Tim Gray
Well-known
CSG: the bokeh issues aren't that great. They show up in some situations. It's basically 'double line' type bokeh. It also shows up in highlights. Look at dfoo's first picture at the white blur circles in the trees (sky?) above the picnic table. Look at the large version for a better look. Some people are really bothered by that.
leicashot
Well-known
I love the VC 35/1.2 and the ZM 35/2.8. The only weakness the Biogon-C has is it's vignetting wide open which can be quite bad in certain situations where the VC has next to no vignetting at the same aperture, for a lens almost 2.5x bigger though, but with potential to go to 1.2. I didn't compare the bokeh at 2.8, but the VC is the best 35mm lens at 1.4 for smoothness.
Here are two examples at 1.2
Here are two examples at 1.2
Last edited:
CSG123
Established
I've read your stuff Leicashot. You're fickle. 
I don't think the Nokton 1.2 is in the cards. I have a line on a used Biogon 35/2 where I've made an offer but I'm not sure if it will be accepted. If not I'm probably in the Nokton 35/2.5 or 1.4 price range. The Biogon 35/2.8 is also a possible but really more than I want to spend. The only reason the 35/2 is a possible is because it's used.
Like TV's, I probably wouldn't notice the difference once I just picked one and just started using it. It's all the online stuff that makes you crazy.
I don't think the Nokton 1.2 is in the cards. I have a line on a used Biogon 35/2 where I've made an offer but I'm not sure if it will be accepted. If not I'm probably in the Nokton 35/2.5 or 1.4 price range. The Biogon 35/2.8 is also a possible but really more than I want to spend. The only reason the 35/2 is a possible is because it's used.
Like TV's, I probably wouldn't notice the difference once I just picked one and just started using it. It's all the online stuff that makes you crazy.
leicashot
Well-known
Like TV's, I probably wouldn't notice the difference once I just picked one and just started using it. It's all the online stuff that makes you crazy.
Well, you asked for it. But you're right, and the less time you spend on here worrying about the differences, the more time you have to enjoy whatever you buy. I've never owned the 35 Biogon but it might be my next lens too.
barnwulf
Well-known
I have the 35/1.4 CV multi-coated version and it's an OK lens but it's not my favorite. I love the small size and light weight but I shoot a lot of architectural subjects and the 35/1.4 has a little more distortion than I had hoped for. If I were shooting less architecture I am sure it would be fine. The 35/1.4 lives on a M4 loaded with Ektar100 I wish now that I would have gotten the single coated version of the Nocton since I am shooting 98% black and white. It is half the price of the Biogon though. I think the ZM Biogon is better and use it most of the time. - jim
Last edited:
Nick De Marco
Well-known
Hi CSG
I have been through quite a few 35s, as it my favourite focal range for rangefinder. I recently sold a broken version IV 'king of bokeh' Leica Summicron f2 and a Nokton 35 f1.2 to fund new lenses.
I have bought the CV 35 f1.4 and the Zeiss Biogon f2. I haven't had the Zeiss long enough to develop the films yet, but I have developed a few from the CV 35 f1.4.
I like the CV 35/1.4 a lot. It is a nice small size (smaller than the Zeiss), it is made well enough, and it is of course very fast - as fast I usually ever need. I've had no bad bokeh issues - it has worked so far really fine at f1.4.
I bought the Zeiss 25/2 for 2 reasons. The first, somewhat silly, because I have just bought a new Zeiss Ikon (one of the few 'new' RFs I have ever bought) and I wanted a shiny new Zeiss lens to go on it. The second reason was I loved the colours from the photos I have seen with this lens, perhaps more than any 35 I have seen. I wanted to use it for colour film but thought it was bound to be good enough for black and white too.
I have the CV 35/2.5 too. It's a great high contrast colour lens for travel and outdoor bright photography. Sooo small too. But not quite fast enough for an all round lens.
I sold the Summicron as it was falling apart and the Nokton f1.2, although it is lovely as leicamatt's photos show, because it is stupidly big and heavy for an RF and I appreciate small and light lenses for my 35mm gear.
If I could buy only one of the above, it would be the CV 35/1.4 because of it's speed, size, versatility and size. Get the single coated version, much nicer with black and white.
But the truth is any of the above lenses are quite capable of producing great 35 photos.
And now a silly photo, using the CV 35/1.4 wide open using the low light reflection from a black door in a public toilet
I have been through quite a few 35s, as it my favourite focal range for rangefinder. I recently sold a broken version IV 'king of bokeh' Leica Summicron f2 and a Nokton 35 f1.2 to fund new lenses.
I have bought the CV 35 f1.4 and the Zeiss Biogon f2. I haven't had the Zeiss long enough to develop the films yet, but I have developed a few from the CV 35 f1.4.
I like the CV 35/1.4 a lot. It is a nice small size (smaller than the Zeiss), it is made well enough, and it is of course very fast - as fast I usually ever need. I've had no bad bokeh issues - it has worked so far really fine at f1.4.
I bought the Zeiss 25/2 for 2 reasons. The first, somewhat silly, because I have just bought a new Zeiss Ikon (one of the few 'new' RFs I have ever bought) and I wanted a shiny new Zeiss lens to go on it. The second reason was I loved the colours from the photos I have seen with this lens, perhaps more than any 35 I have seen. I wanted to use it for colour film but thought it was bound to be good enough for black and white too.
I have the CV 35/2.5 too. It's a great high contrast colour lens for travel and outdoor bright photography. Sooo small too. But not quite fast enough for an all round lens.
