Comparing 35mm Lenses: Would you be interested?

Mmmm…….. thanks for the 1.5 shots Raid, if you had to pick just one lens f1.5 or faster which would it be?

Great piece of work by the way
thanks and regards
 
Sparrow said:
Mmmm…….. thanks for the 1.5 shots Raid, if you had to pick just one lens f1.5 or faster which would it be?

Great piece of work by the way
thanks and regards
Click to expand...

Stewart,

I don't own any 35mm that is as fast as 1.5, but if I could choose one I would maybe favor the CV 35mm/1.2 or the Summilux 35mm/1.4 for portraits at home and the Canon 35mm/1.5 for its vintage look.


Raid
 
raid said:
Stewart,

I don't own any 35mm that is as fast as 1.5, but if I could choose one I would maybe favor the CV 35mm/1.2 or the Summilux 35mm/1.4 for portraits at home and the Canon 35mm/1.5 for its vintage look.


Raid
Click to expand...

Thanks I’d more or less decided to buy the CV, then I read Erwin Puts review and wavered towards the lux, now you did this and the canon is in the frame as well, choice!!!
 
raid said:
Stewart,

I don't own any 35mm that is as fast as 1.5, but if I could choose one I would maybe favor the CV 35mm/1.2 or the Summilux 35mm/1.4 for portraits at home and the Canon 35mm/1.5 for its vintage look.

Raid
Click to expand...

Funny that you should pick the 3 most expensive lenses included
in the test. You are missing the Biogon :)

I have been missing the CV 40/1.4 in your field tests, Raid. In your
portraits or flare tests it was just as good as the ten times more
expensive Summilux to my eyes. As said above, the Canon has
a special look to it, I agree.

Roland.
 
Last edited:
Roland
I love the in focus look of the canon but I’m not sure about the oof areas, both the cv and the lux look “smoother” do you think?
 
Sparrow said:
Thanks I’d more or less decided to buy the CV, then I read Erwin Puts review and wavered towards the lux, now you did this and the canon is in the frame as well, choice!!!
Click to expand...


Stewart,

I tried them "all" here, and I find most of them to be excellent overall. The 1.2 and 1.4 aperture with sharpness gives these two lenses the edge. The Canon 35/1.5 is a different type of lens. Yes, the OOF areas look like those resulting from a vintage lens. Not all vintage lenses have smooth OOF areas when used wide open. It all depends what you want to use the lens for.

Raid
 
ferider said:
Funny that you should pick the 3 most expensive lenses included
in the test. You are missing the Biogon :)

I have been missing the CV 40/1.4 in your field tests, Raid. In your
portraits or flare tests it was just as good as the ten times more
expensive Summilux to my eyes. As said above, the Canon has
a special look to it, I agree.

Roland.
Click to expand...

Hi Roland,

The Biogon did very well in the tests. I cannot field test all lenses that did well. I would need additional volunteers to do the developing and scanning of B&F film and then I would do more field testing.

Cheers,

Raid
 
raid said:
Hi Roland,

The Biogon did very well in the tests. I cannot field test all lenses that did well. I would need additional volunteers to do the developing and scanning of B&F film and then I would do more field testing.

Cheers,

Raid
Click to expand...

I understand. I still would have expected you to test the Nokton more thoroughly.

- everybody expects the Summilux to outperform all other lenses. Only the absolute minority on RFF can afford this lens. Whoever will buy this lens believes in its value independent of your test. By giving it more exposure than the other lenses you promote brand fanatism. What do you say, Magus ? :)
- The Nokton is the biggest "bang for the buck".
- The Nokton is controversial; Its wide open OOF is good, IMO, even though rumoured to be bad. After all it's "cheap", there must be something wrong with it.... It has the best mixture of sharpness, speed, anti-flare behavior and bokeh to these eyes, at least, independent of the price.

So tell us, why would you pick the Summilux over the Nokton for personal use ?

I am no Leica or CV fanatic. But I believe in value, and the Nokton
is outstanding in this respect.

