35mm Lens

Damn it is annoying to try find those Canon lenses on eBay 😉. Are the wide-angles also Serenar or something?

I guess I should consider Canon's too.

I have owned the V3 Summicron and I dont think I'd need any better. I sold it though, to get some money and now I need a cheaper 35 for affordable price but enough speed and quality. The Ultron 35/1.7 would be my choice #1 if the price and lens speed are important. It is a great lense overall, though the 'cron is clearly sharper wide open compared to Ultron at f2 or below.
 
For the price of one second-hand Summicron, I got myself a M-Rokkor 40/2 *and* a Nokton 35/1.2, and I second every kind word and image that has been already posted about both lenses. The original Minolta rubber shade is very handy too when the objective is compactness.

(If you have the courage to file the right bit of the Rokkor's mount a few tenths of millimetre, it is supposed to bring up the 35mm frames. I confess I haven't, but the 35mm lines on my M6 are a very good match for the 40mm field of view.)

On the other hand, some people might ask what the point is of M-photography without Leica glass... I will leave that debate to theologians. :angel:
 
Thanks so much for all that advice, and some lovely example pictures, most appreciated!

OK well I hadn't considered the V3 cron before, but I can see there are quite a few around. Is the IQ similar to the V4? Any differences of note in that regard?

Regarding the CZ lenses - would anyone venture a comparison in IQ between the f2 and f2.8 C lens? From the brief tests I've seen, it looks as though the 2.8 has slightly higher contrast, perhaps the bokeh is not quite as pleasant as the f2, although very nice, potentially greater flare resistance, and it's smaller. The tradeoff appears to be the stop less speed and that the angle of view is closer to 36-37mm not 35mm - although how much one would notice this in the field is debatable I guess. I looked on flickr and there are some stunning shots with the f2, but not many yet with the 2.8 (I guess it's newish) so hard to tell.

The CV lenses; I had a look at the range, and there appear to be many choices in 35mm in the screw and M-mount. Are any known to be particularly good/bad?

As an aside, I always found with the cron v4 that it wasn't the OOF areas which were so much better than other good lenses, but the gradual transition of IF to OOF areas which was so pleasing and gave such a 3D look to things. It's that which strikes me when I look at the shots I took with those lenses.

Cheers,
James
 
CV Lenses: 1.2 Nokton is big, but there is none equal in speed. I haven't used one but surely it is interesting with the f1.2. The f1.4 is small and great other than that it has some obvious distortions.

The 1.7 Ultron is my favourite because of the price. I think it is the best 35mm lense when it comes to the price and quality, at least if lens speed is important. Then there is the f2.5 Skopar, which I hear is great and cheap also, but is "only" f2.5

If you dont want to waste money... My suggestions

1) The Ultron (downsides: not small, not as sharp wide open as the 1.4 or a Summicron.)
2) Summicron V3 (not AWFULLY expensive like the V4, but small and great. Probably the best you can get for less than 600 EUR. I'd say the downside is the price only)
3) The Skopar, maybe PII which is in M-mount. Small, but not fast. Very cheap and optically great
4) The 1.2 Nokton, if you want a large max. aperture. It is not cheap and not small, but great other than that.

Then there is the Zeiss 35/2, which I guess is mostly equal to the Summicron, but is a modern lens where the 'cron is a classic one. I guess it makes more contrast and so on..
 
In case nobody else mentioned it, I highly recommend subscribing (small annual fee) to reidreviews.com (by Sean Reid). His equipment reviews, as well as other commentary on art and photography, are outstanding. Regarding this post, he has an excellent review comparison of 5 or 6 35mm lenses, with pics illustrating differences.
Jeff
 
If I'd get an expensice Summicron, I'd buy ASPH rather than the V4. I think the V3 is a best buy in the 'cron range though. Also I'd pick it over the Zeisses.

But for third or less I get the Ultron which is half a stop faster... Just like the Skopar. It just doesn't say Leitz 😉

None of the resolution or sharpness tests really have much to do with art in my opinion 🙂. Any of these lenses are good enough for photography in general.
 
All I can say is that my Ultron 35mm is easily the best 35mm I have ever owned.

The price is also excellent for an aspherical lens.

Personally I am very rarely below f/2.8 on a 35mm and when I have shot at f/1.7 or f/2 I have never been disappointed.

Comparatively to all lens mounts out there, the Ultron 35mm is one of the best 35mm's I have ever owned and used.

The way some people will talk about CV glass is as if its very much second rate. It really isn't.

Leica's glass is damned good, no doubts about that but if your main concern is the end result, CV glass will turn out stunning results if you can compose a good picture.

No lens, even a Noctilux will make your photos good if you can't take a picture at the right moment and/or in a decent composition.
 
I'm considering a 35mm summicron and the ver III sounds like what I'm looking for. What do you look for in terms of serial numbers, years manufactered, or other things to know you'll get a ver III? Is the filter size 39mm? Finally, what do these lenses sell for?
 
