The Ultron is my favorite lens. It's on my camera all the time and it's the one I use for about 99% of my work. It's really sharp but not too contrasty like the Skopar (personal taste). It's sharp but with a silky look. Highlights are beautiful.
I find it's a perfect match with the Heliar 75/2.5. Pictures from both can be hard to differentiate, except for the field of view and compression.
Since I use a meter or the one inside my R2, the 1.7 aperture doesn't bother me at all.
For samples, check my gallerie, my website or my shots from the Montreal RFF meeting
Great lens and i'm constantly trying to justify spending a fortune on a summicron asph. To be honest I doubt that I would see any difference in the pictures I take. Maybe if I was printing large with a focomat then it would be justifiable but not when scanning negs and digitizing!
is the cv 35/1.7 much more compact than the cv 35/1.2 in reality? by the shots i have seen, the 1.2 doesn't seem that much bulkier....but perhaps this is not so?
is the cv 35/1.7 much more compact than the cv 35/1.2 in reality? by the shots i have seen, the 1.2 doesn't seem that much bulkier....but perhaps this is not so?
I've used a 35/1.7 a lot on an R-D1s, on which it gives a FOV around 50mm, which is my focal length of choice. Absolutely no complaints about the optics, build, or price, it's a terrific lens, sharp, not too contrasty, reasonably compact and light.
This site uses cookies to help personalise content, tailor your experience and to keep you logged in if you register.
By continuing to use this site, you are consenting to our use of cookies.