bwcolor
Veteran
Thanks for all of the replies!
After doing some reading around about the lenses mentioned here (thank you!) and talking with a few aquaintances who are more experienced with rangefinders than myself, AND after looking at my last two paychecks with all the overtime I've been doing, that I might as well just get a coded Summicron and be done with it. I would probably just spend it on another lens anyway, :bang: lol The 28 will be what's on my camera most of the time, so I guess if I'm gonna spend good money on a lens, I suppose that's the one to spend it on.
And I can sell another one of my SLR lenses if need be(as well as the Ultron)
You see, money solves all problems.
After spending so much on your M9, it sounds like a good investment to put the lens you want on the camera, especially given that you will use it. Have fun.
venchka
Veteran
Grinning. We all would like to have Summicrons I suppose. I like Konica quailty and don't miss the extra stop.
YMMV.
YMMV.
porktaco
Well-known
i like the canon 2.8 a lot
D&A
Well-known
Hi,
I just sold my brand new Hexanon-M 28mm f2.8 a few days ago but still have my used copy which I use. I had a chance to test mine out against the 28mm Summicron asph. What's interesting is out of all the 28mm M mount lenses I've used (on full frame (film and digital), the Hexanon comes extremely close to the signature of the Summicon asph. Good but not over the top contrast, and excellent but not overbiting sharpness at f5/6 and beyond. The primary difference between the two was the acuity and sharpness in the edges and corners relative to the rest of the frame. The Hexanon starts out (wide open) with the 80% of the image's centralized area moderately close to max. resolution with the rest of the edges and corners behind (which also serves to draw the viewer into the image) and results in some lovely images. At f4, the edges and corners imporve a bit but beyond that they very quikicly catch up the the rest of the frame, while shaprness improves to maximum. The Summicon starts off from the get-go with farily even shapness acorss the frame (wide open) and it imporves a bit as you stop down.
..again always having fairly even sharpness across the entire frame.
The Leica 28mm f2.8 also has good sharpness across the frame wide open and improving as its stopped down, but for using it on an M8 and M9, the contrast sometimes (in certain lighting conditions) gets to be too much and sharpness although desirable, can also can be a slight disadvantage with some subjects. It's all subjective and most all of the 28mm has strengths and weaknesses.of one sort or the other.
Dave (D&A)
I just sold my brand new Hexanon-M 28mm f2.8 a few days ago but still have my used copy which I use. I had a chance to test mine out against the 28mm Summicron asph. What's interesting is out of all the 28mm M mount lenses I've used (on full frame (film and digital), the Hexanon comes extremely close to the signature of the Summicon asph. Good but not over the top contrast, and excellent but not overbiting sharpness at f5/6 and beyond. The primary difference between the two was the acuity and sharpness in the edges and corners relative to the rest of the frame. The Hexanon starts out (wide open) with the 80% of the image's centralized area moderately close to max. resolution with the rest of the edges and corners behind (which also serves to draw the viewer into the image) and results in some lovely images. At f4, the edges and corners imporve a bit but beyond that they very quikicly catch up the the rest of the frame, while shaprness improves to maximum. The Summicon starts off from the get-go with farily even shapness acorss the frame (wide open) and it imporves a bit as you stop down.
..again always having fairly even sharpness across the entire frame.
The Leica 28mm f2.8 also has good sharpness across the frame wide open and improving as its stopped down, but for using it on an M8 and M9, the contrast sometimes (in certain lighting conditions) gets to be too much and sharpness although desirable, can also can be a slight disadvantage with some subjects. It's all subjective and most all of the 28mm has strengths and weaknesses.of one sort or the other.
Dave (D&A)
Last edited:
kzphoto
Well-known
+1 for the 28 Summicron. Used one for a few weeks and it's amazing wide open and up close. Renders like a Summilux.
I've also read that the Ricoh GR Limited 28/2.8 is a stunner mechanically & optically. But they're expensive!
I've also read that the Ricoh GR Limited 28/2.8 is a stunner mechanically & optically. But they're expensive!
venchka
Veteran
David Murphy
Veteran
I agree about the 28/1.9 - it's also made very well - a real winner in my book and vastly cheaper than an Elmarit (which I still want!)
Hahaha, one that doesn't break the bank huh?
kossi008
Photon Counter
+1 for the Skopar 28/3.5. I haven't really done brick walls or newspapers, but I don't find this one lacking in real-life test situations...