Lilserenity said:
All I can say is that my Ultron 35mm is easily the best 35mm I have ever owned.

Personally I am very rarely below f/2.8 on a 35mm and when I have shot at f/1.7 or f/2 I have never been disappointed.

Comparatively to all lens mounts out there, the Ultron 35mm is one of the best 35mm's I have ever owned and used.

The way some people will talk about CV glass is as if its very much second rate. It really isn't.

Leica's glass is damned good, no doubts about that but if your main concern is the end result, CV glass will turn out stunning results if you can compose a good picture.
Click to expand...

I agree totally. I could say the same about my Ultron (actually I've owned it twice).

When the price is taken into account, I'd say it is easily the best 35mm. If not, I'd say Summicron (V3 is what I had) is close too with its smaller size and the focus tab. I guess if youre a millionaire, the Summicron ASPH would be a good choice 😉.

Shooting wide open or large apertures, I was always quite happy about the Ultron too. I think it was far better than the SLR wide angles I've used. But when I got the Summicron in a trade, I noticed it really was clearly sharper at f2 or so. Still I dont think it matter much at all. The Ultron was good enough no doubt, even at f1.7 it was quite nice.

Also the build quality in VC glass is excellent and I see no reason to brag with Leica's better build quality. Especially these lenses like the Ultron, The 50mm Nokton 1.5 and Heliar 75, the quality is great. I'd say it is better than Leica's. I know some earlier VC's weren't maybe built that well, so maybe that is where the reputation came.
 
i'll have to take a look at the ultron then i suppose - how big is it compared to the leica lenses? any weak points in it's imaging?

james
 
3dit0r said:
i'll have to take a look at the ultron then i suppose - how big is it compared to the leica lenses? any weak points in it's imaging?

james
Click to expand...

This question and others answered, and demonstrated, in reviews by Sean Reid, which I mentioned in post above. I have no affiliation with site...just an enthusiastic follower.
Jeff
 
I also own an Ultron 35, but not much enchanted by it. Wide open it's fine focused at infinity and large distances, but has this edgy yet unsharp look when focused in close. The minimum focus distance is 0.9m vs. often found 0.7 in other designs. The ergonomics is poor (forgot how many times I accidentially slipped aperture), it is not very compact, and DOF scale is poorly readable.

It is fairly flare resistant with the sun in the shot, BUT flares readily if the sun is just aside of the visible frame. The flare is beam-shaped and pointing towards center and is so predictable and repeatable I used it as special effect a few times.

The combined glass-resin aspherical element is nothing to brag about, more a sign of kludgy optical design than an achievement. Cosina has learnt some lessons since and their 35 Nokton is both simpler in design and a better lens in all respects.

It is of course perfectly possible to take many fine pictures with Ultron, and indeed mine has brassed down with me trying to do just that. I wouldn't recommend it however with the options available now.
 
I think the Ultron is fine enough even wide open. Not as sharp as the 1.4 Nokton or a 'cron, but they are the best ones so it is not a shame to lose a bit. I guess the flare might happen occasionally, but I never had any severe ones and really had no problems with that.

Minimum distance is a good point for some people. I never got too distracted about it. I also liked the ergonomics a lot, though I would prefer a focus tab if possible. I think the focusing and aperture settings are very smooth, among the best I've used.

It is clearly longer than a 'cron or the 1.4 Nokton, but I wouldn't say it is big. Medium size I guess 🙂.

I would never choose the 1.4 Nokton over the Ultron because of the distortions it has. I'm not saying they are obvious in every shot but it would really piss me off to have them on otherwise great shot. I wouldn't say it is a better lens overall, but in most aspects, maybe all except the distortion.

I find it quite important even though I dont shoot architecture, but because I still want (for example) window or door frames to be straight in the photos.

In any case, I guess there has to be reason why used Ultrons go for around 200 EUR, but for that kind of price it is a great deal and enough for most photographers I guess. However, if I had much money I would probably get me a Summicron (maybe ASPH) and if I had much more, also a 1.2 Nokton 🙂.
 
thanks guys. i'm back to the summicron iii/iv, or the biogon 2/2.8... it's really all down now to weighing speed or size...
 
You must log in or register to reply here.

Similar threads

Shab
A 35mm lens for a Nikon FM3A
2 3
Replies
42
Views
4K
Dogman
Dogman
kxl
I WANT (not need) another 35mm lens.
2
Replies
27
Views
995
38Deardorff
38Deardorff
I
Used Leica’s serial unknown to Leica?
2 3 4
Replies
68
Views
1K
sojournerphoto
S
stephen_lumsden
Pre-war biogon 35mm f2.8 vs Planar 35mm f3.5
2
Replies
20
Views
1K
TenEleven
TenEleven
macmx
Eisenstaedt's M3 and 35mm lens
Replies
11
Views
1K
Glenn2
G
Back
Top Bottom