Roland.
 
Last edited:
Roland,

Do you mean the CV classic MC or SC or ..?

Since the question put to me was hypothetical in nature, I could allow myself to "spend the extra money" and get a Summilux. That's why I chose a lens that I wouldn't mind getting as a gift. I did not say that I would buy the Summilux.

In my field testing I did a specific pairing of a Leica lens(very expensive) and a CV lens (the Beast) to see if there are any differences. It was not a field test of the Summilux for the sake of promoting the Summilux; just the contrary. I am trying to give the CV 35/1.2 a podium to show its performance relative to the much more expensive Summilux. There are many excellent lenses with me now, as you know, and the Nokton is not the only excellent lens here.

Still, since you like the lens so much, I could do a field test. There are many RFF members who develop B&W film, and maybe someone could volunteer to do the developing and scanning of field tests.

Raid
 
Actually either MC or SC would do. I believe there is hardly a difference
between the two.

But why would you choose the Summilux as a gift, and why did you take
the Summilux out and not the Nokton ? (note that face to face you
would notice that I am not angry, I really want to know, if possible
an answer based on your tests). Is it better opticeally, mechanically
better built, easier to handly bigger/smaller, or it "just feels right", etc.

You realize that the exact Summilux that you tested is probably the first lens
that most M8 users are looking at buying ...

It's not that I like the Nokton so much (which I do). I was hoping we
could come up with objective recommendations and not only confirm our
own, maybe brand or price-based preferences. Like: "if you spend
X amount of dollars more you get better bokeh with this lens
when compared to that lens ... see for instance picture Y". If we don't
have this, help me looking for it in the pictures in the analysis;
what do you want me to look for ?

The CV 35 Nokton is surely a great lens, good optically, but due to size
and speed in a different league than the Summilux. It's unique. You either
need/want it or you don't and if you do, you will not consider the Summilux
as an alternative. The only competitor in this class is the Noctilux, IMO.

Roland.

raid said:
Roland,

Do you mean the CV classic MC or SC or ..?

Since the question put to me was hypothetical in nature, I could allow myself to "spend the extra money" and get a Summilux. That's why I chose a lens that I wouldn't mind getting as a gift. I did not say that I would buy the Summilux.

In my field testing I did a specific pairing of a Leica lens(very expensive) and a CV lens (the Beast) to see if there are any differences. It was not a field test of the Summilux for the sake of promoting the Summilux; just the contrary. I am trying to give the CV 35/1.2 a podium to show its performance relative to the much more expensive Summilux. There are many excellent lenses with me now, as you know, and the Nokton is not the only excellent lens here.

Still, since you like the lens so much, I could do a field test. There are many RFF members who develop B&W film, and maybe someone could volunteer to do the developing and scanning of field tests.

Raid
Click to expand...
 
Last edited:
Sparrow said:
Roland
I love the in focus look of the canon but I’m not sure about the oof areas, both the cv and the lux look “smoother” do you think?
Click to expand...

I agree with you, Stewart. But for some reason it doesn't matter much to me.
There is something wrt 3D quality and color rendering in Raids first shot
(Dana and her bike) which makes the lens really attractive in my eyes.

Roland.
 


Hi Roland,
Getting you angry is the last thing on my mind. If I had known how strongly you felt about testing the Nokton, I would have done it first.



"Actually either MC or SC would do. I believe there is hardly a difference
between the two."



OK then. I will take out either one for a "walk" coming weekend. I don't know when the owners of the lenses want their lenses back though.

"But why would you choose the Summilux as a gift, and why did you take
the Summilux out and not the Nokton ? (note that face to face you
would notice that I am not angry, I really want to know, if possible
an answer based on your tests). Is it better opticeally, mechanically
better built, easier to handly bigger/smaller, or it "just feels right", etc."


