More than a decade ago, I tried the Biogon but ended up with the Cron ASPH v1. The size and handling of the Biogon just wasn’t as good to me. I also don’t like the chrome hood mounting rings on the Cosina lenses, and the silver ZM lenses look weird on silver M cameras. Another personal factor was the 43mm filter size; already having the 50 Cron with 39mm size, I didn’t want to buy another set of polarizer and ND filters.
Glad you reviewed this, having seen your other 35mm M mount reviews. I still remember being so amazed by my friend's 35 Biogon when I used it on his Ricoh GXR over 10 years ago, and it's also why my first lens after getting an M240 was the 50/2 Planar. I was curious on your thoughts about it for the longest time as well compared to the other 35 crons, as I was planning to upgrade to it from my 7art 35/2 Sonnar. Funny enough, I recently got good deals on both the Voigtlander 35/2.5 Color-Skopar C AND the 35/1.2 Nokton III just shortly before this came out, so I guess a third 35mm would already be a little superfluous lol
Something that wasn’t mentioned in your review was the shape of the apertures of both lenses. Because some of these lenses have very rounded apertures where others have straight blades, which makes them hexagonal in their out of focus highlights which can be really distracting. Can say here how they compare? Nice review by the way, it’s nice to see actual comparisons from lens to lens instead of just commenting on which is nicer or better according to your opinion. By the way, nice Rollei 2.8F I had the 3.5F for many years and I just sold it. But I loved owning it for all those years and I still have some great pictures from it.Regards Gerry
Your cron35 asph appears to be a 11673 v2 asph. It's slightly refreshed optics compared to the 11879 v1 cron. It's sharper in the corners and slightly sharper overall compared to the V1.
had both 35mm biogons and I prefer the 2.8. the 2.0 actually more or less has ruined shots wide open for me in the past with the oof rendering. usually, people dont notice, but yeah had some family shots where it was dark and I was on tri-x pushed only one stop and had comments about how ugly a shot or two with the f2.0 biogon were 😬
@@TCMx3 wow that’s odd. I had the polar opposite experience where I hated the 35 2.8 over contrasty shots but loved the f2 for its rendering. I guess it really comes down to personal preference
@@JimmyCheng on most fronts I preferred the 2.0. It's just that if you lose an important shot to a lens it ruins it for you. I would say this occurred very rarely, but it did. never seen any behavior like that from the summicron.
just a friendly reminder, Jimmy, you don't have to put English subtitles, and if you're considering your Chinese audiences, you can input the Chinese subtitles into the cc. Too much text on the screen
I really appreciate your reviews. Simple, nicely made and informative
@@webersteve1547 thank you so much for your kind words
would love to see a comparison between the Zeiss Planar 50 and a recent Summicron
@@PerseusPure I’ve done a review between the planar and the latest cron, feel free to check it out
Zeiss is always nice.
More than a decade ago, I tried the Biogon but ended up with the Cron ASPH v1. The size and handling of the Biogon just wasn’t as good to me. I also don’t like the chrome hood mounting rings on the Cosina lenses, and the silver ZM lenses look weird on silver M cameras. Another personal factor was the 43mm filter size; already having the 50 Cron with 39mm size, I didn’t want to buy another set of polarizer and ND filters.
Glad you reviewed this, having seen your other 35mm M mount reviews. I still remember being so amazed by my friend's 35 Biogon when I used it on his Ricoh GXR over 10 years ago, and it's also why my first lens after getting an M240 was the 50/2 Planar.
I was curious on your thoughts about it for the longest time as well compared to the other 35 crons, as I was planning to upgrade to it from my 7art 35/2 Sonnar. Funny enough, I recently got good deals on both the Voigtlander 35/2.5 Color-Skopar C AND the 35/1.2 Nokton III just shortly before this came out, so I guess a third 35mm would already be a little superfluous lol
最近带着ZM25 2.8和ZM35 1.4去冰岛玩。作为标头党第一次体会到25焦段原来这么好用。而且ZM25的微反差和素质跟ZM35 1.4很接近，出片风格一致，拍了很多好照片。如果没用过zm25还是挺推荐的。（据说zm这几枚biogon里面zm 25的素质也是最高的。我没用过zm28，但比起之前用过的zm21我确实更喜欢zm25）
Something that wasn’t mentioned in your review was the shape of the apertures of both lenses. Because some of these lenses have very rounded apertures where others have straight blades, which makes them hexagonal in their out of focus highlights which can be really distracting. Can say here how they compare? Nice review by the way, it’s nice to see actual comparisons from lens to lens instead of just commenting on which is nicer or better according to your opinion. By the way, nice Rollei 2.8F I had the 3.5F for many years and I just sold it. But I loved owning it for all those years and I still have some great pictures from it.Regards Gerry
@@gerryhardman9060 thanks for the details!
Great video! It would be nice to see comparison of Zeiss 35mm f1.4 Distagon ZM against Leica 35mm Summilux ASPH.
@@jirischlemmer8196 thanks. I thought there’s quite a few comparisons already so I decided to skip that one haha
@@JimmyCheng there are other comparisons but I like your methodology and presentation so I think it would still be valuable.
I’ve done one and it’s surprisingly close
Your cron35 asph appears to be a 11673 v2 asph. It's slightly refreshed optics compared to the 11879 v1 cron. It's sharper in the corners and slightly sharper overall compared to the V1.
@@shawnj8765 yeah this one is asph v2. I’ve also got the asph v1 which I don’t find there’s any major differences
biogon always beats summicron, best bang for your buck
正要睡一看到發布趕緊來看
@@LU-cf7ll 👍👍
konica的m35f2和m50f2也不错，现在拥有m50f2，就是不知道跟原厂有多大的差距，只要没上原厂，总是心痒痒😢
@@user-xo2pe8ul4s 50推荐原厂，徕卡那只summicron 非常经典，我都觉得没必要上apo。
@@JimmyCheng 好！50相对来说也不是那么贵
had both 35mm biogons and I prefer the 2.8. the 2.0 actually more or less has ruined shots wide open for me in the past with the oof rendering. usually, people dont notice, but yeah had some family shots where it was dark and I was on tri-x pushed only one stop and had comments about how ugly a shot or two with the f2.0 biogon were 😬
@@TCMx3 wow that’s odd. I had the polar opposite experience where I hated the 35 2.8 over contrasty shots but loved the f2 for its rendering. I guess it really comes down to personal preference
@@JimmyCheng on most fronts I preferred the 2.0. It's just that if you lose an important shot to a lens it ruins it for you. I would say this occurred very rarely, but it did. never seen any behavior like that from the summicron.
just a friendly reminder, Jimmy, you don't have to put English subtitles, and if you're considering your Chinese audiences, you can input the Chinese subtitles into the cc. Too much text on the screen
3:29 Zeiss F2.4 VS Leica F2.0 ???
all Leica manual lenses without digital contact won't have aperture info in LR, so it was a wild guess by LR (and usually they are wrong)