CV 35/1.2 finally gotta admit it's too heavy

[noimmunity]

I love the speed and the images this lens produces, and I never felt bothered by the size. But recently the weight of the darn thing has begun to...well, excuse the pun...weigh on my mind (not mention my wrist!).

I used to have a fun little ZM C Biogon 35/2.8 . Beautiful little lens. BUt in practice I don't need separate "daytime" and "nighttime" lenses. I need one that can go back and forth.

I think I'm getting close to buying a CV 35/1.4 as the best compromise between speed and weight and price. But I don't know if I could give up the Big Nokton. Maybe I need to try the little one for a while and then make a decision...

The Leica Summilux asph looks like it would be what I'm really after, but the price is too high at this time.

Any suggestions?

 

[back alley]

do you use the 1.2/1.4 alot?

i like the zm 35/2.8, plenty fast for me and so nice and sharp too.

 

[ray*j*gun]

I agree with BA......nice lens and I normally try to avoid thin DOF situations.

 

[martin s]

I'm going the other way around, the f1.4 is just a little too character-less, the OOF area is simply boring and the barrel distortion is just killing me (I like straight lines). Eventually I want a small 35mm with the least distortion possible and the fast Nokton, don't know which one to get first though.

martin

 

[ferider]

The Nokton 1.4 if you need speed, Jon, or a pre-asph Summicron (v3, least expensive, least flare, best built) if you want small and no distortion (beats the C-Biogon in size, for example).

Cheers,

Roland.

 

[noimmunity]

I definitely need the speed. Don't need straight lines most of the time since my main subject is people (and I avoid the really straight ones!).

And having 2 35s sounds nice but in practice doesn't really work for me.

I suppose I could just save up for a summilux asph...don't know how many moons that would take, though.

 

[back alley]

The Nokton 1.4 if you need speed, Jon, or a pre-asph Summicron (v3, least expensive, least flare, best built) if you want small and no distortion (beats the C-Biogon in size, for example).

Cheers,

Roland.

but the c biogon is not large by any stretch of the imagination.

 

[Sam N]

I think ferider was just trying to say that the Leica F2.0 is EVEN smaller than the already small ZM F2.8.

Try holding almost all of the weight of the camera+lens in your left hand and only using your right hand to squeeze the shutter button. This is a great way to relieve wrist strain when using heavier lenses. Of course that won't solve the size problem or the issue of the weight around your neck (if you use a neck strap).

From photos I've seen, it seems that the 35/1.2 is all about a characteristic look. If you love that look, I think you should keep it. If you could take or leave the look, get a 35/2 of some variety (ZM or any 'cron (sorry swear-jar guys)).

 

[morgan]

I'm in the same boat. I love the 1.2 and I love its drawing characteristics, but it is heavy and I'm getting a little sick of it. I've been using the 35 ultron for days when I don't want to carry it around but I think the 35/1.4 might get more use. I would never sell the 1.2 just because it takes such incredible shots, especially of people. But my thinking is I'd use the 1.4 most of the time and save the 1.2 for when I know i'd be shooting people. I like the ultron but find it a little characterless and not much smaller than the 1.2.

The color skopar 2.5 is tiny and super sharp. It's also a great option, but I found it too sharp for portraity stuff.

 

[sockeyed]

I'm a big fan of the CV 35mm f/1.4 (I've got the SC version). It's compact, sharp, ergonomic and well-built. Here are a couple of samples that I took last week in a tunnel on a wet, dark evening. The first is shot at f/1.4 and 1/30, and the second at f/2 and 1/60, both on Neopan 1600 rated at 800. They are not works of art by any stretch, but they do show how it performs in real-life conditions.

And the same lens under more optimal conditions, probably f/5.6.

 

[johannielscom]

I think ferider was just trying to say that the Leica F2.0 is EVEN smaller than the already small ZM F2.8.

Try holding almost all of the weight of the camera+lens in your left hand and only using your right hand to squeeze the shutter button. This is a great way to relieve wrist strain when using heavier lenses. Of course that won't solve the size problem or the issue of the weight around your neck (if you use a neck strap). ...

I bought a small table top tripod, the really small dirt cheap thing every camera store carries for modern compacts. It looks like this:

Screw into the Leica right hand side tripod screw, and position the legs on your chest and collar bone. Added stability for a little money, and partially takes the weight off your wrists too. Screws into the bottom with three twists, fits in the pocket at all times.

Hope this is of any help. It's certainly the cheapest solution

 

[thomasw_]

I like the 2 images with the spray cans, Sockeyed!

OP, I have both the summilux 35/1,4 ASPH and the CV 35/1,2. While the Summilux is an ideal all-round lens with no notable 'weaknesses', ie, it is not overly suspectible to coma, it does not have the same character as the 35/1,2. Though I would not say I prefer one over the other absolutely, I would say that I do prefer one or the other certain situations. The Summilux w/o a hood is about the same size as a ZM 35/2 w/o a hood, perhaps a tad smaller; accordungly it is a slightly better all-round 35 for day to day use. But, oh, O live the character of the f1,2...