I don't mind big heavy lenses if they can give me the edge for certain type of photos. I took out the CV 35/1.2 and the Summilux because I read some opinions on RFF somewhere where people compared these two in their discussions, and I was intrigued to see if the Beast actually can outperform the Summilux. The Summilux is built very well indeed. I was able to better focus with the Cv lens though. Things snapped into focus for me better.



"You realize that the exact Summilux that you tested is probably the first lens
that most M8 users are looking at buying ..."


I am not interested in doing tests for M8 buyers alone; I was hoping that a pairing of the CV and the Summilux lenses would be useful to others too.



"It's not that I like the Nokton so much (which I do). I was hoping we
could come up with objective recommendations and not only confirm our
own, maybe brand or price-based preferences. Like: "if you spend
X amount of dollars more you get better bokeh with this lens
when compared to that lens ... see for instance picture Y". If we don't
have this, help me looking for it in the pictures in the analysis;
what do you want me to look for ?"



There is only so much that we can do with 26 lenses. There is a time and cost constraint attached to extensive testing. I am grateful to one RFF member who volunteered to do the developing and scanning of two B&W rolls of film. If the Nokton is an important lens to field test and if such a field test actually makes our test results more useful, then I certainly am happy to continue such tests until I find the owners of the lenses ringing my door bell and threatening to break down the door to get their lenses back! :D



"The CV 35 Nokton is surely a great lens, good optically, but due to size
and speed in a different league than the Summilux. It's unique. You either
need/want it or you don't and if you do, you will not consider the Summilux
as an alternative."


The field test will not hurt anyone, Roland. It will hopefully add more information.


The testing project is a great project that I am enjoying. Your assistance and the input by several RFF members has been great. I hope that there are no sour apples left ....

Raid
 
Last edited:
raid said:
Roland,
Getting you angry is the last thing on my mind. If I had known how strongly you felt about testing the Nokton, I would have done it first.
Click to expand...

I am not angry ... NOT !!! :D :D

raid said:
I am not interested in doing tests for M6 buyers alone; I was hoping that a pairing of the CV and the Summilux lenses would be useful to others too.
Click to expand...

I think you meant M8 ... Just think about it this way:

- how many people out there buy a > 3000 US Leitz lens (with crop factor an f1.4 normal lens) and will not buy the M8 ?
- How many (used) M2, M3, M4, M6 + Bessa users (like you and me) will buy a > 3000 US Leitz lens ?

It might be a good reference. But then what ?

Roland.
 
Last edited:
ferider said:
I agree with you, Stewart. But for some reason it doesn't matter much to me.
There is something wrt 3D quality and color rendering in Raids first shot
(Dana and her bike) which makes the lens really attractive in my eyes.

Roland.
Click to expand...

Yes that’s the one that took my eye, I’ve been looking at fast 35s for a while and I’m finding it difficult to be objective

regards
 
Stewart and Roland,
There is a reason why I posted that particular image out of 36 images taken with that lens. I was struck with the beauty of face rendition and the vintage 3d qualities of the Canon 35mm/1.5.

Typically, I do not do field testing of individual lenses for my lens tests, but I hand pick a few lenses that intrigue me for personal test drives.

Raid
 
I am announcing the official end for the testing of the lenses. What is left is to allow Roland enough time to do a good job with the set-up of all the recent lens test images that either were uploaded to his smugmug site or those images that still need to be developed and scanned and then uploaded to his site.


A tedious, boring and SAD part is now left on my shoulders; I need to pack all lenses up and mail them back to their owners ASAP. The room here is full with parcels that need to be repacked.

What are the remaining other issues ....?
(1) I have two B&W rolls of EFKE 25 film being developed and scanned by a volunteer (Rav) from RFF. THANKS. These two rolls were taken with the CV 35mm/1.2 and the Summilux 35mm/1.4. I had two M cameras, with one lens mounted on each. Then I took nearly identical images throughout an early afternoon.

(2) Today I took two rolls of ARISTA 50 (same as Ilford Pan F) with eight lenses; four chrome lenses mounted on the chrome M3 and four black lenses mounted on the black M6. I need help with developing and scanning these rolls. I don't mind paying for the service. Please pm me.