I sold the Summicron as it was falling apart and the Nokton f1.2, although it is lovely as leicamatt's photos show, because it is stupidly big and heavy for an RF and I appreciate small and light lenses for my 35mm gear.
If I could buy only one of the above, it would be the CV 35/1.4 because of it's speed, size, versatility and size. Get the single coated version, much nicer with black and white.
But the truth is any of the above lenses are quite capable of producing great 35 photos.
And now a silly photo, using the CV 35/1.4 wide open using the low light reflection from a black door in a public toilet
ferider
Veteran
All the 35mm lenses mentioned in this thread are great, and in practice, you will find very little difference. Among the lenses I have tried I have kept Nokton 35/1.4 MC, Color Skopar, Nikkor 35/1.8 and v3 Summicron.
If you get the 1.4 Nokton, against the customary rumour, I recommend the MC version (I have used both SC and MC). It's just as good for B+W and has better flare behavior in strong counter light. Also, due to chrome barrel, you should use it with a filter, or at least empty black filter ring, to avoid circular flare rings that you sometimes get without.
Here's a shot from last week from the MC:
(scanned from negative, no distortion correction)
And here is the 1.4 Nokton bokeh (cropped to 8x10):
What's not to like ?
Remember, there is stuff with an f1.4 lens you cann't do with a f2 or above; for instance, it is easier to use as a portrait lens due to shallow DOF.
Roland.
If you get the 1.4 Nokton, against the customary rumour, I recommend the MC version (I have used both SC and MC). It's just as good for B+W and has better flare behavior in strong counter light. Also, due to chrome barrel, you should use it with a filter, or at least empty black filter ring, to avoid circular flare rings that you sometimes get without.
Here's a shot from last week from the MC:
(scanned from negative, no distortion correction)
And here is the 1.4 Nokton bokeh (cropped to 8x10):
What's not to like ?
Remember, there is stuff with an f1.4 lens you cann't do with a f2 or above; for instance, it is easier to use as a portrait lens due to shallow DOF.
Roland.
Last edited:
PMCC
Late adopter.
Remember to use lens cleaner.
CSG123
Established
I really appreciate the continuing comments and sample photos from everyone! At this stage of the game, seems like I'd do fine with any of them. The Nokton seems to be such a great blend of price, speed, and size. And I make the assumption that all of the lenses are good with various shades of gray (or color) separating them in different aspects of their performance.
I agree with Roland. Get the MC version.
Krosya
Konicaze
Ultron 35mm/1.7 is super lens. Great signature, nice price. Even Erwin Puts has some good things to say about it:
http://www.imx.nl/photo/zeiss/zeiss/zeiss/page53.html
According to him it's a match for a Leica Summicron IV optically.
And if you make it focus closer, to 0.7m, it makes possibly best 35mm lens/price for LTM/M camera.
Of course CV 35/1.2 is in a league of it's own - simply stunning!
Having had other great 35mm lenses, like M-Hexanon 35/2, UC-Hexanon 35/2, I think CV 35/1.2 and 1.7 well worth looking into. And not just because of the lower price.
http://www.imx.nl/photo/zeiss/zeiss/zeiss/page53.html
According to him it's a match for a Leica Summicron IV optically.
And if you make it focus closer, to 0.7m, it makes possibly best 35mm lens/price for LTM/M camera.
Of course CV 35/1.2 is in a league of it's own - simply stunning!
Having had other great 35mm lenses, like M-Hexanon 35/2, UC-Hexanon 35/2, I think CV 35/1.2 and 1.7 well worth looking into. And not just because of the lower price.
papasnap
Well-known
I completely agree, I haven't tried the f1.7 but the big f1.2 nokton is my all time favourite lens! There's nothing else like it at any price.
I've got the little 35mm f2.5 voight pancake II, but I've barely ever used it. The plan was to use it as a little walk around lens, but every day turns to night eventually and then it's too slow for me.
I recently got a zeiss 35mm f2 biogon, which is a lovely little lens. Probably the nicest looking lens I've ever seen, quite jewel like. Handling is excellent, I prefer the biogon's handling over the 35mm summicron asph I used to have (tragically lost in a taxi). I still haven't put many rolls through the biogon, but from what I've seen I very much like it. Here's a couple from a recent camping trip, both biogon @ f2 + zeiss ikon + provia 400x at +2 stops (both in very low light):
I haven't done any colour correcting etc on the scans, so the blacks are a bit grey.
CSG123
Established
What is that, some sort of Aussie vampire guitar ritual??
Mister E
Well-known
Cv 35/1.4 Mc
papasnap
Well-known
What is that, some sort of Aussie vampire guitar ritual??
hahah something like that. once again wild turkey may have been involved.
atlcruiser
Part Yeti
I have both the CV 1.4 and the CV 2.5. Both are great lenses. The 1.4 is my go to lens on the M6 if it will be low light or very fast shooting. The 2.5 is my standard for outdoor street shooting in daylight on the M6.
I use both on the M8 in more or less the same situations but I really like the 28 elmart on the M8...it sort of lives there.
I bought both to use "until" I could save up for a summircron 35/2. I think I wil keep what i have
Cv 1.4
I use both on the M8 in more or less the same situations but I really like the 28 elmart on the M8...it sort of lives there.
I bought both to use "until" I could save up for a summircron 35/2. I think I wil keep what i have
Cv 1.4
Last edited: