martin s
Well-known
Just a short one, to give you a rough idea of the size. Sorry for the bad pictures, I don't have a proper digital camera at the moment. I bought this lens in a German photo store, it came in a box like this
The M next to it as a size-comparison. I was shocked when I first opened the box, crazy. It's pretty heavy, too (490 gr.). Unlike the 35mm f1.4 it comes with a lens hood
Now the cap only fits on the lens with the hood attached, so you really have to at least carry the hood. The cap works pretty well, there's some fabric on the inside of it to hold. You tighten the hood with a little screw, which pushes the metal strip (doesn't scratch anything), holds really well, too. There are notches on the lens so it doesn't turn freely.
(Elmar f2.8 on the right, another picture)
Like I said, freakishly huge, and still bigger than you might think looking at those images.
But despite the size, it's an amazing lens. It's really, really well made - feels incredibly solid and even makes my Canon L friends somewhat jealous. All metal as far as I can tell.
You can set the aperture in half stops, which is nice. The aperture ring is really responsive, too, easy to change without actually looking at it.
There's no focusing tab, which I would have preferred. You get used to not having one really fast though, faster than I thought. You can turn the focus ring real easy, but it's fast, still not too fast to focus at f1.2. If it's not super dark focusing isn't an issue I'd say, even wide open.
On the M6 the lens feels a little too front-heavy, probably way better with a Rapidwinder / Leicavit / Motor M / ... . It's still bearably , even though I at least need a neckstrap now, carrying it in your hand for an hour or two isn't fun.
Regarding the viewfinder intrusion (0,72x) it's not really an issue for me, except with close-up portraits where the head of the subject would be located in the top right corner (vertical). I was surprised though, it does take up quite some space, but it'll just blend in after a while. Like your nose, which you technically see as well
Quality wise there are plenty of threads with _amazing_ photographs taken with this lens, even some recent ones.
More information about the lens here. I will post another, more detailed review once I've shot more with this lens. For now it's my take everywhere to get used to it.
martin
The M next to it as a size-comparison. I was shocked when I first opened the box, crazy. It's pretty heavy, too (490 gr.). Unlike the 35mm f1.4 it comes with a lens hood
Now the cap only fits on the lens with the hood attached, so you really have to at least carry the hood. The cap works pretty well, there's some fabric on the inside of it to hold. You tighten the hood with a little screw, which pushes the metal strip (doesn't scratch anything), holds really well, too. There are notches on the lens so it doesn't turn freely.
(Elmar f2.8 on the right, another picture)
Like I said, freakishly huge, and still bigger than you might think looking at those images.
But despite the size, it's an amazing lens. It's really, really well made - feels incredibly solid and even makes my Canon L friends somewhat jealous. All metal as far as I can tell.
You can set the aperture in half stops, which is nice. The aperture ring is really responsive, too, easy to change without actually looking at it.
There's no focusing tab, which I would have preferred. You get used to not having one really fast though, faster than I thought. You can turn the focus ring real easy, but it's fast, still not too fast to focus at f1.2. If it's not super dark focusing isn't an issue I'd say, even wide open.
On the M6 the lens feels a little too front-heavy, probably way better with a Rapidwinder / Leicavit / Motor M / ... . It's still bearably , even though I at least need a neckstrap now, carrying it in your hand for an hour or two isn't fun.
Regarding the viewfinder intrusion (0,72x) it's not really an issue for me, except with close-up portraits where the head of the subject would be located in the top right corner (vertical). I was surprised though, it does take up quite some space, but it'll just blend in after a while. Like your nose, which you technically see as well
Quality wise there are plenty of threads with _amazing_ photographs taken with this lens, even some recent ones.
More information about the lens here. I will post another, more detailed review once I've shot more with this lens. For now it's my take everywhere to get used to it.
martin
__hh
Well-known
Thank you for that. I am currently looking for one and find your personal views on the lens valuable.
Still trying to determine the real advantage of the F/1.2 over F/1.4 taking size/costs into account.
Hung
Still trying to determine the real advantage of the F/1.2 over F/1.4 taking size/costs into account.
Hung
xayraa33
rangefinder user and fancier
All for the love of sweet bokeh
__hh
Well-known
Yes, I don't dispute that at all. I have done that myself for the 50mm FL.
sleepyhead
Well-known
Great lens, but not worth the half stop for me over an f/1.4 smaller lens.
So I sold mine and bought a 35mm summilux.
Hung, what good is a lens if it's prohibitive to carry with you.
So I sold mine and bought a 35mm summilux.
