35mm lenses for Leica M2

[Erik van Straten]

Erik, thank you for the pics using the Ultron. Is that the new or old version of that lens?

The shot on the beach is with the new one (Leica M mount) and the other one with the old one (Leica screw mount).

Erik.

 

[Nigel Meaby]

Erik, thank you for the pics using the Ultron. Is that the new or old version of that lens?

One of each.....First with the M version, second with the LTM, first version, as labelled 🙂

 

[Rob-F]

I like my 35mm 2.8 Summaron better than the new Summarit. I also like it more than the Summicron (image wise) but I'd also take any version of the Summicron OR the CZ 35mm 2.8 over the Summarit.

Well, I don't own the Summarit, so can't comment on that; but I have owned a 2.8 Summaron since around 1961 or so. Though I have added a version 1 Summicron and a version 4, I still love the M2/2.8 Summaron combo! So another vote for the 2.8 Summaron!

 

[teddy]

I have the Summicron 35/2 V1 and the Summaron 35/2.8. The Summaron has a lot of "soul", character, personality. Is plenty sharp. It's an artists 35mm lens.

 

[Chubberino]

The 3.5cm 3.5 designed specifically for the M2 is a good choice.

 

[sara]

When I bought an M2, I had the 35 color skopar pancake lens (infact it was someone on this forum who sold me the lens!) 🙂 which I used for many years, and then recently bought a Summicron 35.

The Summicron is much sharper (obviously) but the color skopar is compact, and lighter.

I've kept both lenses, because I don't want my Summicron getting bashed in parties (for example) 😀.

 

[michaelwj]

I like them very much.

Leica M2, VC Ultron-M 35mm f/1.7, 400-2TMY.

Erik.

Leica M2, Ultron LTM 35mm f/1.7 (full aperture) Tmax400.

Erik.

I can sure see why you like it. Well done.

Erik, thank you for the pics using the Ultron. Is that the new or old version of that lens?

Dont be fooled by an excellent photo by Erik used to tout the qualities of a lens. All his photos are excellent. I believe he could photograph with the bottom of a wine bottle and we would all be amazed and wonder what exceptional lens it was. 🙂

 

[brennanphotoguy]

If you want something new, I also say the 35/2.5 color skopar. I've sold that kit (M2 with the Voigtlander 35/2.5) I don't know how many times to people just getting into rangefinders.

 

[Chromacomaphoto]

Yet one more vote for a Summaron 2.8, goggled or otherwise. It is just heavenly with an M2. You will not regret it.

 

[Chromacomaphoto]

Don't discount the value of the goggles! 🙂 I find the 35mm framelines hard to see all at once with my M2. The goggles squeeze a 35mm view into the 50mm framelines, making things much nicer! You can see what's happening around the outside. Bonus that the goggled Summaron costs less...
BTW, Summicrons and Summiluxes also came in goggled versions.

Glad I'm not the only one to think this. Frankly I am happy that the previously (when new) more expensive goggled versions are cheaper 2nd hand where I live. I used to have to wear contacts to shoot 35mm lenses, now the whole 'squeezed into the 50 frame' thing is just great. I even quite like how they look on some M's. Win/win.

 

[giulio stucchi]

summicron-m 35 asph is my choice for "modern" optical design on my M2 but i am sure a summarit 35 2.5 or 2.4 are also great choices.

on the vintage side the summaron 35 2.8 is my fave followed by the summilux 35 pre asph (both being slightly longer than 35mm, 38mm seems to be the actual FL)

if the summarit 2.4 fit the bill, go for it!


Giulio

 

[jonmanjiro]

The Zeiss 35mm f/1.4 (lens on left) gave me the image quality I wanted, fit better with my shooting style, provided me with the light gathering I needed, and was compatible with my budget.


Zeiss 35mm by Narsuitus, on Flickr

The IQ of the Zeiss Distagon 35/1.4 really is something, especially at f1.4. But small it is not. In comparison, the Nokton 35/1.4 is tiny, and the MS Optics 35/1.4 (quirky handling and all) is positively minute. I have a Zeiss Distagon 35/1.4, but it only gets used when I know I'll need f1.4.

 

[Nyc Dito]

Hi,

I recently acquired an M2 and looking at 35mm lenses. I saw a sale today for a new 35mm f2.4 summarit. I was wondering how this lens might compare to the 35mm f2 summicron and the Carl Zeiss 35mm f2.8 lenses? I have not done much research on the summarits but seems reasonably priced.

