jky
Well-known
Thanks, Rob. I don't know the optical physics behind FS so I thought I'd ask here.... I've read on the net as well that the Rokkor is actually more desirable... true or not it doesn't matter as I just pulled the plug on a rokkor CLE just moments ago.
Classique
Well-known
This may be far fetched but how does rokkor cle 40mm compare to Nikkor 3.5cm f/2.5?
IEDEI
Well-known
not really! i use 39mm filters and hood without any issues. no rattles, fit perfectly.
IEDEI
Well-known
Hey c'mon... keep it down or the $ will go up!
Thanks for the feedback guys. I've also been reading on the net that the Rokkor has slightly better coating... what I can't find is whether this means it takes better care of flare.
Just wondering what were your experiences.
Thanks again!
haha...OOPS!
hurry up and buy one so we can praise it further!
jaapv
RFF Sponsoring Member.
In that case somebody has forced the thread if it is a Summicron. The Summicron has 39x.75 thread and the filter 39x.5. For a less destructive solution: Heavystar sells a 5.5-39 adapter+vented hood for little money. The Rokkor is listed at E40.5 filter thread.
kutitta
Well-known
sparrow6224
Well-known
You can use regular 39mm filters and hoods with the "C" lenses and the early Rokkors but the whatchamacallit is different, the size of the grooves... I'm forgetting the word on account of senility... anyway you can use the 39mm stuff but you should only screw it in until it stops, which is about halfway -- don't force it all the way.
sparrow6224
Well-known
Threads. Right.
Spicy
Well-known
Anyone have any experience with the differing focus cams on the CL (steeper version) and the CLE (M spec version)? I've read in some places that it "could" be an issue, but I've never found any evidence, or anyone claiming their version never worked properly. Seems like a case of someone saying something online and everyone quoting it as gospel.
Also, they should all be optically identical, the only difference being the Summicron and CL version are single-coated, and the CLE is rumored to be multicoated, though some have disputed that, and claim there may be some multicoated 'crons or CL versions out there.
I just purchased a CL version one a couple of weeks back and am waiting on its arrival from Singapore, so all the stuff above is what I've seemed to put together from all my pre-purchase research.
Also, they should all be optically identical, the only difference being the Summicron and CL version are single-coated, and the CLE is rumored to be multicoated, though some have disputed that, and claim there may be some multicoated 'crons or CL versions out there.
I just purchased a CL version one a couple of weeks back and am waiting on its arrival from Singapore, so all the stuff above is what I've seemed to put together from all my pre-purchase research.
LCT
ex-newbie
I have both Summicron and CLE Rokkor lenses. Hard to tell a significant difference as far as flare. I have kept the Minolta brochure of the CLE body and its M-Rokkor lenses from 1981. It refers to the same "Achromatic" coating as earlier Minolta lenses which was composed of two layers if memory serves. On hard tests (500W halogen lamp within the frame at f/2), the Rokkor's pics look a bit more flare free than the Summicron's but i need side by side comparos to view it distinctly.
ruslan
Established
I had both Summicron-c and CLE Rokkor, cron is better for flare control, has some focus shift, little bit smaller than Rokkor, better sun hood system with filter inside. Better focusing tub on Cron-C.
jaapv
RFF Sponsoring Member.
Spicy
Well-known
Oh, and does anyone happen to know the right kind/size for a push-on cap for the CL version?
LCT
ex-newbie
Hood cap # 14191:
Godfrey
somewhat colored
Currently, I use the Nokton 40/1.4 MC and M-Rokkor 40/2 (gen II). In the past I've also had the Summicron-C 40/2 and M-Rokkor 40/2 (gen I).
These lenses are so similar overall that it's almost crazy to call one out as very different from the other. Of the Summicron-C/M-Rokkors, the one I have now is the best performer by a slight amount. The Nokton and it draw almost identically at f/2-2.8 and smaller lens openings. The Nokton's big plus is the extra speed when you need it, and the bokeh becomes a little harsher there. But it's not a big deal.
Buy any of them and you're getting a great lens. I tend to use the M-Rokkor on my CL and the Nokton 40 on the GXR-M or M9.
Oh yeah: I've never seen much focus shift with any of them.
jky
Well-known
Thanks Godfrey.
No focus shift with the 40mm 1.4... That's enticing. The shift on my old VC 35 1.4 and some reports of shift on the net on the 40 are the reasons I didn't consider this lens. I used to have a 40 when I was shooting an M6- loved the ability to use that 1.4 if necessary.
No focus shift with the 40mm 1.4... That's enticing. The shift on my old VC 35 1.4 and some reports of shift on the net on the 40 are the reasons I didn't consider this lens. I used to have a 40 when I was shooting an M6- loved the ability to use that 1.4 if necessary.
kermaier
Well-known
That is far-fetched. I have both, but never tried to compare them. One of these days, if I'm feeling ambitious, I'll test a few 35s/40s.
Ari
kermaier
Well-known
And the CLE version has a rectangular knurled bump on the focusing tab, whereas the other versions have a round bump.
::Ari
maddoc
... likes film again.
Yes I have (had), my copy of the C-Summicron 40/2.0 did not focus properly using one of my M-bodies and I sold the C-Summicron. The reason for this "mis-match" is that in case of the C-Summicron lens (with the slope-shaped cam) the roller of the cam-follower in the camera (the small arm) has to be positioned exactly in the center of the M-mount. Any deviation to the left or right would result in a shift in the RF since a different "steep" part of the cam would be gauged. Leica did never specify any "accuracy" for the position of the roller of the cam follower since it does not matter if it is shifted to the right or left when using M-lenses with linear motion of the cam. Because the terms "Leica" and "non-specified accuracy" do not fit very well, there was never an official confirmation for the above stated. (I found this explanation some time ago on-line but forgot where ... )
)