hardwired after awhile...changing it sounds easy but it is not.