35mm Zeiss lens - used market?

<p>Dear all,</p>

<p>I'm trying to join the world of rangefinder photography. I recently bought a Zeiss Ikon ZI body and am now after a 35mm lens to get me started.<br>

I have a relatively small budget, max aprx 300euro, so would very much like some suggestions from all of you experienced members:<br>

1. Would you suggest the Zeiss ZM Biogon 35mm 2.8 is a 'good' choice considering budget?<br>

2. If so, where could I buy this lens used? Within Europe, to be sent to Germany.<br>

3. If no, what do you recommendend and where could I buy it?</p>

<p>Your help is much appreciated!</p>

<p>Greetings,<br>

Max</p>

<p>Hello Max <br /><br />To "help" you I can point you to this: <br />http://www.ebay.com/itm/140647868621?ssPageName=STRK:MESELX:IT&_trksid=p3984.m1555.l2649<br /><br />It's my lens.<br /><br />You can also try the Leica shop:<br />https://www.leicashop.com/vintage/index.php?language=en<br>

And you can try Ffordes:<br />www.ffordes.com<br>

Hope this helps.</p>

<p>The Cosina/Voigtlander lenses are an option. I have the Ultron 35/1.7 and it is good. There is a less expensive 35/2.5 also. The Canon and Nikon 35mm lenses (screw mount, so adapter ring needed) are well regarded also. Probably the cheapest option is the USSR-made Jupiter-12: though that has a bulbous rear which may crash into something in the body.</p>

Zeiss is a good choice, Voigtlander, or a good used Leica Summaron. KEH is a popular dealer of used equipment

with an excellent return and warranty policy. I would think they'd ship to Europe.

<p>Maximilian,<br>

You can't go wrong with any Carl Zeiss ZM lens. Voigtlanders are great for the price. It would be great if You find ZM Biogon in VG shape within Your price range.<br>

Stay away from USSR-made lenses. I would rather mount ZM to Soviet camera :)</p>

<p>Or, Canon 35mm/2.0 (mid 60's) for approx $350 USD. Excellent budget lens, Summicron performance.</p>

<p>f2.8 is quite slow for having only one lens. Minimum f2.0. Look hard on the used market or evaluate the CV lenses.</p>

<p>The Zeiss is a terrific first lens. Don't worry about speed at this point -- it's better to concern yourself with learning how to work with a rangefinder system first. You can get better faster lenses later.</p>

<p>Steve Huff provides really good hands-on reviews of the Zeiss ZM lenses on his site.</p>

<p>Max: I am afraid that your approx. 300 Euro budget will not get you even half way to the price of any used current Zeiss Ikon lens. But you may find a used Cosina Voigtlander lens in your budgetary range. Great description of those lenses at Cameraquest.com. They are very good lenses, excellent when you consider the price.<br>

You can watch the classifieds at Rangefinderforum.com. That site is down with technical problems now but should be back up, hopefully tomorrow. E-Bay is always an alternative but prices tend to be more reasonable at RFF since it is somewhat of a small community mostly selling to friends.</p>

<p>As long as you are wishing, I'd suggest a Zeiss Planar instead of the Biogon. I have both lenses and I find the Planar much sharper. When I asked Zeiss about the difference they opined that the Biogon was designed to emulate an older style lens that was more "atmospheric."</p>

<p>My experience differs from Steve's. I have owned the ZM 50mm Planar, the ZM 35mm f2.0 Biogon and the Zeiss 35mm f2.0 Planar (ContaxG mount). I found each of them to be excellent and not that much different.<br>

I sold the 50mm Planar after a few years only because 50mm is a focal length that I do not use much.<br>

The 35mm f2.0 Biogon was recently stolen. I am in the market to replace it with an identical model.<br>

The 35mm Planar was my standard lens for about 7 years. But I transitioned away from the ContaxG system to ZI M mount system.<br>

FWIW, the 35mm Biogon was my standard lens for several years. The 28mm Biogon has become my standard for the last two years.I have already replaced my stolen 28mm Biogon with an identical one.<br>

I am reasonably well exhibited. My standard print size is either 10x12 1/2 or 9x13 1/2. I can see no difference in the print quality for any of the above lenses.<br>

Zeiss has the MTF curves for both the 50mm Planar and the 35mm Biogon on their website. Not much difference.</p>

<p> </p><div></div>

<p>Thanks to everyone for the informative responses! <br /><br />So it seems that the Biogon seems to be a good choice despite the relatively lower speed. If i find one within my price range I will pounce! Other options are;<br /><br />Cosina/Voigtlander Ultron 35/1.7 or 35/2.5<br />Canon and Nikon 35 mm <br /><br />@ Paul - any more info on the lens? - 'Canon 35mm/2.0 (mid 60's) approx $350 USD'<br /><br />I'll head over to rangefinderforum now and post an 'want' thread! <br /><br />Again, appreciate the advice.<br /><br /></p>

<p>Max,<br>

Sorry for the late visit, but if you haven't gotten the Biogon yet, with regards to image quality, Erwin Puts has run some tests of both the 35mm f2 and f2.8 Biogon lenses; the f2.8 outperforms the f2 wide open, but not really by much. I own several 35mm Leica lenses and will use only my 35mm f1.4 ASPH Summilux-M (the second version that was recently discontinued) only if I need the extra speed, otherwise it's my 35mm f2 Biogon. I haven't used the Voigtlander lenses, but if I were to choose, I would stick with the Biogons for better contrast and resolution.</p>