The Voigtlander 35mm 1.5 Type II Review. How it compares to the Zeiss Distagon ZM

For this first sample, I turn to black and white, which remains my favorite way to evaluate a lens's rendering. 

In this specific scene, the results are striking primarily because of how difficult it is to tell the two apart. Both images are remarkably similar, from the great sharpness on the focal point of the headlight to the smooth, gradual transition into the out of focus areas. The contrast and the way the highlights are managed on the metallic surfaces are nearly identical.

In this instance, a strong case can be made that both lenses perform almost indistinguishably. If you were looking at these prints on a wall, you would be hard pressed to pick which came from the Zeiss and which from the Voigtlander. However, it is important to remember that we are viewing these as black and white. While the performance here is equal, there is much more to uncover as we move into color and different lighting environments.

Note, The first image is from the Voigtlander while the 2nd image is from the Zeiss

For this next set of samples, I decided to go into one of the consignment stores in thw village. These types of locations are perfect for testing rendering of lenses because they are packed with loads of textures, colors, and varying background that can really challenge a lens and create interesting bokeh. My primary focus point for these shots was the ornate brooch hanging in the center of the frame.

The level of detail captured by both lenses here is extraordinary. When you zoom in on the brooch, you can see every individual prong holding the stones, the delicate texture of the gold tone metal, and the crystalline clarity of the green and blue gems. Even shot wide open at f1.4 and f1.5, the sharpness is mind blowing.

What is most impressive is that despite the incredibly busy environment with flowers, glass jars, and furniture competing for attention, the subject pops with a 3D quality you would expect from a longer focal length lens.. 

Looking at the two images side by side, the rendering of the fine details on the brooch is so similar that it reinforces my point about their shared lineage. They both resolve detail that you typically only expect from the most expensive glass in the world.

This scene again highlights that for the vast majority of shooting scenarios, the performance gap between the these two lenses is practically nonexistent.

Notice no mention of the Leica 😀

Again, first image is from the Voigtlander and the 2nd is from the Zeiss

So far, the results are making a very strong case for the Nokton. I can honestly say that I wouldn't hesitate to take the Voigtlander out for a day of shooting and never feel like I left a better lens at home. Usually, when you opt for the more affordable or compact version of a lens, there is a nagging sense that you are compromising on some level of optical excellence. Here, that simply isn't the case so far.

Here, both lenses were shot wide open. The bokeh comparison is where the fact that these both come from the same factory really becomes evident. Looking at the highlights in the background, specifically those magenta and gold orbs, the similarity in rendering is remarkable. Both lenses produce a very clean, circular bokeh with a smooth look that lacks that nervous or busy quality often found in smaller, fast lenses. Did someone sprinkle the Zeiss pixie dust on the Voigtlander ?

The transition from the sharp, weathered grain of the wooden birds into the oof background is equally impressive on both. While the Zeiss has long been the benchmark for this smooth look, the Nokton delivers a nearly identical character. It manages to maintain those round highlights without excessive cat eye distortion, which is a significant achievement for a lens with such a compact physical footprint. It is clear that in wide open shooting, you are not sacrificing that signature look by choosing the smaller, more affordable Nokton.

So far so good. Nokton is hanging in there.

This is the Zeiss version of the capture.

I just had to share this one. Captured with the Zeiss and processed using the Velvia 50 preset in DxO Film Pack 8, this shot perfectly illustrates why the Zeiss remains my all time favorite 35. Don’t get me wrong, as the next image shows, the Nokton is no slouch but there is a specific pop to the Zeiss that is hard to beat.

Here is a similar version with the Nokton.  It' sharp but it's missing the Zeiss pixie dust.

Steeping outside for a bit. Too many women in the shops just yapping away. 

In this set, I focused directly on the cluster of pink flowers nestled between the trunks. This is a torture test for many lenses due to the high contrast edges of the tree branches against the bright sky, but both of these lenses handle it with ease. Fringing around the tree branches is kept to an absolute minimum in both files, showing that these lenses are well corrected for longitudinal chromatic aberration even when used at their fastest apertures. Considering the Zeiss is over a decade old, it really shows it was a lens designed for perfection and to be future proof.

Like in the previous shots, the bokeh remains so similar that it is difficult to distinguish the two without me telling you which is which.  From my point of view, the way the out of focus blossoms in the upper part of the frame just melt into the background is just beautiful.. 

So far I am really impressed with what I am seeing. My only regret is not getting the Nokton sooner. But hey, good things come to those who wait .

Based on these two images, as much as I hate to say it because I get excited with new gear,  if I had to give a slight nudge to one, it would go to the Zeiss. Upon closer inspection of the primary subject, the flowers in the Distagon shot appear slightly sharper, with a bit more bite in the micro contrast of the petals. It is a minor difference that you would likely only notice when viewing the files at high magnification, but it is there nonetheless, giving the Zeiss a tiny edge in resolution for this specific scenario.

I’ll be honest. I don’t actually like this specific shot. The composition and lighting don't quite hit the mark for me. Its a bit busy, but as a technical test, it’s a revelation. Even in a frame that I'm not crazy about, I am blown away by the similarities between these two lenses.

The amount of sharpness the Nokton is delivering here is staggering. When you look at the focal point, the Voigtlander is resolving detail with a clarity that you just don't expect from a lens of this size and price point. It’s matching the Zeiss so closely in terms of sharp detail and contrast that it reinforces the same theme I have seen all day,  the technical gap is almost nonexistent. 

