Suggestions for a compact 35mm lens with character?

daniel buck said:
I do have a 50/1.5 Summarit and I love the glares, glows and odd colors that it produces when shot wide open, and an out-of-focus rendering that almost swirls like some large format lenses. I'm wondering if there are any 35mm lenses that might be similar to this? Anything worth looking into?
Click to expand...

Don't overlook a Canon 35/1.8...plenty of swirls, glares, glows, footballs and odd stuff going on. My favourite lens on my R-D1.

6268818189_015328ebed_b.jpg
6269339740_2f9792cda9_b.jpg
 
+1 on the Canon 35/1.8. It's pretty soft wide open, for images w/ a dreamy quality, and sharpens up a lot by f4 but w/ lower contrast than a modern 35. Great for b&w and color. Plenty of character when you want it.
 
Perar 35/3.5 triplet from MS-Optical. There have been lots of recent discussion on this super-compact wonder. And, yes, it is not cheap.
 
The 35mm Summilux-M pre-ASPH would be your best bet for a small 35mm lens with character (wide-open, sharp but lower contrast) and higher contrast (especially for color) when stopped down.
Example shots with this lens here at flickr
 
semilog said:
The 35/2.8 C-Biogon is stunning. Overall, the most well-mannered lens I've ever used. Surgical sharpness, wonderful color, great bokeh. Specular highlights can get a halo, but there's usually a total absence of any veiling or reflections. It has almost no distortion. Rockwell says it excites aliasing from full aperture on his M9, a very strong indication of its performance.

On the M9 it vignettes substantially at full aperture. The vignetting is still there on film, but less assertively so.
Click to expand...

I agree with all of this but this lens, like the 50 Lux ASPH has no character at all, being 'too perfect'.

So to anser the OP's question, I have to say that my favourite is the Hexanon 35/2 UC lens. Sharp wide open, and smooth bokeh, but with a painterly effect giving character to the picture.
 
FWIW - the most character-y 35 I've used is the Zeiss Jena 35/2.4 Flektogon. However, I believe it's only available in M42 mount and would require an adapter.
 
semilog said:
The 35/2.8 C-Biogon is stunning. Overall, the most well-mannered lens I've ever used. Surgical sharpness, wonderful color, great bokeh. Specular highlights can get a halo, but there's usually a total absence of any veiling or reflections. It has almost no distortion. Rockwell says it excites aliasing from full aperture on his M9, a very strong indication of its performance.

On the M9 it vignettes substantially at full aperture. The vignetting is still there on film, but less assertively so.
Click to expand...

Yes yes - but the OP already has a good lens [28 Summicron] but is looking for a 35mm lens which exhibits faults. Unfortunately for him the C-Biogon is a fabulous lens which gets out of the photographers way by not imposing faults on talented photography. A 28mm Summicron paired with a 35mm C-Biogon would be a fabulous partnership worthy of any talent; but low on 'decorating' faults.

Oops : - I had a little turn there and forgot where I was. I've used the common turn faults and have just remembered that the polite PC term here is character. Bad me; apologies, apologies.

.................. Chris
 
daniel buck said:
Hm, if it doesn't have much fuzzyness to the highlights wide open, it may not be what I'm looking for. But I may look at it for a more general lens. I do like the Zeiss lenses, I use several on my Canon 1Ds2, and I like them.

The C-biogon, is that in an M mount already? or does it require an adapter?
Click to expand...

I gave my superseded Nikon DSLR plus a prime lens to my daughter who finds it a delightful camera as long as she leaves a soft focus attachment on it all the time. It's not a Softar, just a cheap one, with a fairly small effect.

So you could have a razor sharp lens for when it suited you, and something with more "character" at other times.
 
back alley said:
no one thinks the canon 35/2.8 has character?
Click to expand...

I certainly agree that the Canon 35/2.8 has character, particularly if you're after a vintage look. It gives a more desaturated, "pastel" look to colors, and the low contrast also gives a vintage look to b&w. I got the sense, though, that the OP was looking for a lens that was distinctly soft wide open, which suggests to me that a faster lens might suit his needs, so I recommend the Canon 35/1.8.

The summilux recommended by Gabor and Thomas undoubtedly has lots of character, too, but at a significantly higher price than the Canon 35/1.8. I guess it all depends on what sort of look the OP is after and what his budget is.
 
J-12 or 3.5 Summaron. Given my choice, I'd go w/ the Summaron every time. Tons of Leica signature, yet still sharp enough. Tiny and light too, unless you go w/ the FrankenKamera goggled version (one of the best lenses I've ever used, but when I had that combo on an M3, it made me too self conscious when walking about. Too weird looking).
 
How "compact" is "compact"?

+1 for Summaron f3.5 if on a budget. +1 for preAsph 35/1.4 v2 if no budget (or alternatively the Cron 35 v3 or v4).
the Summaron is the smallest of the 3 above, but the 35 Cron and Lux are still small relative to their speed and unique signature.
 
Last edited:
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top Bottom