Steve Huff Review Voigtlander 35/1.7 vs ZM 35/1.4

[uhoh7]

You said this before and I wasn't sure. I thought about it, have been browsing ebay, and now I agree. If you want a "clean" (high resolution, no distortion, etc.), f2 or faster RF 35mm, in the < 2000$ ballpark, you basically have 3 choices: (1) Summicron ASPH, (2) ZM Biogon, and (3) this one. For my M, I probably would pick a Biogon. (3) is the only one that doesn't smear corners on the A7.

Roland.

I did get a Biogon, after alot of reading, for my M9. On the A7.mod it's actually usable, but still not as good as M9.

Someday I might get a asph. or who knows? Maybe an Ultron, which I bet would just smoke on a Kolari A7.

The trump of the asph is the form factor.

 

[uhoh7]

The ultron has quite an advocate for use with with A7:

http://www.fredmiranda.com/forum/topic/1255248/1154#13227353

Phillipe goes on to say if he only kept a single lens it would be this one, and this is a guy who has shot many many lenses on the A7, some loaned by Sony to him.

 

[trip-xa]

I am wondering why in the head bartender's OP and on the CQ website the Voigtlander 35mm family photo omits the Nokton 35mm f1.4. I get that it's not in this discussion and doesn't rival the lenses dicussed here, but it is still available and offers value for a film M shooter looking for a 35mm lens.

 

[Erik van Straten]

It is a great lens for film.

Leica M2, Nokton-M 35mm f/1.7, Tmax400.

Erik.

 

[Huss]

It is a great lens for film.

Leica M2, Nokton-M 35mm f/1.7, Tmax400.

Erik.

Excellent photo. I should see if I have any TMAX in my freezer.