Leica Summilux-M 35mm f/1.4 vs. Zeiss Otus 28mm

[Dennis Ingemann]

Hi all,

I'm currently wondering what lens is the better option, the Leica Summilux-M 35mm f/1.4 (ASPH) or the Zeiss Otus 28mm f/1.4, I know they haven't the same focal lenght, but in terms of sharpness, image quality & overall perfomance which is the better option?
Or should I consider a real cine lens? (Say, Zeiss Cp.2 25/35mm T*2.1?)

 

[Ben Scott]

There are so many variables in answering that question that it is impossble to answer it without lots more information about your considerations and what you intend to shoot and what you want from an image.

 

[Les Hillis]

You'd need to use a Leica-M mount for the Summilux-M lens, which isn't possible with the (Canon EF mount) Raven camera. (Can't just use a lens adapter because the M-mount lenses need to sit closer to the sensor then the Canon-EF lenses, not further from it like PL lenses for example.)

As Ben said, you need to base your lens choice on a balance of image-quality, usability/functionality and price, which are things only you can judge.

 

[Nick Morrison]

Such a hard question - one is a tiny RANGEFINDER lens, the other a modern, very large, state of the art piece of photo glass, designed also with some cinema in mind. It's like comparing a Ferrari and Mack Truck, and asking which is better - both are great, I guess it depends on your needs?

 

[Daniel John]

If I'm not mistaken, the M mount will only take M lenses with a focal length of 50mm or longer....I think. Think the flange depth is too deep on the wider ones. Don't quote me on that but might want to research it first. They are great little lenses though. Recently shot some stuff at night on the Weapon with the 50 Noctilux and it looked great.

 

[joey richey]

If I'm not mistaken, the M mount will only take M lenses with a focal length of 50mm or longer....I think. Think the flange depth is too deep on the wider ones. Don't quote me on that but might want to research it first. They are great little lenses though. Recently shot some stuff at night on the Weapon with the 50 Noctilux and it looked great.

yep, daniel is correct.

the rear fins that protect the rear element on the 35LUX asph will bump the olpf housing, prohibiting you from getting focus to infinity.

you'll also see more CA on the M glass than you will on the otus when using them on RED.

the basic trade offs are that the otus is incredibly sharp and flat (think master prime land) while the M glass renders shapes in a more round/dimensional way (think cooke S4).

theres new 0.8 pitch M glass options coming out very soon, that should clear the OLPF housing on DSMC2, so that may be something to consider.

:thumbup:

 

[Richard Williams]

Hi all,

I'm currently wondering what lens is the better option, the Leica Summilux-M 35mm f/1.4 (ASPH) or the Zeiss Otus 28mm f/1.4, I know they haven't the same focal lenght, but in terms of sharpness, image quality & overall perfomance which is the better option?
Or should I consider a real cine lens? (Say, Zeiss Cp.2 25/35mm T*2.1?)

I think the most flexible option is the CP.2
You can change the mounts so if you upgrade from the Raven to a PL mounted camera in the future, you do not need to buy a new lens.
It also works well as a set as they are all a similar weight, size and have a manual aperture.

While the Otus may be sharper, does the EF mount version have a manual aperture?
There is also not the extensive range of different focal lengths of the CP.2

I would only buy a M mount lens if you did a fair bit of still shooting on a M body.
I have a Leica M9 but my CP.2 set of 6 lenses are definitely my go to lenses for motion.
Like others have said M is no good for Raven with a fixed EF mount- you would need to go to a body that accepts a M mount like the Scarlet or Epic.

 

[paulcurtis]

Just some more info on the M Mount.

There are two issues with M Mount lenses.

One is that the rear element on these lenses can protrude too far into the OLPF housing and potentially hit the OLPF glass itself.

The other is that the newer OLPFs have a thin plastic baffle to prevent light bouncing back, this is larger than the previous OLPF versions, which had some circular cut outs.

