Best budget 35mm lens in 2018?

[Sykomor]

I think the Ultron 35/1.7 ltm could be found for around $350. Add the ltm to M adapter.

 

[ChrisC]

I had a Color Skopar 35mm and upgraded to the Zeiss C-Biogon 35mm f2.8. It's a stunning lens. Buy it; keep it for life.

........... ChrisC

 

[pippy]

For ebay price of new Nokton 40 or new Skopar 35, you could only get used 35 3.5 Summaron. Even if purchased locally. At least where I purchased it locally once.
Summaron 35 2.8 is much more expensive lens now...
I was never overwhelmed not with Skopar nor with f3.5 Summaron...

I stand corrected on the price difference, Ko.Fe. Thanks for the clarification. it would seem that the price of a Summaron-M has almost doubled since I was considering buying another one just a couple of years ago. Astonishing!

In terms of performance; well, I would never claim to have been 'overwhelmed' by the Summaron - that is an adjective I'd reserve solely for the likes of the ASPH Leitz offerings - but after my own example was sent in for a fungus-clean it came back as a truly stellar performer - all things considered.

On a slightly different topic;
The imminent arrival of the 7artisans 35mm f2 is VERY interesting. The review states it follows 7a's preference for Sonnar-type designs so it will have certain well-known traits but having bought a couple of their 50mm f1.1 lenses I must say I'm looking forward to reading more about the final production version.

Pip.


EDIT : As it happens the other day I posted an image and detail thereof which was shot as a test frame just after I collected the Summaron from its CLA mentioned earlier in this thread. They are in the "Summicron Lens Fog - Fixable?" thread. For anyone interested enough you will hopefully see what I mean about the rectilinear quality and overall sharpness.

 

[chrischunli]

This might be worth waiting for.

https://www.35mmc.com/18/11/2017/7artisans-35mm-f2-pre-pro-sample-photos/

Michael

Really like the IQ on these samples... I think I’ve made up my mind on this one! My M6 still has to get here, plus I plan on getting it CLA’d anyway so waiting for a Feb release makes a lot of sense for me.

Thank you all for your input! Hopefully this thread will also help other new rangefinder newbies like me in the future 🙂

 

[scautez]

I have the 35mm f2.5 color skopar in LTM mount with an adapter, and love that lens. Also the canon 35mm f1.8 ltm is beautiful in black and white.
Would a 40mm summicron be a possibility? Also a nice lens.

 

[Keith]

Depends; what is your budget?
Lenses that I can recommend to you based on my own use of such lenses:

Zeiss Biogon 35/2 (modern look, flare resistant, brilliant colors)
Canon 35/2 ltm (still modern look; sharp; cheap)
Summicron 35/2 Version 1 (a classic; high resolution)
Canon 35/1.5 ltm (rare; performs very well)
Nikon 35/1.8 (special look to images from it; overpriced in ltm; small)

I do not own any CV 35mm lens, but I read about positive feedback on such lenses.

I'm with Raid here ... that Biogon is really special and worth stretching for financially a little if you can. A Voigtlander of any variation is not in the same league in my opinion.

 

[jsrockit]

For a modern look, the Voitlander Color-Skopar 2.5/35 closely followed (in budget rankings) by the Zeiss 2.8/35 C-Biogon.

This and any of the voigtlander 35mm from the past (i.e. 35mm 1.7 or 35mm 1.4).

 

[maddoc]

If you don`t mind the missing 40mm frame line problem (which is not really a problem because RF cameras are not well designed for proper framing) then I also would recommend a 40mm f/2.0 Summicron-C lens or the Minolta M-Rokkor 40/2.0 CLE (later version).

 

[nickthetasmaniac]

In comparison to the 35mm Summaron (which is as near-as-damn-it rectilinear) the 35mm Nokton has very pronounced barrel distortion. The 40mm Nokton, OTOH, isn't nearly as badly affected in this way as is the 35mm. but is still not as good as the Summaron.
The edge fall-off in terms of sharpness follows the same pattern as above with the Summaron being comfortably ahead of the 40 Nokton with the 35 Nokton trailing both..