Hung, what good is a lens if it's prohibitive to carry with you.
back alley
IMAGES
Optics and Lenses -
READ INSTRUCTIONS! This forum is aimed towards the technical side of photographic optics and lenses. There will be some overlap by camera/manufacturer, but this forum is for the heavy duty tech discussions. This is NOT the place to discuss a specific lens or lens line, do that in the appropriate forum. This is the forum to discuss optics or lenses in general, to learn about the tech behind the lenses and images. IF you have a question about a specific lens, post it in the forum about that type of camera, NOT HERE. Mods are tired of moving threads, and may just delete them instead.
READ INSTRUCTIONS! This forum is aimed towards the technical side of photographic optics and lenses. There will be some overlap by camera/manufacturer, but this forum is for the heavy duty tech discussions. This is NOT the place to discuss a specific lens or lens line, do that in the appropriate forum. This is the forum to discuss optics or lenses in general, to learn about the tech behind the lenses and images. IF you have a question about a specific lens, post it in the forum about that type of camera, NOT HERE. Mods are tired of moving threads, and may just delete them instead.
martin s
Well-known
@sleepyhead and hunghang
That's what I was thinking, but I'm not really using anything beyond f2.8 all that much, and generally I'd know beforehand, that's why I was thinking I'll just get a 24mm/25mm lens to supplement my wides and carry the f1.2 only if necessary.
@back alley
Now that is just ridiculous, please feel free to delete this thread. I navigate to the already insanely large overview of subforums, and search for "lens" via ctrl+f, that's the only one which came up. Reading all of the descriptions would have taken me longer than writing the review.
//EDIT2: now why in the world is this thread the "Bessa" subforum now? Is that where people would look for such a thread? The description clearly says "Rangefinder", too, not lenses.
martin
That's what I was thinking, but I'm not really using anything beyond f2.8 all that much, and generally I'd know beforehand, that's why I was thinking I'll just get a 24mm/25mm lens to supplement my wides and carry the f1.2 only if necessary.
@back alley
Now that is just ridiculous, please feel free to delete this thread. I navigate to the already insanely large overview of subforums, and search for "lens" via ctrl+f, that's the only one which came up. Reading all of the descriptions would have taken me longer than writing the review.
//EDIT2: now why in the world is this thread the "Bessa" subforum now? Is that where people would look for such a thread? The description clearly says "Rangefinder", too, not lenses.
martin
Last edited:
back alley
IMAGES
martin, i just enforce the rules...
this is the section that would include cv lenses as well.
nothing personal...
this is the section that would include cv lenses as well.
nothing personal...
boy_lah
Discovering RF
Hung - having owned the 1.2 and now the 1.4, i don't find the 1/2 stop to be the deal breaker.
For me, it was size (large) / lovely lovely quality vs compact / still very good quality but completely different look between the lenses.
The 1.2 is sharp / modern / smooth. The 1.4 is (to me) good and sharp from f2.8 and more 'vintage' looking.
kxl
Social Documentary
A gallery of fast lenses
A gallery of fast lenses
Here's my contribution, intended for those with Nikon SLR gear.
From left to right: the venerable Nikon 105/2.5 AIS, the CV 35/1.2 (with hood), an old PJ favorite: the Nikon 35/1.4 AIS, the "bokeh king" 85/1.4 AIS, and the ZF 50/1.4.
A gallery of fast lenses
Here's my contribution, intended for those with Nikon SLR gear.
From left to right: the venerable Nikon 105/2.5 AIS, the CV 35/1.2 (with hood), an old PJ favorite: the Nikon 35/1.4 AIS, the "bokeh king" 85/1.4 AIS, and the ZF 50/1.4.
Last edited:
hans voralberg
Veteran
I reserved myself one in HK and will pick it up on the 29th hehe, for me it's also about price, NIB is still cheaper than a Summilux, it's hard not to get one haha.
noimmunity
scratch my niche
If you don't want to carry the hood it is easy to get a 52mm front cap, or just use a UV filter. I rarely use the hood, actually.
A great lens. Enjoy!
A great lens. Enjoy!
morgan
Well-known
Taking the hood off helps, but even with a filter I'm nervous about it.
Yes, it's a fast lens (and I shoot it at 1.2 all the time), but what I really love about it is how it draws. It's so creamy and smooth. It's really worth it, IMO.
Yes, it's a fast lens (and I shoot it at 1.2 all the time), but what I really love about it is how it draws. It's so creamy and smooth. It's really worth it, IMO.
thomasw_
Well-known
I have both the summilux asph and this lens. Sorry to say this but they are both such interesting lenses, that I have found it useful to keep both for the different looks they provide in this focal length. I have the leica summilux 75/1,4 and it is a big bertha; but both the cv 35/1,2 and the lux 75 are offer such special rendering that I will put up with their size. And I say this, knowing that I am fortunate enough to have a smaller, more portable summicron 35/2 for when I want that functionality. If I couldn't afford a few lenses in a focal length, I think I would go with one smallish 35.
