CV 35/1.4 vs. CV 35/2.5

[healyzh]

I'm looking for an affordable 35mm lens for my M6 TTL. While I really want a Summicron 35/2 I am thinking about starting out with either the CV 35/2.5 or 1.4 lens, the 2.5 is much closer to a price I want to pay right now.

I've been looking on the cameraquest website and it isn't obvious what the actual size difference of these two lenses are. They look very close to each other. How about compared to the Summicron?

How about build quality? Anything else I should know about with CV lenses?

What about the picture quality between the two?

 

[reala_fan]

I have the CV 35/1.2 and the CV 35/2.5

For general photography, I much prefer the 35/2.5 (PII) - much better size/weight and I prefer the Tab focus over the knurled knob of the larger lens. Don't have the 35/1.4 but I think it would be a good compromise between the two I do have. CV build quality is good and both of mine are nice and sharp, espicially the 2.5:

 

[bidnez]

I use the 1,4 SC daily, used to have the 2,5 (PII), considering getting one again. They´re both great lenses, in my experience as well for film as for digital (M8). While the 1,4 is moderate in size, the 2,5 is remarkably compact - one of the most important reasons I´d like one again.

 

[kxl]

I used to have both.

IMHO, the 35/1.4 as a good low light alternative to the bigger and more expensive f1.4 and f1.2 lenses, while the Color Skopar is a good (and very small) general-purpose lens.

 

[Pablito]

Have both & they are very, very good. the 1.4 may have more barrel distortion.

 

[semilog]

Have any of you had the opportunity to compare these to the Zeiss ZM Biogon C 2.8?

 

[back alley]

the zm 35/2.8 is a fantastic lens, excellent quality and i love the look of the iimages it produces.

the cv lenses are less excellent but no less capable in producing excellent images. the 2.5 is so tiny and sharp while the 1.4 is less tiny but not big by a long shot and some complain about a bit of distortion and harsh bokeh...2 things that would never stop me from using it.

also consider the 40/14, small, very sharp and less $$ than the 35/1.4.

that is the one i eventually settled on for using with my rd1 (60 fov with the crop - and that's why i prefer it).

 

[semilog]

Thanks, BA. I think I'm going to go for one of the Biogons or, if the 2.5 shows up at the right moment, that. The 40 would have great appeal if I was looking for a one-lens solution but I am after the extra FOV of a true 35.

 

[RFluhver]

This shot of my M2 should give you an idea of the 35/2.5's size (unattached is the 50/2.5):

I am currently thinking about getting a black version of the 35 (and I've already found one) for when I buy myself a black M.

 

[rxmd]

I find that the non-pancake first version of the Skopar is actually smaller than the pancake version, in addition to being LTM (and more compatible) and cheaper.

 

[sampunk]

Which lens perform better @ f8~f11? (sharpness, color etc etc)