Ah OK, I misread and thought you meant all Voigts. The 35mm Ultron (similar price new to a used Summaron) should be a much closer contest.

 

[pippy]

Ah OK, I misread and thought you meant all Voigts. The 35mm Ultron (similar price new to a used Summaron) should be a much closer contest.

Quite the contrary, nick. I have a great respect for Voigtlander's lenses and in fact the 35mm Nokton seems to be the odd one out in that it seems to be the least corrected of the range - which is a very great pity as I did want to get one.
I hardly shoot 35mm - I'm very much a 50 user - and when I do shoot 35 it's usually outdoors during daytime so the smaller max. aperture of the Summaron isn't an issue (added to the fact that I've had the Summaron since 1980) but I did seriously consider the 35 Nokton after I bought the M9-P (to go along with the M8.2) just because of the extra 'speed' it offered. Unfortunately the resultant reworking/cropping necessary because of the barrel distortion was the deciding factor against it. Instead I bought the (rather superb) Voigt. 28mm f2 Ultron which, for my uses, has several advantages over the 35 Nokton...but that's another story.

The 35 Ultron is, as you suggest, a very attractive alternative to a 2.8 Summaron. A lot bigger and, as I've learned the Summaron has become, not quite 'budget' in price but it is a very good - and 'fast' - performer.

Pip.

 

[Kent]

I have just bought - delivery is pending - a Schacht Ulm Travenar 3.5/35 in LTM and I'm very curious about this lens.
If it is any good, you can find a copy for the price of a good Jupiter-12 if you're patient.
The buy-now offers are much higher, though, due to the relative rarity of that lens.

 

[Ccoppola82]

Summaron 2.8 is my go to daylight lens for BW images. There’s plenty of threads here and other sites about how “special” it renders...and it does. In my eyes, it saturates the mid tones while gradually easing into highlights and shadows. I’ve never had mine flare...as the glass sits quite deep. Build quality is as good as it gets. I’ve heard it’s not as nice for Color, but I bought my kit solely for BW film. ALSO, my kit was geared toward a classic reportage look rather than digital perfection. So that is important to note. If you want a modern or digital look, grab the Zeiss.

Nokton 35 1.4 is my lowlight lens. It was also my very first M-mount and I think I was in a similar situation as yourself. My first m-mount criteria were in this order.

Portable (this is the reason i got into Leica, and this and the Summaron are equally compact)

Versatile (1.4 vs 2.8.....this is where for my 1st lens the Nokton won out)

IQ (the Summaron is IMHO better, but the Nokton is no slouch despite being the whipping boy of 35’s. Yes it distorts...doesn’t bother me as much for what I do. I’ve not encountered focus shift but others have, and bokeh is a subjective element of a Photo)

 

[teddy]

I admire the Summaron a lot. The best black and white 35mm lens - period.
Colour is good too, but depends what you are trying to achieve.
This lens will cost from $400 to $600 for the Finder (M3) version. $900-$1200 for the M2 version. So not quite so budget really. I prefer the M3 version. It focuses closer, and this lens is superb at closer distances too.

I'm currently using a Voigtlander 35/2.5 Classic on my M2. I've got a feeling I will like colour work with it.

Floating Trikes at Barmera
Leica M3, Leitz Summaron 35/2.8, Fuji Velvia 50 (1998), 81a Warming Filter

Sunset, West Beach - Robe, South Australia
Leica M3, Leitz Summaron 35/2.8 @ f11, 81a Warming Filter, Provia 100F

The storm is here, West Beach - Robe, South Australia
Leica M3, Leitz Summaron 35/2.8 @ f11, 81a Warming Filter, Provia 100F, 30 seconds

 

[dp13]

It cost me a little extra but I looked for and found a great deal on a used Zeiss Biogon ZM 35/2. There are times when I wish I had gotten f1.4 in something, but very rarely. I particularly like the colors and lack of distortion from this lens.