(3) I just remembered: I still have a few shots left to be taken with the Bessa R2C and the four Nikkor and Zeiss lenses in Contaxt mount.

The lens testing resulted in excessive GAS for me. No Gas-X helped!
I want a clean Canon 35mm/1.5 and maybe a Zeiss ZM. Why?
Well, the Canon lens gave me 3D like images that are very nice looking, and the ZM lens looks very solidly built and the focusing throw allowed me to focus very quickly. I still need to see the results though.

I will continue trying out other lenses until the last moment possible for my personal enjoyment and not for "testing". I recall that I need to complete the Contax mount lenses which will be done this weekend.


That's it folks.


Have a great weekend wherever you happen to be right now.



Raid (your unofficial and unscientific lens tester)
 
Last edited:
I'll speak for many readers when I say that everyone who contributed to this test series has done a great favor for 35mm photographers. We now have a good information base from which to make equipment decisions about one of the most-used focal lengths. It was a huge effort, well executed with judgment and integrity.

It will also fuel debates for many months and years, which is another good thing. Thanks to you all.
--Lindsay
 
I think that it may be useful to others here to see what I went through in terms of organizing this lens testing.

1. I announced my wish to do a test for 35mm lenses.
2. I invited people to submit to me any lens of their wish.
3. I made sure to clearly state the goals for the testing, and I announced that
return shipping cost with insurance must be covered.
4. I started planning out the tests for about 14 days. Many sketches were
made.
5. As I was sent a lens, I stayed in touch with the sender via pm and/or email.
I made sure that the sender had my full address and phone numbers.
6. I started a file on my laptop pc in which I carefully recorded every lens that I
received. I wrote down the lens serial number and also mentioned
whatever accessories were included. The parcels in which the lenses were
sent to me were kept.
7. I wrote up plans for the tests, with a clear numbering [ordering] of the
lenses. It got more complicated when I realized [for example] that the J-12
did not fit the Bessa T and that four lenses are in Contax mount. It got
confusing at times due to the similar lenses. Nikkor 35mm/3.5 in LTM and
Nikkor 35mm/2.5 in Contaxt mount ... etc.
8. Things got complicated when it came down to get the film developed and
scanned. It was of the utmost importance that each frame corresponded to
the right lens as mentioned on the test list. The life saver was the Elmar, I
must confess. Its flare showed me the way. I used its image for "calibrating"
where my testing was going.
9. It got also messy when I got three rolls of film scanned and the developer
put all three rolls on the same CD. What I did not expect was that the three
films were alternating after each image on the CD. It got complicated when
two rolls were 36-exp. rolls and one was a 24 exp.roll. Thank God that the
Kodak C-41 looks different from the XP2. I was ableto use the different grey
tones to identify when the 24 exp. roll ended.
10. It is important to be ethical and responsible. It is always possible that a
lens gets damaged somehow and then I must pay fully for the damage or
a new lens. This is always on my mind when doing such tests. I relax only
with my own lenses. For example, I thought that I had misplaced a lens
cover of a Nikkor lens, so I notified the owner of the lens first, and then I
ordered from Kevin Cameras a replacement cover. Today, I figured out that
I actually never had misplaced that cover. It was and still is on the right
lens.
11. Order is of the highest importance. For this reason I took multiple photos
of all lenses together. It helped me resolve the mystery of the missing lens
cover. I saw "it" on the lens! Then I took a look at the same table with the
lenses and I saw the actual lens with the lens cover.
12. Film based testing can be costly. It required me to be extra cautious in
every shot to reduce the overall cost. A typical test requires at least ten
rolls of film.You figure out the cost for good type film plus developing plus
scanning.
13. Most importantly, I get a sense of satisfaction that I may have provided
some enjoyment for others on top of useful buying information on some
lenses.



Raid
 
Last edited:
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top Bottom