Thanks,
Shane

i very happily went with the suggestions of many here on RFF and bought a 35/2.5 color skopar as a first lens for my M2. I saw it as a good starting point. Even in low light i shoot HP5/Tri-x at 1600 with no issues. I love the size and weight of my combo. Highly suggested as a good place to start and try for a few months.

 

[TRIago]

If you want to buy a 35 F2 lens only once then go right away for the 35 Cron Asph.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

 

[Robert Lai]

Darryl earlier made a comment about an SLR for 35mm lenses. From my experience with Nikon, they never made a really good 35mm SLR manual focus lens. I've tried them all, from the 1.4, 2, and 2.8 lenses. Even now I use a 40mm f/2 Voigtlander Ultron in Nikon F mount, as my "close to 35mm" lens.

This search for a good 35mm focal length lead to the rangefinder cameras.

So far, I've got:
35mm f/2.8 Summaron in LTM. This can be used on my IIIG also, with the proper finder. A very fine lens by all accounts.

Color Skopar 35mm f/2.8 in LTM - very high contrast, perhaps not as high resolution. A very satisfactory lens with color print film.

35mm 1.7 M Ultron - high resolution with high contrast. Rather similar in imaging to the Leica 35mm f/2 Summicron ASPH. The only problem with this beast is that it's rather bulky in comparison to the others.

35mm f/2 Summicron ASPH. High contrast, high resolution. About as technically perfect as a lens of this focal length can get. Physically small, but dense and heavy, especially the chrome version. If I had to choose only one lens in this focal length, I'd chose this one.

However, the weight and bulk of these faster lenses usually have me using the Color Skopar or the Summaron far more often.

 

[agoglanian]

Until just recently I was using the 35 Summicron ASPH and it really is a wonderful lens. I've had the ZM Biogon in the past and really bonded well with that one. However I was making changes and sold my Summicron with the intention to buy the C-Biogon f/2.8 but was swayed by a chance to buy the Konica UC-Hexanon 35mm f/2 which has been on my "want" list for quite some time.

For the time being that is my 35mm and it's just exquisite really, but if I had to sell it I would go back and hunt for a 35mm C-Biogon for sure.

 

[uhoh7]

Just in terms of pure technical performance from F4 on down, the ZM 35/2 is the strongest, even better than the new ZM35/1.4. No mid-zone waves and just great rez. Least distortion of any 35.

But it's a little big, F2 is not as good as 35/2 ASPH, and bokeh is not great either.

L1033110 by unoh7, WO on M9.

So many interesting 35s each with it's "case". Biogon-C is maybe the best value of all for the street. On M2 ideally I would take 8 element cron. 🙂

 

[Erik van Straten]

35mm F3.5 Summaron: A great lens with a "vintage" or "classic" rendering that seems to give photographs a warm emotional appeal and pleasantness. It's an excellent lens for old-school general photography. Some of my favorite photographs have been taken with this lens. Don't hesitate to use a tripod and slower shutter speeds to make up for the slower aperture. Color is not this lens' strong point.

Leica M5, Summaron-M 35mm f/3.5, 400-2TMY.

Erik.

 

[presspass]

If you don't mind a slow lens and one with a bayonet adapter, look at the 35 Elmar 3.5. I bought one a year ago to use with a IIIa and have been astounded by the quality of shots it produces. Mine needs a CLA - the lube is tight if I don't use it for a couple of weeks and the infinity lock should be straightened. It's a tiny lens with a fiddly f-stop setting method, but it does produce. You could also look for an earlier version of the Summicron - they are lighter than the ASPH ones and if you get one made in Canada, it may cost less because the 'made in Germany' crowd thinks they are inferior. I've had one that came with my M4 nearly 35 years ago and it still works just fine.

 

[djnato10]

I have gone through most 35 focal length lenses for M mount. The Summaron is great for the price and has a little more vintage look. The Summicron ASPH is amazingly sharp and contrasty with a much more modern look and feel. I actually opted to sell my ASPH in favor of the Zeiss 35mm f2.8 Biogon due to it being significantly less expensive, lighter, and easily just as sharp at all apertures. I was however longing for that F2 again and picked up a Konica M-Hexanon 35mm f2 in nice shape; when compared side by side with the ASPH it is pretty tough to see the difference. There is a little more vingetting at F2 but not much, other than that it hits all of the marks that my ASPH did. You can get both the Zeiss 35 2.8 and Konica 35 f2 for the price of one good used Summicron ASPH, they are all great lenses but having two great lenses is better than one in my opinion, it gives me options.