Just look at the focus point, the purple buds in the center and compare the two images.

Blown away, I tell you !

For this group of images, it is almost frustrating to write that the results are once again so similar it barely feels worth writing about. We are seeing the same consistent rendering, the same color temperature, and the same contrast levels that have defined this comparison from the start. 

It is worth noting this very consistency, the fact that a lens half the price and significantly smaller can repeatedly match the output of the reigning 35mm champion is a story in itself.

But let’s hold that thought for a moment. There is something more revealing coming up in the next group of images that might finally pull the curtain back on where these two truly differ.

Game Changer !

With these crops of the above images, the narrative of absolute equality finally begins to shift. When comparing the two side by side at this level of magnification, the Zeiss reveals why it has earned its reputation as the benchmark 35mm lens for the M system.

The difference is clearly visible in the rendering of the white text on the price tag. In the Zeiss image, the letters are etched with a cleaner,  contrast. There is a crispness to the edges of the font that the Nokton doesn't quite match. Furthermore, the Zeiss exhibits superior control over spherical aberration, there is a subtle glow or softness around the high contrast edges in the Nokton file that is absent in the Zeiss. But perhaps the most damning evidence is found when looking at chromatic aberration,  the Nokton clearly shows purple fringing around the edges of the white letters in the word Home, whereas the Zeiss remains perfectly clean.

The texture on the rusted dragonfly tells the rest of the story. In the Zeiss crop, the individual pits and grains of the metal feel more defined and three dimensional. While the Nokton isn't soft by any means, it’s still performing at a very high level, the Zeiss shows a level of clarity that gives the subject a more realistic, tactile feel.

This is it. For those who prioritize a compact setup, this is exactly where the extra glass and larger footprint of the Distagon pay off. In this center frame comparison, the Zeiss is clearly the winner if you are looking for absolute technical perfection. It resolves fine details with a level of clinical purity that proves there are still real, measurable gains to be found at the top, even when the law of diminishing returns starts to kick in.

It is also worth noting that most of these technical differences, particularly the fringing, can be easily corrected in post processing with a few clicks. For my own workflow, this is far from a deal breaker. When you weigh that small amount of extra work in the editor against the advantage in size and the superb feel of the brass body, the Nokton makes a very compelling case for itself. While I beleive the Zeiss remains the benchmark, the Voigtlander is so close that for most real world shooting, the trade off is more than fair.

Black and White simply rules! In black and white, the conversation shifts away from fringing and color science and focuses entirely on texture, tonality, and light. This shot from the Voigtlander is a perfect example of why this lens is such a workhorse for environmental portraiture and street photography. I simply love it! 

The rendering here is classic and punchy. Even in the barbershop, with various light sources, mirrors, and a mix of textures, the Nokton manages the transitions beautifully. The shadow detail in the barber's jacket and the highlights on the frames are well balanced, providing a rich tonal range that feels timeless. Did I say I love B&W?

Note, If I recall, I may have shot this a f/2.0. 

This is a great reminder that when you strip away the color, the character of the lens and the quality of the light become the real stars. It's all about the light baby! This is exactly the kind of shot where the Nokton’s compact size makes you a much less intrusive presence in the room, allowing you to capture these genuine, 100% human moments without the gear getting in the way.

For comparison, this shot from the Zeiss carries that same rich, documentary feel, but with its own specific character. While color fringing is a non issue in black and white, you can see how the Distagon handles the light in the shop. The skin tones and the texture of the jacket are simply rendered beautifully.

The background rendering here is a bit more uniform / structured. Those out of focus lights and shop signs have a very defined, clean look that helps create that signature  window into the world clarity that makes the Zeiss the ultimate 35 for many people.

Ultimately, looking at the shots from both lenses in this setting, it’s clear they are both phenomenal tools for this type of work. The Voigtlander gives you that nimble, compact advantage that lets you blend into the background, while the Zeiss offers a technical perfection and a specific way of drawing the scene that is hard to argue with.

For 100% human photography where the goal is to capture the soul of a moment, you really can't go wrong with either piece of glass.

In this final set of captures, once again, at first glance, the rendering is so similar that they feel interchangeable, especially looking at the string of lights in the background. The bokeh remains smooth and consistent.

However, when I look at the focus point, the pink ribbon and tag in the foreground the Zeiss once again shows its strength. There is a noticeable edge in sharpness on the ribbon's texture and the text on the tag. The Distagon just manages to pull out that extra bit of detail that makes the subject feel a hair more lifelike.

To wrap this up, the Distagon still holds the crown when it comes to raw performance. If you’re looking for the absolute peak of 35mm lenses where every letter is etched with perfect clarity and fringing is practically non existent it is clearly the lens that gives you that ultimate edge.

But the real takeaway from this comparison is how razor thin that margin actually is. Taking either of these lenses out into the field will result in world class imagery that’s essentially indistinguishable in most real world scenarios.

In fact, for a day of street photography, the Nokton is likely going to be my first choice. When I am moving through a crowd or trying to be discreet, that compact size and handling become more valuable than the last 5% of corner sharpness. It’s proof that while the Zeiss might still be the King, the Nokton offers a more balanced experience for the way I actually shoot. I wouldn't hesitate for a second to leave the Zeiss on the shelf and trust the Nokton to get the job done.