AhShun
Member
My CV28/2 gone because of the same problem.
28s in and out, and the last one to go may be the Rokkor (in good condition).
28s in and out, and the last one to go may be the Rokkor (in good condition).
daniel buck
Established
which have you settled on?
Today I was sent an Elmarit 28 instead of the Summicron that I ordered. It's quite a nice size! And since I'll probably have it for a day or so until the exchange is made for the correct lens, I might as well shoot a few shots with it to see how I like it
To bad I'm working 15 hour days lately with no weekends off, so I don't get much time to photograph Maybe I'll get up early tomorrow and shoot a few shots in the morning in down-town culver city.AhShun
Member
I use a Rokkor in Winter time, but a converted G-Biogon in Summer.
(It's seems silly but I try to prevent from use the Rokkor in hot & hudmit days.)
Like Reid, the Canon 28/2.8 is real fun to use.
Both Ultron gone because of size. (Also the corners of f/2 version.)
It's hard to settle on anyone of them indeed ^^
(It's seems silly but I try to prevent from use the Rokkor in hot & hudmit days.)
Like Reid, the Canon 28/2.8 is real fun to use.
Both Ultron gone because of size. (Also the corners of f/2 version.)
It's hard to settle on anyone of them indeed ^^
The Meaness
Well-known
The ZM 28/2.8 is awesome. Not such a great shot, but shows the character of the lens well:
I know the 25mm is a great lens with a perfect reputation, but dare I say I prefer the 28 for the smaller size and still ridiculous IQ. I don't have a 25mm to shoot it against, but the 28mm more lens than I need. On top of that, it's usually much cheaper because of the bad rep.
I know the 25mm is a great lens with a perfect reputation, but dare I say I prefer the 28 for the smaller size and still ridiculous IQ. I don't have a 25mm to shoot it against, but the 28mm more lens than I need. On top of that, it's usually much cheaper because of the bad rep.
Bruin
Noktonian
Hey Daniel, I think you have a poor sample of the Ultron. jyr compared the Ultron to his Summicron and found them to be exactly the same at f8 and infinity, looking at them 100% from M8 files. Check out his comparison for details:
http://www.rangefinderforum.com/forums/showthread.php?t=72505
Rayt
Nonplayer Character
If budget is a priority I would recommend the Minolta 28/2.8 for the CLE. Ones with the white dot front element defect can be had cheap.
daniel buck
Established
The Ultron seemed to be just fine in the center of the lens, it was just the corners that never got sharp. An M8 would never see those corners, the M9 sees more of the lens coverage with the physically larger CCD.
polarabbit
Newbie
cv ultron 28/2 is great.
cv ultron 28/2 is great.
performance pretty much on par with the Cron.
cv ultron 28/2 is great.
performance pretty much on par with the Cron.
daniel buck
Established
on an M9 or film camera? Or an M8? Mine was not on par with the Cron at all in the corners, on an M9 (and probably on a film M as well, I assume). My summicron is MUCH better in the corners than the 2.0 Ultron. The ultron never got sharp in the corners (it got better as you stop down, but never really sharp). The overall sharpness, contrast and all was just fine for me, but the corners were not enough. The cron seems to be fitting the bill perfectly, even though the bill is expensive
Tim Gray
Well-known
I've never used the GR Limited in M/LTM mount, but I do have a GR1. I usually prefer images from the 28 Summicron way more than the ones from the GR1, but that can probably be chalked up to the way I use these cameras - the M is for more 'serious' photography, the GR1 is my pocket camera for when I'm not expecting to shoot much.
If you've got the money, get the Summicron. It's my favorite and most used lens.
noimmunity
scratch my niche
Kind of OT (since the OP wants to know about performance specifically at f/8 and infinity): I've read and re-read that thread several times, and the funny thing is, it seems to me that it says two things at the same time. The Ultron is pretty good (sample-dependent), good enough to possibly not need/want anything else. But the cron isn't just added sharpness in the corners. It is 'better' OOF, better microcontrast, better color, etc etc, that adds up to a subjective look: "skin looks like it's glowing from inside".
On the other hand, there are people like Tom A. and Sean Reid who have found a certain subjective magic in the Ultron, particularly wide open and close in.