Some M Lens elements will physically fit into the housing but the outer edge at the back will hit that thin plastic backing first. You can take away that plastic backing with a scalpel and then they will work.

For example a Voightlander 35mm f1.4, the rear element doesn't go back far enough to hit the glass but the outer edges hit the plastic bit. Now that works fine.

A 21mm Voightlanders rear element however, when focusing to infinity will physically hit the glass of the OLPF so there's no way that will work. I think someone on here did a measurement to see how much room there is.

Now Leica themselves are coming out with M Mount cine lenses and a new OLPF, i've been in contact with them a few times tracking the progress of this new mount but i don't know whether it's physically deeper or whether they are just changing the glass or something else.

It pains me, because shooting with M glass is just so uber lightweight and convenient. And the image is often better. I shot all the time on Sony Emount with these lenses and they were great. Even the 12mm.

In terms of the original question i would assume the summilux would work, but you may have to take away that plastic baffle.

cheers
Paul

 

[Dennis Ingemann]

I think the most flexible option is the CP.2
You can change the mounts so if you upgrade from the Raven to a PL mounted camera in the future, you do not need to buy a new lens.
It also works well as a set as they are all a similar weight, size and have a manual aperture.

While the Otus may be sharper, does the EF mount version have a manual aperture?
There is also not the extensive range of different focal lengths of the CP.2

I would only buy a M mount lens if you did a fair bit of still shooting on a M body.
I have a Leica M9 but my CP.2 set of 6 lenses are definitely my go to lenses for motion.
Like others have said M is no good for Raven with a fixed EF mount- you would need to go to a body that accepts a M mount like the Scarlet or Epic.

Thanks alot for the input guys!
Seems like i'll buy the CP.2!

 

[John Marchant]

We're assisting CW / Leica, with help from the Red team, to provide a revised OLPF housing to accommodate deeper rear elements. Both for DSMC 1 and 2.

Not long now.

 

[Les Hillis]

We're assisting CW / Leica, with help from the Red team, to provide a revised OLPF housing to accommodate deeper rear elements. Both for DSMC 1 and 2.

Not long now.

Any chance the Leica-M OLPF will incorporate some kind of lensing effect to redirect the rays of the wider angle lenses so they hit the sensor at a better angle around the edges of the frame?

No idea if such a thing is even possible, just thought I'd ask.

 

[paulcurtis]

We're assisting CW / Leica, with help from the Red team, to provide a revised OLPF housing to accommodate deeper rear elements. Both for DSMC 1 and 2.

Not long now.

I just head from Kevan, that's great news. Really looking forward to it.

I was wondering how much extra room is in there. I have M lenses from all over the place, was curious whether there was just enough room to accommodate the 0.8M lenses or extra wiggle room as well?

I assume that you guys aren't selling the OLPF but CW/Leica will?

thanks
Paul

 

[John Marchant]

The parts will be available through CW. Our benchmark for maximum rear clearance is the Summilux 28 ƒ1.4 - currently even with correct 'open' flare guard this crashes the OLPF retainer on DSMC1, and hits the entire frame assembly badly on DSMC2.

The amount of additional clearance we're adding is small, but tolerances here are very tight. Said 28 1.4 ends up with its rear element just a hair away from the OLPF surface, which necessitated some interesting little changes.

 

[paulcurtis]

The parts will be available through CW. Our benchmark for maximum rear clearance is the Summilux 28 ƒ1.4 - currently even with correct 'open' flare guard this crashes the OLPF retainer on DSMC1, and hits the entire frame assembly badly on DSMC2.

The amount of additional clearance we're adding is small, but tolerances here are very tight. Said 28 1.4 ends up with its rear element just a hair away from the OLPF surface, which necessitated some interesting little changes.

Thank you John,

Any idea what the clearance measurement is? (So i can get a ruler to some lenses around here...)
I'd have though the 21mm or the 24 would protrude further?

I assume (hope?) that there are differences with the OLPF itself to help with the shallow ray angles?

Is there just going to be one OLPF?

thanks!
Paul