 

[ForestCap]

If you are lucky you can find third party lenses from makers like Komura. I have the 35mm f/3.5, it is a 5 elements asymmetrical double-Gauss type. Half a stop slower than the budget Jupiter-12 but better flare control. I think a reasonable price tier (from user perspective) for such lenses should be more expensive than J-12, but cheaper than the Canon 35mms.

 

[David Hughes]

Really like the IQ on these samples... I think I’ve made up my mind on this one! My M6 still has to get here, plus I plan on getting it CLA’d anyway so waiting for a Feb release makes a lot of sense for me.

Thank you all for your input! Hopefully this thread will also help other new rangefinder newbies like me in the future 🙂

Hi,

It's been very interesting reading all the responses to your opening question but I wonder if I could answer your question with another question or two?

Firstly, what do you want the lens for?

Are you intending using B&W film, colour film for prints or slides?

If prints then how big?

Regards, David

 

[Carey M]

The 35mm Nokton Classic is a good option if you don't mind the distortion. If your end result is digital, you can correct it easily, but for me, it still drove me nuts. I didn't find the bokeh objectionable and it was sharp enough. Good colour. Loved the price, size and ergonomics.

The Canon 35mm f/1.8 is a good choice if the 1m close focusing doesn't bother you. Focus throw is also very long, so not the fastest lens to use. My copy was clean as a whistle, but still had some glow in high contrast parts when shooting wide open. The Canon is sharp in the centre even wide open. Colors maybe a bit undersaturated. Not as well built as the Nokton.

The Summaron 35mm f2.8 is sadly not a budget option any more. The f3.5 model is a great little lens for black and white. It does flare easily though. And doesn't focus closer than 1m. Great build quality.

It cost me a little extra but I looked for and found a great deal on a used Zeiss Biogon ZM 35/2. There are times when I wish I had gotten f1.4 in something, but very rarely. I particularly like the colors and lack of distortion from this lens.

I'm suffering from some serious GAS for the Biogon. Only thing holding me back is the size. I do have the Planar and I like the focus bump, the short focus throw (after I got used to it) and the "pop", but if the lens was a centimeter or two shorter, I'd love it even more. The Biogon-C is a smaller option, but I feel it's just a bit too slow.

 

[chrischunli]

Hey all, just wanted to say thanks for all the responses - loving this forum and the members in it already. After a bunch of searching, I was able to track down a M2 version Summaron 2.8 for $650! After I put some rolls through that with my new M6, I'll be sure to post back some pics here for you all to see!

I also hope that any new hopeful RF enthusiast finds this thread useful - I know I have!

 

[Ccoppola82]

Nice choice! Don't worry though, you will get more. Haha

 

[Dante_Stella]

Hey all! I just picked up an M6 for a pretty good price (first M rangefinder for me!), and am currently looking to pair it with a 35mm lens. Been doing a bunch of research on different lenses, from the Zeiss Biogons to Summarons, but it seems like a lot of the secondhand prices have gone up since the original post dates of those lenses. That said, what do you guys think would be the best bang for buck 35mm nowadays? Appreciate any thoughts!

35/2.8 Canon. It's a little sharper wide-open than the 35/2 Canon. Actually, it's hella sharp. It's also the only legit budget lens that has been mentioned on this thread. I will probably list a cheap user in the classifieds, since out of nowhere I scored a 35/2 for a price I couldn't refuse to outfit a Canon P that I probably shouldn't have bought! 🙂

The rest are pricey. A 35/1.8 Nikkor is not economical in any mount unless you think that $700+ is budget. Prices on RF lenses are pretty much out of sight. A Summaron isn't that cheap, and not the best bang for the buck.

Dante