canon 28/3.5 vs cv 28/3.5

[back alley]

has this been asked before here?
my memory is going...

is it just the difference between a modern multi coated and an older lens or might there be more in terms of characteristics?

joe

 

[Kim Coxon]

First it was ZI then Leica and now CV. Is there no end to the depravity!

 

[back alley]

gee, it was only a question...🙂

just wondering...the zi with it's modern 35/2 might end up being the kit to grab when the higher contrast look is wanted. so...perhaps my canon would not be appropriate and the likelihood of the zm28 is remote or down the road at least but a cv 28 used might be doable.

just random thoughts as i sit here at work unable to go out and shoot.
joe

 

[back alley]

bump


it

up

 

[tajart]

good question. curious minds want to know.

 

[laptoprob]

Joe, I only know about the same similarity in 35mm lenses. The Canon 35/2,8 is a very sharp lens, but much less contrasty than the CV 35/2,5. That creates a very different look.

Just a matter of preference...

Rob.

 

[rover]

I have watched a bunch of Canon 28/3.5 lenses but have been able to control my bidding finger.

The CV is sharp and contrasty, pretty flare resistant, thought the built in hood isn't that great if you filter the lens.

 

[raid]

I used to own a Canon 28mm lens. It is less contrasty than modern lenses. The collector's market has increased its cost quite a lot.