CV 35mm...which one?

[djon]

What do you prefer, the Ultron, the Classic, or the Pancake?

I've heard the pancake is the least of the bunch, sharpness-wise...but the Ultron's huge, as big as my Nokton...and I do have a mint/clear 35 3.5 Summaron, but it lives on my IIIC fulltime, with a Leitz finder, when I'm in antique mode...

Your opinions?

 

[ray_g]

Of the three, the only one I've owned is the ultron. Great optics, but I ended up selling it to another RFF'er for the reason you cited - I wasn't too crazy for the ergonomics.

If you're looking for one, www.kohscamera.com is selling brand new silver ones for the unbelievable price of $310, much less than the current market price. I've bought from them before and they're reliable.

 

[rover]

I will disagree and say that I move prefer the ergonimics of the Ultron to that of the Summicron or Canon 35/2 that I now have. The Ultron is not huge, it is the size of a 50/2 Summicron, no where near as large as the Nokton. The little extra length makes it much easier to focus and turn the aperture ring without grabbing the hood or focus ring. Smaller is not necessarily better.

 

[phototone]

They are all good, it all depends on what you want to spend, and how fast a lens you want.

You will not be disappointed with the performance of any of the CV 35mm lenses.

 

[peter_n]

What do you prefer, the Ultron, the Classic, or the Pancake?

I've heard the pancake is the least of the bunch, sharpness-wise...but the Ultron's huge, as big as my Nokton...and I do have a mint/clear 35 3.5 Summaron, but it lives on my IIIC fulltime, with a Leitz finder, when I'm in antique mode...

Your opinions?

They are all good performers, the original pancake is optically identical to the classic, and the current pancake is a very similar lens. These lenses have high contrast and good color. The Ultron has lower contrast with a more classical look to it and of course is faster and bigger.

I have seen shots to admire from all of them but the best bang for the buck is probably the Classic f2.5.

 

[Peter]

I have shot with almost all CV 35mm lenses (except 35mm Nokton) and I am very pleased with their performances. If you want speed, the Ultron is an excellent lens for indoor available light photography. If you want compactness, the C and PII are the ones. I shoot exclusively in 35mm focal length nowadays and CV 35mm lenses deliver the results that I want. I currently own 2 Ultrons, a P and PII. I recently sold my C and I am thinking of buying the 35mm Nokton! 😛

 

[Huck Finn]

Keep in mind that the Ultron has a minimum focus distance of 0.9 meters (3 feet) while the other two have a minimum focus distance of 0.7 meters (27 inches).

 

[peter_n]

Good point Huck! The first version pancake also has a closest focus distance of 0.9M.

 

[ent2b]

hey, what happened to the nokton choice?

i only have the classic skopar, and while i love the size in terms of being nonintrusive, i have fairly long fingers, so it makes actual usage a bit of a pain sometimes. i've never tried the others but wouldn't mind playing with an ultron.

 

[Gabriel M.A.]

I think they're all good, and any are as good according to your taste and/or disposable change. But that said, the best bang for the buck I think is the Ultron; it's light, the performance is great, it's been compared to the 35 Summicron (pre-asph), it's just an itsy-bitsy faster than a half stop than the Summicron, a whole stop and a half faster than the Skopar, and it takes 39mm filters.

 

[gabrielelopez]

Hi, the 2,5 one is very nice, i used it for many shots when I had my R..the lovely kit sadly gone away..

I've never used the 1,7 one, but has that less contrast and more creamy look in my opinion, looking at the photos of friends..

I love the 35mm lens, in fact I'm in search of one for me, to trade for my 25mm f4.. 🙄

 

[GeneW]

From what I've read and heard, all the CV 35's are excellent. I have the Ultron and it's one of my all-time fav lenses.

Gene

 

[Uncle Bill]

I own the CV 35/2.5 Skopar and I use it with my Leica M3. I love using it because the results are really nice and the lens is easy to use.

Bill

 

[MCTuomey]

Another vote for the 35/1.7. I love mine - it seems to do everything for me at 35mm that my DR 50/2 does. As earlier noted, kind of classic, a bit muted and easier on older faces wide open.

I don't understand the comment about its large size. For me, it feels just about perfect on my Bessa or M4. But if you're really into compact kits, I can't imagine anything nicer than the Bessa R + CV 35/2.5. Very sweet.

 

[peter_n]

You're right Mike, but I at least in describing the Ultron as bigger meant just that, the Ultron is bigger than any of the f2.5 lenses. Its a relative thing. If you want absolute big in CV 35mm lenses, there is the f1.2 Nokton! Actually I don't see that lens discussed too much in this thread...

 

[djon]

...by "big" I guess I mean that the camera doesn't hang as discretely as I want from a rangefinder... the extra weight makes it less an item of everyday wear. I think of rfdrs as compact and light (eg my IIIC)...but with Ultron (and with my Nokton) they're bigger and heavier than compact SLRs (not to mention 8mp prosumer dslrs). Wearing my P with Nokton, I might as well be wearing my F1.

We have such wonderful 800ei color neg film (eg NPZ) and B&W can obviously be so incredibly sharp and low grain @ 800/1600, processed properly (eg I'm using Neopan 400 and Emofin currently).. lens speed may rarely be necessary to get a photo, though it's good for interesting out-of-focus.

 

[rover]

Extra weight?
Not Discrete?
It is only an extra centimeter if that. NOBODY will notice.

To me, the size argument doesn't hold water, that is just me though.

 

[MCTuomey]

Good point about the Nokton, Peter. Would appreciate a comment or two from an owner about its qualities. It seems overlooked - I wonder why? Djon?

 

[djon]

50's overlooked because it was a kit lens in the old days. It's a great focal length IMO.

Nokton's very sharp (comparable to my 50 1.4 FD) but I've not yet put it through its paces enough to evaluate beyond that. I used it a lot today at f16 in extremely harsh late morning-noon light with Kodacolor Gold 200...I'm curious about possibility of interesting photos in this ordinarily photographer-despised light.

Ultron's 2+ inches long...in practice that's FAR bigger than the 1.5" Skopar, and it weighs 150%. Important if you want to carry a camera discretely. But if you use a rfdr pretty much the way you'd use a slr (kid pics, tourist pics, scenics) then presumably the Ultron (or slr) is fine...though of course not as useful as a macro-zoom on a slr for those purposes. IMO a rangefinder camera is a people-picture-camera so questions like size and weight are relevant.

 

[nvanallens]

I have to wonder about the whole "size" - "discreet" issue nowadays. I agree that carrying a small-ish camera is less obtrusive than lugging an SLR or DSLR, but ... in this day and age people can take your picture with their phone or some tiny device hanging from their neck, and the size of some of the digital cameras, with 8 megs, means they will soon be everywhere. Eventually, any camera of any size at all will be pretty noticeable, so I would concentrate on results and not worry about a few cm here and there. Just my $.02 (Cdn) 😉