“King” of Bokeh vs. CV 35mm 1.4 v2
- Thread starter xmas_one
- Start date
- Latest activity Latest activity:
- Replies 20
- Views 2K
peterm1
Veteran
I had the V4 Summicron 35mm and for some reason never really bonded with it. Though it is a highly competent lens (obviously) 35mm is not a focal length I use a great deal preferring a longer lens for most of my purposes. So in part I think the issue was that it seemed that having a lens valued at around $2000 sitting in a cupboard doing nothing for 90% of the time was a waste. I sold it and used the money for some other purchase and unlike some lenses I have sold I cannot say I really regret it – not because it is a bad lens but rather because it was not for me.
I did however eventually ( several years later) buy a second hand Voigtlander 35mm f1.2 (first version) from a friend, swapping it for a Voigtlander 40mm f1.4 which I owned plus some cash – which seemed a good deal for me as somehow I never really bonded with that 40mm lens either. On reflection in addition to the focal length issue already mentioned, I think it has something to do with the form factor . Small bodied lenses like the two I mentioned often seem too small for me to handle comfortably. While the big 35mm f1.2 is perfect. But that is just me. Also I have seldom place too much of a premium on pure lens performance and much prefer character and interesting rendering.
I did however eventually ( several years later) buy a second hand Voigtlander 35mm f1.2 (first version) from a friend, swapping it for a Voigtlander 40mm f1.4 which I owned plus some cash – which seemed a good deal for me as somehow I never really bonded with that 40mm lens either. On reflection in addition to the focal length issue already mentioned, I think it has something to do with the form factor . Small bodied lenses like the two I mentioned often seem too small for me to handle comfortably. While the big 35mm f1.2 is perfect. But that is just me. Also I have seldom place too much of a premium on pure lens performance and much prefer character and interesting rendering.
Ko.Fe.
Lenses 35/21 Gears 46/20
King of bokeh has plastic parts for aperture control which are not available anymore. I'm not this rich, I have all metal and glass CV 35 f1.4 II.
More correct comparison would be with Ultron 35 f2, BTW.
But I was surprised, in the link, I couldn't believe, I was reading several times which lens is where.
🙂
More correct comparison would be with Ultron 35 f2, BTW.
But I was surprised, in the link, I couldn't believe, I was reading several times which lens is where.
🙂
DwF
Well-known
I certainly like what Cosina Voigtlander are putting out. This comparison does not make me want to sell my v4 Summicron or my v3. If I didn't aready have the Leica lenses, I would be taking a serious look at this newer 35mm Nokton.
As for the test:
The tree shot is quite flawed by moving foliage so impossible to discern his point of focus, or that it was even the same in both exposures but does favor the CV. Having said that, the bokeh is a bit more nervous in the CV image. The fridge shot with magnet that says Berlin and the word Saison favors the Summicron. Again, both fine lenses, the K of B is for sure inflated in price, has been and likely will stay that way.
David
As for the test:
The tree shot is quite flawed by moving foliage so impossible to discern his point of focus, or that it was even the same in both exposures but does favor the CV. Having said that, the bokeh is a bit more nervous in the CV image. The fridge shot with magnet that says Berlin and the word Saison favors the Summicron. Again, both fine lenses, the K of B is for sure inflated in price, has been and likely will stay that way.
David
kiemchacsu
Well-known
Not all versions are the same. I heard that German made lenses have better construction built.
valdas
Veteran
Yep, I had a German silver chrome version. Gorgeous. But sold it, prices were too high to justify keeping it when the difference vs Nokton in my eyes was not that critical (for what I shoot).
vincentbihler
Member
Erik van Straten
Veteran
The Ultron 35mm f/1.7 (both versions) is better in my opinion. No distortion. Beautiful rendering.
Erik.
Erik.
kiemchacsu
Well-known
i have noticed that people tend to compare leica lenses with other brands and happy to use a cheaper lens with "better" or on par quality with leica lense.
i don't mind using other brands lenses because they are better, i want to hold in my hands leica lenses. Am i NUT?
i don't mind using other brands lenses because they are better, i want to hold in my hands leica lenses. Am i NUT?
Erik van Straten
Veteran
No, you are wise. Leica lenses are the only lenses that go up in price continuously. So the longer you keep them the better it is for your wallet.
