35mm LTM Choices

[Moto Mark]

I’m going to add a 35mm LTM lens to go with my 50mm 1.5 Nokton. I want to stay with Voigtlander so with that in mind I’m looking for input from users on their experience with the various 35mm’s out there.

I’m leaning towards the Ultron but I want to hear what actual users tell me.

Thanks !

 

[johannielscom]

Very briefly owned a version 1 35mm 1.7 Ultron but wanted to use it on a screw mount Leica and it was just too big on that. Although it was an LTM mount lens, it really had a rear flange diameter that made it perfect for an M Leica, but ugly on a Barnack screw mount model.

Just a word of caution...

Myself, I settled (ahum) for a Nikkor 35mm 2.5 from the 1950s to go with my nickel Heliar 50mm 2.0. Got it from a fellow RFF member for about the price of a Voigtlander lens and it's nice and small. Made for screw mount Leicas, perfect fit.

 

[Gregm61]

I've used a 35mm f1.8 Nikkor on a Canon VT deLux that was pretty darn nice. I think they're a bit pricey these days, but not nearly so pricey as those limit edition 35mm f2 Summicron ASPH lenses you can find on eBay if you really wanted to splurge, LOL...

https://www.ebay.com/itm/MINT-Leica...924968?hash=item44139e69a8:g:Nc8AAOSwbopZfue3

 

[Bingley]

The little Voigtlander Skopar 35/2.5 for LTM is an incredible value if you can find one. It's sharp, flare resistant, and contrasty. The design of the LTM version and the M-mount version is identical; there's a thread on the 35 Skopar so you can see the results. I've had both the LTM and M-mount versions in the past, and both are very very good. Also, RFF member Lynnb regularly uses the Skopar 35 LTM on a Leica IIIc; you can see his excellent photos over on flickr.

FWIW, these days I'm using a Canon 35/2.0 (aka "The Japanese Summicron") and a tiny Summaron 35/3.5. Both are outstanding lenses, although they render very differently (the Canon is more modern, contrasty; the Summaron more old school).

 

[peterm1]

I know you said you want to stick to Voigtlander but there is a Leica option which is inexpensive and good so you may wish to consider it. Try to get your hands on a Summaron 35mm f3.5 in LTM (there is an early and a late LTM version and it also comes in M mount which is based on the late LTM version). The early LTM one is presently selling for around the $300 mark on eBay. I have both the early LTM and M versions and so far as I know they are optically identical. I love the rendering of the Summaron 35mm f3.5 which is very classic in appearance. The lens is an order of magnitude better than the Elmar 35mm's around before. Only thing to be aware of is that like all early Leica lenses they can fog due to the lubes used and so may need CLA unless that has been done already.

This link to the MIR site gives a nice overview. https://www.mir.com.my/rb/photograp...sources/RF-Nikkor/Leica_RF/LSM35mm/index2.htm

Photo of early and late LTM versions.

Image from Flickr site of "Matt Osborne" a London based photographer. (No connection to me but thank you Matt).

Leica Summaron 35mm f3.5 by Matt Osborne, on Flickr

 

[Ko.Fe.]

I liked 35 1.7 a lot more than 35 2.5. For results. It was way better on BW prints.
And I liked it more than 35 3.5 Summaron available in LTM. But I guess, I didn't have as good as above copy, twice. 35 1.7 seems to be no gamble comparing to vintage Leitz lens.
Mine developed quickly lens block wobble, but it was just one ring to tight.

 

[Moto Mark]

Thank you for the recommendations, please keep them coming.

I’ve read on here about the front element of the Ultron coming loose but I wonder wether it is a bad production run or if it occurs throughout the production.

 

[Brooklynguy]

If you are open to other lenses, I'll second Bingley's suggestion on the Canon 35/2.

 

[Rob-F]

I'm perfectly happy with my CV 35mm f/2.5. It is small and light, sharp and contrasty, just right for my Barnacks.

 

[fenixv8]

If you are open to other lenses, I'll second Bingley's suggestion on the Canon 35/2.

AMAZING lens!

 

[raid]

It also depends on the budget for a LTM 35mm lens. The Canon 35/2 is a great lens, while the Canon 35/2,8 is also a wonderful lens (maybe better for B&W). The Canon 35/1.5 would be also a suitable option if you want to use a not so easily found lens. The CV lenses are great lenses too. The Nikon 35/2.5 may be a good choice here.

 

[mooge]

cause nobody's mentioned it: Jupiter 12. Small ish, cheap (~$70?), sharp, right amount of focus throw (90 degrees from inf to 1m). only downsides are the clickless aperture ring, slight pincushion distortion and it sort of doesn't fit on Bessas (but should be okay on Canons or Leicas). Can't go wrong for the price in my opinion...