 

[noimmunity]

I think Sockeyed's first two images are great. I'm also interested in candid photos at minimum distance...

I gotta admit that like Morgan I'm partial to the rendering of the 35/1.2 .

I also really liked the ZM Biogons, too. If only I could live with f/2.

Thomas, since you have both a lux and a Big Nokton, I'd enjoy hearing more about which situations you prefer which for. If you're taking photos of people, it sounds like you might prefer the Big Nokton, and the lovely moody photo that you attach kinda backs that up.

A big hand to everybody. So far we've managed to keep this from becoming a this versus that tug of war.

But it does look bad for GAS. The only answer may be to go right back to where I was and get a second 35.

 

[yanidel]

I use both the Nokton 1.2 and Cron IV. The first at night or dark days and the second on sunny days or long walks. Yes, the Nokton is heavy but it does take shots that the Cron cannot and usually at night I won't take my long lens so all in all, the kit weights the same.

 

[thomasw_]

Thomas, since you have both a lux and a Big Nokton, I'd enjoy hearing more about which situations you prefer which for.

The f1,2 is my favourite 35 for taking pictures of people in close. The Summilux does this well too, but you end up with a different cleaner look. When I want saturated glows from light sources in the image, I turn to the f1,2. There is nothing else like it of which I am aware in a 35.

For reportage and capturing the sense of a scene in low light the summilux asph is my favourite 35. There are 2 situations where the Summilux ASPH particularly rocks: inside concerts or pubs and for outside with nature shots. It is for this latter reason that I think Roland will eventually gravitate to this lens. Also, the summilux is just killer with colour rendition, especially with kodachrome; this past summer I snagged some very pleasing images at our Pacific National Exhibition with that combination. Also, rather obviously the summilux is better for carrying around than the f1,2. Without meaning anything perjorative by my terms, I would describe the Summilux 35/1,4 ASPH as rendering a very neutral image. How one uses the light and composes will of course be part of the resulting frame, but the summilux asph just gives you a faithful, clean and unaffected image.

Here's a few summilux shots, note the 3d, clean rendering in the first image of my son casting a fly line. Note how the lens renders even the subtle light detail on the fringe of his hoodie. Telenous has monetioned to me in the past that there ocasions where it seems as though the lens seems faster than f1,4; both he and I have thought, though, that it may be just chemical fog on the negatives putting details in there that you know at f1,4 wouldn't be:>

Here another "person" image of a friend of mine with the summilux asph. Not everyone likes the sharpness or crispness of its rendering. The 3d rendering is here very evident again. I have some more concert images with the summilux, but i won't bomb the thread with them unless you'd like to see it in action in very low light. The Summilux 35 asph is a magician in very low light. Note how it gets some OOF 'detail' from the back of the vehicle.

 

[jmarcus]

I agree its too heavy, I want a Zeiss 35mm F1.4, (why aren't they building this lens) I can't seem to focus the Nokton at 1.2, overall just kind of disappointed. I'm still working with it though. Plus I think, for me there is a lot to be learned about metering at 1.2.

James

 

[Krosya]

Try this - take a Pro level SLR with Pro zoom on it or a Hassy - carry that for a few days and than CV 35/1.2 will seem so nice and light!

 

[noimmunity]

That reminds me of why I got the M8 instead of the D700 (admittedly a far better camera in most respects).

Anyway, the conversation here has been convincing me that there is no way I should give up my Big Nokton, but that I should eventually complement it with another lens. A Summilux Asph to be exact . I really doubt that's gonna happen any time soon, however.

After looking at photos I really think a Rokkor-M (Summicron-C) 40/2 would suit my taste. But I need the speed (largely to use in tandem with my 75/2), so the Little Nokton it is. I see it just as a "place holder" until such time as I can get a Lux Asph.

I would love to see, however, some more photos from Thomas, especially some of those fabulous concert photos he mentions!!!

jmarcus: I don't have trouble focusing the Big Nokton. Perhaps you are just coming up against the limits of the focusing accuracy of the R-D1?

 

[notturtle]

I do not own a 35 1.4 nokton, but I am not sure this would be the best all rounder due to the well documented focus shift issues, esp on sensors. Can you really not live with F2?

 

[Sam N]

I don't think the Nokton Classic 40/1.4 has focus shift (or as much barrel distortion as the 35/1.4 Nokton Classic)... if you're ok with 40mm, just get the Nokton. That way you technically won't even be doubling up on 35s

The 40/1.4s bokeh (and everything else) gets a lot better at 2.0 but it still gives you a very nice and compact 1.4 when you need it.