Erik.
valdas
Veteran
They do. But life goes on and we are not here forever. I don’t want to pass away knowing that I have in my camera bag a lens that has been growing in value all the time 🙂 So what? If my kids appreciate photography and lenses, then maybe yes. Otherwise - I’d prefer to sell it and use the proceeds on something else (travel, some other experiences). I would not look at lenses as an investment instrument (surely, in some cases it might be). But sure - if one enjoys using it, why not keeping. I just don’t see the appreciation in value as the ultimate reason.
steveyork
Well-known
Ha, ha, far as I know, all modern Leica lenses are full of plastic. The only lenses I ever broke were Leica lenses -- an early 35mm Summicron Asph and coincidently two separate 60mm Elmarit R. In repairing the Summicron, Krauter told me modern Leica lenses are full of plastic inside. The 60mm Elmarits both had focusing issues, and in fixing one Sherry said she had to manufacture the spare part. I could be wrong, ha, ha, I often am, but this is my experience, so I laugh to myself when I read, especially on the Leica forum, people touting the build quality of modern Leica stuff.
steveyork
Well-known
Ha, ha, not in circa 2005-07!! Back then we all worried Leica was going out of business, prices plummeted, and some stores liquidated stock at cost. Oh man, the deals I got then. Too inexperienced at the time to realize that was pretty much once in a lifetime. Should of kept the stuff.
Yeah, my initial go round with M stuff I sold after more then a decade of use, for pretty much the price I paid for it new. Still have a receipt for a new chrome 35mm Summicron 4th for 995 in circa '97. Should've bought a dozen. That was back when the new Asph came out and the stores just wanted to get rid of the old model.
Not sure Leica optics will skyrocket in price as they have over the last 10-12 years. There's a lot more competition now, producing quality stuff, and this huge influx of M users with the advent of the full frame digital M probably will level off (if it hasn't done so already). Leica just can't keep jacking up prices every year (or maybe they can!). At some point the junkies and rich folks will say, no more, but really, ha, ha, what do I know. There's certainly been impressive appreciation on Leica optics over the last decade.
Ko.Fe.
Lenses 35/21 Gears 46/20
As far as I know in more recent lenses German engineering wisdom made the switch to composite materials.
I have seen as many reports about falling apart Leica lenses at LUF as here.
Also about falling, defective from factory film M cameras. Cracked sensors on A7 Leica copies. All at LUF.
Days of legendary German quality are over.
zenza
Well-known
I'd wager taking the $$ saved going with another brand and putting it into some kind of investment would yield more $$ in the end than whatever amount the Leica lens appreciates.
kiemchacsu
Well-known
Oh I should have said that I do not intend to make money in in buying and selling Leica lenses. It is just my pure interest in old Leica lenses.
Personally I have 35/2 v4 German version and 35/2,8 Summaron now.
Personally I have 35/2 v4 German version and 35/2,8 Summaron now.
Disappointed_Horse
Well-known
If you want to buy something that will last, buy something that already has. Limited useful life and planned obsolescence are built into everything manufactured since the late 1970s/early 1980s.
Ko.Fe.
Lenses 35/21 Gears 46/20
Honestly, hard to tell. Maybe collector?
I had very many old Leitz lenses and just sold every each of them as soon as I realized I don't need it.
Different mentality. I still like time then I had nothing but one lens on one camera. Must be crazy for those days of hording and consumerism. Sorry, collecting hobby.
raid
Dad Photographer
I have never own any of these lenses mentioned here, but I have had a strong feeling that the Ultron 35/1.7 is a very good lens. I nearly got one.
Ko.Fe.
Lenses 35/21 Gears 46/20
Exactly, but it has nothing to do with Leitz.
I'm not collector and not speculant, just a photog. I have no interest in sending of deteriorating over time Leitz lenses for service and wait for it if it comes back any better or worse.
Earlier Leitz lenses have no plastic, but quality of glass is bad. Fungus prone, soft glass, fogging and separation. This is why I let it all go and keeping couple of FSU RF lenses instead. They dodn't have soft, separating and fungusy glass a.k.a. Leitz. And they are easy to CLA at home. And those are lenses from fifties. Which are fine even on digital Leica.
Similar threads
