news: Zeiss Biogon 35/2.8

[joop]

See:

 

www.zeiss.com/C1256A770030BCE0/WebViewTopNewsAllE/738D20DA1D354511C125741100297832?OpenDocument

[stuart_richardson]

My question is why? There is already a glut of good 35mm lenses on the market -- their own

35mm f/2, all three of the Leica 35mm lenses (1.4, 2 and 2.5), multiple lenses from

voigtlander -- 1.2, 1.4, 1.7, 2.5, not to mention older lenses by Leica, Konica, Canon and

even Nikon. If you were looking for a compact 35mm lens, there is the brand new Leica

Sumarit, the older 35/2 non-asph, and the Voigtlander 1.4 and 2.5 lenses...all of these are

faster than the Zeiss, and many would be cheaper or around the same price as the Zeiss. It

just seems like an odd choice. They have hardly any telephoto lenses in the ZM lineup...why

don't they put out something other than the 85/2?

[john_gleason1]

"If you were looking for a compact 35mm lens, there is the brand new Leica Sumarit, the older 35/2 non-asph, and the Voigtlander 1.4 and 2.5 lenses...all of these are faster than the Zeiss, and many would be cheaper or around the same price as the Zeiss"

 

I'm not so sure. The best US price I can find on the 35 Summarit f/2.5 is about $1350 (and that's for a demo lens). Meanwhile, the 35 f/2.0 Biogon is $875, brand new. I'd have to guess that the new f/2.8 Biogon would be less expensive than the f/2.0 Biogon. If that's correct, that's competitive with the newly introduced CV 35 f/1.4.

 

In other words, a f/2.8 Biogon might just have a pretty attractive price, at least here in the US. And as I recall, one of the complaints about the f/2.0 Biogon is that it's too big (meaning, bigger than a 35 'Cron, I guess). And if the f/2.8 Biogon has the image quality of the f/2.0 Biogon, this could be an interesting lens.

 

Zeiss probably doesn't see much need for a ZM lens longer than 85.

[aizan_sasayama]

I think it'll be a very appealing lens, if it's as good or better than the Biogon: even more

flare resistant, maybe less field curvature and coma, as sharp and tonally pleasing, and

have as smooth bokeh. And it's really small.

 

The Summarit and used Summicrons mainly have price going against them, while the

Voigtlanders either have harsh bokeh wide open (Nokton Classic), or are reputedly too

contrasty (Color-Skopar), and aren't as nicely made. It's still fast enough for most indoor

shooting, so speed isn't that big a draw.

 

An 85/2.8 is probably the next 'c' lens in the pipeline.

[len_smith]

I'm with John here. The 35/2.8 is an excellent idea, a cheaper and more compact alternative to the 35/2.0.

 

It is clearly a response to Leica's 35/2.5 Summarit and for that reason, I would not be surprised to see an f/2.8 version of the 85mm Sonnar and possibly even a 50mm in due course.

[rjm photo]

I would have preferred a LTM version.

[jose_angel]

As a `cron 35 and Elmar 50 user, the only lens that could catch my attention could be somekind of retractable Elmar 35; I only miss a high quality 35mm in an Elmar 50 size. Does anybody knows about the "real" dimensions of this lens? Zeiss data include caps!! (?).<p><i>"Dimensions (with caps): 52 mm diameter, length 55 mm"</i>

[jose_angel]

I wonder why Zeiss likes to play the misleading-data game.

 

FWIW, if the image provided by Zeiss is scaled, that new lens must be around 32mm lenght (from the mount); it means slightly shorter than a `cron 35 asph (aprox. -2mm).

[samuel_dilworth]

The press release says the price will be approximately 590 euros excluding VAT.

 

A lot of people like the Biogon f/2 35 mm but the specs aren't that appealing to me. The 35 mm Summicron ASPH is a fair bit shorter, has two fewer elements, and was designed over a decade ago, yet still manages to produce a sharper image wide open. The Summicron also has the useful focusing tab that the Biogon lacks. Unfortunately the price is typical Leica circa-2008.

 

The new C Biogon f/2.8 will probably be optically admirable, and estimating from the press release pics as Jose did above, it seems that Zeiss did a good job of keeping the size small. (Jose: I think Zeiss state the entire length of the lens, excluding lens caps but including the portion inside the camera. Leica measure the length from the flange. Both companies should provide both measurements in my opinion.)

 

Might be a nice lens, though ultimately it's slower than ideal for people shooting film.

[samuel_dilworth]

I beg your pardon, Jose. I didn't notice that Zeiss does indeed specify the length including

lens caps. How odd!

[jose_angel]

I checked also the german version, looking for a bad translation, but it doesn`t.<p><i>"Maߥ (mit Deckeln): ؠ52 mm, L䮧e 55 mm"</i>

[mohir_ali]

Another too expensive and too slow from CV. It makes the 35/1.4 look cheap, not that it is.

[frank]

I think it's the right joice for 35mm-loonies like me. I already use a Summilux ASPH 35/1.4, a Nokton 35/1.2 and a nice Pancake II 35/2.5. If I don't come to my senses 'til this Biogon is available, I will buy it.

 

;-)