Any information on quality of CV 50mm 2.5?

[Theo-Prof]

I just joined the group this week after I received a Bessa-R w/ 35 classic lens. I am thinking about adding other lenses. I have heard good things about the CV 50/1.5 but have been unable to find much of anything on the 50/2.5. I like the fact that the 50/2.5 is very compact and has a Leica style focus tab, but I would rather hear from someone who has actually used one or someone who can direct me to a site that has a review.

Does anyone own a 50/2.5 who can give me an opinion?

By the way, this is a great forum. The threads I have read have been very helpful and the people are respectful and courteous.

 

[rover]

I believe Doug has one of these lenses.

 

[Todd.Hanz]

Yes he does, Here is a link with discussion and some pics about this lens ( of course Doug's pic is one to drool over) 🙂 http://www.photo.net/bboard/q-and-a-fetch-msg?msg_id=0090Ra

Todd

 

[Bertram2]

Yes he does, Here is a link with discussion and some pics about this lens ( of course Doug's pic is one to drool over) 🙂 http://www.photo.net/bboard/q-and-a-fetch-msg?msg_id=0090Ra

Todd

Quote :
"Maybe not a Summicron but quite useable nevertheless. "

Phew !! Tho I know it since a long time this kind of descension makes me laugh again and again ! 😀 😀
Bertram

 

[Doug]

Hi-- There are more samples with this lens in my Gallery here in RFF... and a larger version of the "Juicebar Lady" 🙂

By comparison with the Skopar, here's one of the same scenes shot recently with a Contax G2 and its 45mm Planar. First the Skopar on Fuji NPZ800, then the Planar on Kodak Portra 400VC; different day and lighting too of course.

 

[Roger Hicks]

Yers, I have one; have had for a couple of years or more. Put it this way: it's a better lenms than I am a photographer. I like it and use it often (for a 50 -- I use 35 a lot more) because it's so compact and has a proper focusing tab.

The older I get, the more kit I accumulate and the less difference I see in most of the pictures on a given format. In other words I really wouldn't worry about using the 50/2.5 instead of any other high-quality modern 50mm, and I have a lot to compare it with.

The comparisons: I also have a 50/1.5 Nokton (nice too), a 50/1.2 Canon (very soft wide open but good at f/2 and below), and a 50/3.5 uncoated Elmar from the 30s that I hardly use any more. I've just returned a 50/1 Noctilux that a friend lent me for a year: big and heavy but I'd buy one if I could afford it. I sold my last 50/2 Summicron a few years back because I couldn't see what the fuss was about; in the past I've also had 50/2.8 Elmar, 50/2 Summitar, Summarit, 50/1.5 Xenon, Yashica 50/1.8... A modern Elmar is fine and the Yashi wasn't bad but it's not as good as the more modern lenses I've used.

Of course if you really want more quality, use a bigger format! Even an ordinary 6x6 like my KowaSIX (inherited from my late father-in-law) is very good and something like my Alpa is superb: my favourite lens is the 38/4.5 Biogon on 44x66mm while my wife Frances Schultz uses a 35/5.6 Grandagon on 6x9cm. There's more about the kit we use on our website, www.rogerandfrances.com

Cheers,

Roger

 

[Bertram2]

. First the Skopar on Fuji NPZ800, then the Planar on Kodak Portra 400VC; different day and lighting too of course.

Doug,
the Skopar shot should be an ideal demo for pincushishion distortion with that vertical door line along the right edge from the bottom to the top.
I've put the door upright in PS an cut the photo at the rhs along one of the vertical lines:
If there is any picushion distortion it is somewhere at the limit of my perception.
If THIS is what all this Skopar talk is about it is a non-issue. Great lens , clear and precise, has the same strong documentary impact as the 2,8/35 has.
Best,
Bertram

 

[Doug]

Hi Bertram -- Yes, that was part of the reason for taking this photo! I can faintly sense the pincushion distortion by looking at the photo, and verify its existence by putting a straight edge on the screen along the line of the door. So indeed this is a practical demonstration of the degree of distortion produced by the lens. It's no more noticeable than the slight barrel distortion from the 43mm Pentax-L, and I'd prefer it weren't noticeable at all! Of course it's NOT noticeable unless there are straight lines like this running near the edge of the photo.

 

[Theo-Prof]

Thanks for all the responses. I will have to read the links you all mentioned. Sorry I put this out there and was so long getting back to the forum. It's wildflower time here in Texas and I thought this would be a good time to try out the new Bessa-R and 35/2.5. I will have to wait until next week to process the film because I know of no E-6 labs here that are open on Saturdays.

For landscape work I had always used an SLR and a tripod, trying to take great care with composition. Today I found that a rangefinder is actually an aid to composition: I not only can see the composition I want within the frame lines but I also see that composition as a slice out of a larger composotion. Without moving the camera I could see what else I "could" include if I wanted. I think this will be a big positive for me.

Now to read the links you directed me to.

Kevin.