On left the Loxia 35mm corner at f/2.0. On right the [shoplink 9808 ebay]ZM[/shoplink] at f/2.0 (Image 3D-Kraft)
As you know the new Zeiss Loxia FE lenses are based on the current [shoplink 9808 ebay]Zeiss ZM lens design[/shoplink]. There were some worries that the new Loxia may be just the same ZM lenses with an E as mount. Well 3D-Kraft compared the new Loxia 35mm lenses with the “older” [shoplink 9808 ebay]ZM 35mm lens[/shoplink]. And as you see form the images on top there is a clear optical advantage on the Loxia. 3D-Kraft writes:
Although the Zeiss Loxia 2/35 uses a similiar (and proven) lens design like the ZM Biogon 2/35 (designed for range finder cameras), it is distinctly and visibly better optimized to requirements of the Sony digital A7 / A7R sensors.
Zeiss Loxia preorders:
Zeiss Loxia 50mm f/2 Planar T* Lens for Sony E Mount at BHphoto, Adorama., WexUK, CameraPro.
Zeiss Loxia 35mm f/2 Biogon T* Lens for Sony E Mount at BHphoto, Adorama, WexUK, CameraPro.
Zeiss Lens Hood for Loxia 50mm f/2 Planar T* Lens at BHphoto and Adorama.
Zeiss Lens Hood for Loxia 35mm f/2 Biogon T* Lens at BHphoto and Adorama.
Zeiss 52mm Front Lens Cap for Touit and Loxia Lenses at BHphoto and Adorama.
Zeiss De-Click Key for Loxia Lenses (5-Piece Set) at BHphoto and Adorama.
Zeiss Rear Lens Cap for Loxia E-Mount Lenses at BHphoto and Adorama.
0 Responses
Excellent news…but still no Sonnar challenger..
Maybe the FE 1.4
Maybe the ZM 1.4
Or voigtlander ultron 35mm f1.7…
I would say I am not holding my breath for that one.
My thoughts are that size would be the primarily concern for that lens since its previous iteration was only replaced by the current SC and MC 35mm 1.4
Agreed. The bokeh on my sonnar is great. Plus it’s very sharp in the corners, something I wasn’t expecting after reading the reviews.
When I saw the Sony MTF, I didn’t believe it.
Then DxO reviewed the lens and it was the thing that pushed me over the edge for selling my NEX 7 and 3 lenses for an RX1.
Thanks, 3dkraft! 🙂
Reaffirms my fears about the half baked lens. I look forward to the Cosina Ultron 35/1.7.
A clear NO from me to the Zeiss abomination.
Indeed corners and far edges are smeared. Looks like a ‘classic’ 35 or a perfect 40.
I look forward to the FE and ZM 35/1.4.
This is disappointing Biogon ZM made to suck less on the Sony A7… but it still sucks.
Indeed it does. A shame.
I always look forward to a lens getting into blogger/forum posters hands to be able to review and judge them myself. 3dkraft always does a great job.
Lloyd Chambers continues to test the new 35mm f1.4 ZM
http://diglloyd.com/blog/2014/20140916_0300-ZeissZM-35f1_4-Distagon.html
It will be interesting to compare it against the 35mm f1.4 FE next year
This is worth noting…
“With 1/3 the distortion of the Summilux, superior control
over field curvature, more uniform and higher contrast wide open, more
uniform sharpness sharpness across the field, absence of lateral color,
no focus shift, the technical prowess on paper is confirmed by
yesterday’s field shots showing.
The in-the-field performance at ƒ/1.4 is very impressive, which means that the famed Leica 2010 35mm f/1.4 Summilux-M not only has competition, but now appears to play second fiddle to the ZM 35mm f/1.4 Distagon.”
That’s very different. The colours look a bit different as well, with the ZM having a cooler look compared to the new E-mount.
Owning the ZM version myself, I do not mind the light falloff and corner performance. I like the look it gives at f2.8. This new lens would have made my day if I didn’t get it but I am not complaining either. This new lens is a very welcome addition to the line of native FE-mount lenses.
I hope they test out the 50mm out as well. I’m looking for a 50mm full frame lens that isn’t fly-by-wire and the new 50mm Planar looks very nice.
Thanks Admin!
Wow almost as good as Minolta 35/2.
Loxia heavier @340G compared to Minolta @240G. Loxia longer at 66mm vs Mino 48mm.
LAEA1 adapted for FF adds some size and weight of course, but camera f/stop control is still used and it comes with removable tripod socket. LAEA4 offers AF with Mino.
Mino can be fit to different mounts with AF… Loxia cannot.
Don’t be Sony… Be Happy!
Plus the Minolta is stabilized on real Alpha body. Loxia… well…
Shouldn’t that read “Don’t be Zeiss..”?
If you put function over form, yes, the Minolta wins handily. The Sigma ART 35/1.4, even better. 🙂
My sigma 35 1.4 art does not play well with my A7R. Sides and corners don’t sharpen up til f11.
I think they really limited their sales potential by releasing these 2 focal lengths first. I would say that 70%-80% of all A7 series owners already own the Zeiss 35mm & 55mm. If they launched with an 85mm or 135mm first, I think they would have a much better chance of getting a good following. Now they will see very low sales numbers, not because they don’t have a good product, but because I don’t think too many users are going to sell their 55mm Zeiss to move up to the Loxia 50mm, and I don’t think that many will want to buy duplicate focal lenghts either.
Interesting! Thanks 3D-Kraft!
Odd way to test lenses… A scenario that few will use wide open in that bright sun. Seems this should have been an actual infinity comparison test. The ZM looks to have some decentering, as the focus fall off on right is far more severe than fall off on left.
Not sure I award much merit to this parking lot test at questionable infinity. Doesn’t demonstrate any real world shooting method that I’m comfortable with.
I hope it is realised that this could be an individual lens issue.
I saw a very similar result when comparing two lenses I had. One was a Sony 24-70 f2.8 and the other was a…Sony 24-70 f2.8. The first copy was a dog and the second was sharp as a razor. Not definitive, but likely the explanation here too.
As ‘I dunno’ says, there appears to be some decentering which is certainly nothing to do with design, but quality control, or even damage in transit!
The difference between the Loxia and the ZM Biogon shown here is not an individual lens issue. There are others who came to the same insight already:
http://www.verybiglobo.com/photokina-2014-zeiss-loxia-story/
There are two things to bear in mind here:
First, I didn’t say it was a lens issue, only that it could easily be so. However, there are signs within the test given that it is the case here.
Second, that the other example you have cited relates to a lens shown at Photokina. Now don’t get me wrong, it could be a normal example of the lens, but I would have reservations that Sony would just pick an example out of the production line to take with them, as opposed to making sure it is a very fine example by testing a number first!
Certainly, it is likely that the design should produce a better result and I think in most cases it will, but don’t just accept the marketing spiel before there is a good deal of real world testing.
Looking at the sample shot provided. Other parts of the image appear to have issues beyond corner performance ,
If it was the eighties though, that would be a pro shot.
hahahaha!
You should note that this area was out of focus. The overview images contain an indicator, where the focus was set (in the tree)!
Tree wasn’t in focus either.
Garbage.
I don’t see these differences as meaningful. But, for the price I’d still pick the loxia.
I’m not sure about the bokeh on this loxia lens. Seems rather agitated. The bokeh on my 35mm sonnar is fantastic. Sharpness is great too.
I am sure it’s not very good. First samples show busy bokeh. The ZM Biogon 35/2 has -really- bad bokeh too, it’s a “feature” of the design…
I’m waiting on the two 35/1.4s, Sony and the ZM…
I do not think these 2 pictures are conclusive in any way. The focus plane seems to be at an angle, which probably puts the tree in question off the plane. It seems like the Loxia has a bit more forward field curvature, which will make that particular portion of the picture sharper than the ZM lens.
I have the biogon 35zm on my Sony a7 and i prefer this lens than my zeiss fe 35 f2. 8. Dont forget that the zm 35 must be use on other camera, not loxia version. The zm is too litlle than loxia version, and zm is much interessant on Sony e mount apsc.
You prefer a soft lens with corner smudging, color shifts, terrible aberrations to the FE 35/2.8 which matches the Sigma 35/1.4 within its aperture range, incredibly sharp corner to corner, great colors, great bokeh?
To each his own I guess…
You can’t beat a hipster with your arguments 🙂
I have the ZM Biogon too. It is an outstanding lens with sharp corners. This test is just another proof how useless non-scientific lens tests are. Mostly due to sample variation. This is bad, but applies to all manufacturers. (Ming Thein went thru 6 samples of the Summilux 50/1.4 until he found a perfect one.)
With adapters i find tons of old lenses, and to get this kind of corner sharpness, I need no Zeiss glass, I get that with a 85$ lens without any problem.
Lol.
– Colors/abberations of a cheap vintage lens
– Sharpness of a 400$ lens
– Replaced the beautiful ZM series design with something that looks MUCH uglier than the Sony/Zeiss designs
– Ask 1000k$ for it
For real 2014 performance either accept the x2 price of the new ZM or x2 weight of the Sigma. Putting this on the a7r is a waste of time and money.
perhaps Voigtlander VM ultron 35mm f1.7 that CV just announced?
And you know of course better than anyone else on this planet?
Ever used the lens? Tested it a bit? No? Then maybe you should just…
I have RAWs here from A7r and A7 with the Loxia 35 and 50 and those RAWs speak another story than what you write here.
But I guess that is the internet, no clue but big opinion 😛
Help, buyers remorse!
It obviously doesn’t matter if I or someone else took the shots as long as they are executed in a technically correct manner. And 3d-kraft has proved that he can, many times. What about you? You don’t even show a single sample.
Talk about baseless opinions lol 😉
Distinctly better, but still not a very good lens.
How so? Even the ZM version is great (not good, but actually great).
The He 35 Loxia seems like a great general purpose or people lens. For landscape and pixel peeping purposes I thing we will still be waiting for that great 35 prime for the FE mount.
Lately I’ve been thinking that if Sony releases a RX1 with built in EVF I may get one and skip the FE mounted 35’s. As of now I’m wait on the 35 Distagon FE but if it’s not great then a RX1 or Loxia’s is in my future… Or just stick with the 16-35/4.
I can’t wait to sell my 35/2.8FE. It’s a very good but not a great lens.
“There were some worries…”
Not with me and most other people who actually have a clue. Those who whine, as usual, are those who don’t have anything trying to find excuses to not do anything and wait for some camera lens combo that they subconsciously know will never materialise.
…or when it does they complain about the high price because they can’t afford it.
Both you and Tre are really good at delivering sermons? LOL!
I still think these Loxia lenses make the most sense for FE mount. If there is anything out there that would suggest taking a look at Sony’s mirrorless I think this is it. I hope to be able to rent it and try them out myself which I don’t normally do. However, I’m very interested in the overall user experience and from what I’ve seen thus far, the image quality looks to be very promising.
I have tested the two Loxias at Photokina and in my opinion they are absolutely great. Two friends who were with me at Photokina think about to buy the A7 just becouse of those Loxia Lenses. They like the “analog” workflow combined with the modern cameras we nowadays have, plus they are small and deliver very good quality “wide open” at F2 (it is not really wide, but you know what I mean).
I am an A-Mount user but testing the A7 with those 2 Loxias really was impressive and I also consider it as a small second system for travel.
If you can, grab them for a few hours and test them. It is better to have an opinion based on experience than on internet comments 😉
Both photos shown above are garbage. You should expect more from a lens/sensor combination or take up painting with water colors.