 

[creenus]

I use a nice and clean early version Summaron 35mm f3.5 LTM and it's a small dandy. I have also acquired a collection of those odd little A36 clamp-on filters, including an Infrared, so I can shoot HP5 in any lighting conditions with my Barnack.

I know you said you want to stick to Voigtlander but there is a Leica option which is inexpensive and good so you may wish to consider it. Try to get your hands on a Summaron 35mm f3.5 in LTM (there is an early and a late LTM version and it also comes in M mount which is based on the late LTM version). The early LTM one is presently selling for around the $300 mark on eBay. I have both the early LTM and M versions and so far as I know they are optically identical. I love the rendering of the Summaron 35mm f3.5 which is very classic in appearance. The lens is an order of magnitude better than the Elmar 35mm's around before. Only thing to be aware of is that like all early Leica lenses they can fog due to the lubes used and so may need CLA unless that has been done already.

This link to the MIR site gives a nice overview. https://www.mir.com.my/rb/photograp...sources/RF-Nikkor/Leica_RF/LSM35mm/index2.htm

Photo of early and late LTM versions.

 

[stupid leica]

I just picked up an UG 35/2 LTM (Canon) from KEH for $248, we'll see how it looks when it comes in and decide to keep it or not. I've owned numerous copies of this lens in the past, love and miss it.

 

[Ko.Fe.]

cause nobody's mentioned it: Jupiter 12. Small ish, cheap (~$70?), sharp, right amount of focus throw (90 degrees from inf to 1m). only downsides are the clickless aperture ring, slight pincushion distortion and it sort of doesn't fit on Bessas (but should be okay on Canons or Leicas). Can't go wrong for the price in my opinion...

I think I owned four of LTM version in different times and one Contax mount.
I'm currently with "Biogon" version, one of the first made J-12 in LTM.
Prior to this, I had black NOS version from 1991. One I have now was great on M8 and fine on M9. I have it currently on Zorki.

I don't know about copy you have, but all of the J-12 lenses I'm familiar with will produce flaring like no other lens. Hood, no hood, it will flare with multiple pentagons (aperture blades shape).
http://www.deep-life.ru/film/jupiter-12/controlight.htm
This is why it is not even 70$ lens. It is DIY lens 🙂 To cut flares it needs to be blackened and not only on visible lens part.

 

[css9450]

I think I owned four of LTM version in different times and one Contax mount.
I'm currently with "Biogon" version, one of the first made J-12 in LTM.
Prior to this, I had black NOS version from 1991. One I have now was great on M8 and fine on M9. I have it currently on Zorki.

I like the odd little J-12 a lot. I have an LTM version, and more-recently got a Kiev/Contax version from a forum member here. I use it on my Nikon S2. It looks well worn but produces very nice sharp pics! Then I bought a NOS black one from Ebay... It looks perfect but unfortunately some lens elements have become "unnattached" from each other (or something) and it causes softness on the left side of the photo. Too bad too since its such a nice handling lens, once you get used to the the odd aperture ring.

 

[mdarnton]

If you are just looking for quality, the 35/1.7 is one of the sharpest, clearest lenses I've ever owned, but yes, it is big on LTM cameras. At the other end, my 35/1.5 Canon was a dog. I have never owned the Canon 35/2 or 1.8, but in general the other Canon lenses I've had, aside from the 35/1.5, were excellent lenses, bettern than my Leica equivalents (I'll duck now).

 

[ForestCap]

cause nobody's mentioned it: Jupiter 12. Small ish, cheap (~$70?), sharp, right amount of focus throw (90 degrees from inf to 1m). only downsides are the clickless aperture ring, slight pincushion distortion and it sort of doesn't fit on Bessas (but should be okay on Canons or Leicas). Can't go wrong for the price in my opinion...

My 197x black J-12 fits on my Bessa-R and I'm pretty sure it's not touching anything that a lens should not touch. It blocks the light meter sensor though. It also fits on my Canon L2 and Canon 7.

 

[Moto Mark]

Thank you for all the suggestions, I pulled the trigger on a Color Skopar f2.5 pancake tonight.

Looking forward to shooting with it !

 

[mooge]

My 197x black J-12 fits on my Bessa-R and I'm pretty sure it's not touching anything that a lens should not touch. It blocks the light meter sensor though. It also fits on my Canon L2 and Canon 7.

My Jupiter 12 (black, 1987, No. 8715009) fits on my Bessa R2 and R (on loan) BUT the focus gets tight between inf and 15m, which I take it means the rear element is bumping into the baffling. Not really ideal.

On my Canon 7(s), I think the bigger outer diameter glass bit rubs against the light baffling as the paint on that part of the rear glass has been worn off. This is more okay than on the Bessas because the baffling on the Canon 7 is just sheet metal.