johannielscom
Snorting silver salts
probably because of the build quality as well. I owned a Summilux and sold it because of the build quality. Old Summicrons are as tight as the M-Hexes, nothing else I ever shot is as well built
Erwin Puts Slams Hexanon Glass on Leica M Body
- Thread starter 35mmdelux
- Start date
- Latest activity Latest activity:
- Replies 26
- Views 5K
probably because of the build quality as well. I owned a Summilux and sold it because of the build quality. Old Summicrons are as tight as the M-Hexes, nothing else I ever shot is as well built
Krosya
Konicaze
Well,
Its a good thing that you have so many choices, isnt it? But based on what you say, it seems to me that you either never tried Hexanons or thier signature is not your taste. Reason I say this is - if you tried Hexanons - you'd see that they are built much better than CV or Zeiss ZM lenses. CV 28 is on par with Leica's and better than ZM version at the same price or less. Prices of Hex 50 - well I just sold one for $400, so I dont think you can find ZM 50/2 at that price and again - while it has a pretty good glass, built is not there, compared to Hex - I had Planar, Hexanon and Summicron (latest) -all at the same time at one point and kept Hex as the best option for me based on signature and built. BTW, Summicron is no better, but you dont question its' prices?
Hex 90 - while it's similar to Leica 90/2.8, signature is different, more of a Sonnar/ernostar look. So, when you look at other options out there I dont think you can find one in the same price range as good of a quality lens.
Hex 35/2 M, not UC - is another superb lens. I used to have UC 35/2 and M-Hex 35/2 at the same time and ended up selling UC because I like M-Hex better. To my eyes it draws very similar to Leica ASPH Summilux, just not as fast and not as clinical. So again - great lens if you can find one.
All in all - matter of personal taste, I suppose. But bottom line is - Hexanons deliver as good or better results as Leica, better than almost all Zeiss in same FLs with only ZM 35/2 being in the same league, while all Hexanons are better built, and I'm not even talking about CV - while good value, they are not in the same league as Hexanons when it comes to the same FLs with the same speed (not talking about CV 35/1.2, for example, which I love).
So, based on my actual "hands-on" experience, it sounds like you just never tried hexanons. But as i said in the beginning - it's a good thing they have so many choices, so if you prefer ZM or CV over Hexanons - its your money and your pictures.
Tim Gray
Well-known
You're right, I never did try them. Also, I'm not much of a 'look' or rendering guy either. I like lenses that don't flare, are consistent in their sharpness across the frame, at different stops, and at different distances. If they don't have jerky bokeh, that's a bonus.
I was desperately looking for a 50/2 Hexanon when I started, and just missed a couple for $300. As in I was told, "oh, this store has a couple for $300," and I'd go check, but they were already sold. At the time, that was what I was told I should be able to find one for, and the prices rapidly escalated to the $400-450 range. I found a latest version Summicron for $500, and snagged it, figuring I could sell it for at least that when the time came (which was true). The Summicron was a nice lens, but not worth $1k+ in my book. I'm not touting it's superiority, just availability, etc.
I was also looking for the a 35/2 about a year later. Leica, Hexanon, or Zeiss. Never did find a used one for less than what the Zeiss went for new at the time ($700?), so after a couple months of looking, I just bought the Zeiss. The Hexanon 35/2 (non-UC) got rave reviews, but was harder to find for some reason and always commanded a higher price. I had my heart set on one, but it just never happened. And from what I've seen, the Leica 35/2 version 4 is a totally over-hyped lens.
I still do think the Zeiss 50/2 is probably the best bang for your buck at 50mm. The prices have gone up a $100 or so, but for $700, you get a brand new lens that is very good, and has a warrantee. If you go used, you can get them for $400-500, and even then, they can only be a couple of years old. If you can find a Hexanon 50/2 for $400 or less, by all means go for it. We just have different options now, and the price differences are different now then they were 4-5 years ago too.
And having used Leica, Zeiss, Nikkor, and CV lenses, I can't say any of them are built any better or worse. Yes, the Leica lenses tend to have smoother feeling focus and aperture rings than the other ones, but I can't say that's better build quality, just a better feel. The only lens I've had any problems with was a reasonably newish (several year old) Leica lens that had oil on the aperture blades.
I was desperately looking for a 50/2 Hexanon when I started, and just missed a couple for $300. As in I was told, "oh, this store has a couple for $300," and I'd go check, but they were already sold. At the time, that was what I was told I should be able to find one for, and the prices rapidly escalated to the $400-450 range. I found a latest version Summicron for $500, and snagged it, figuring I could sell it for at least that when the time came (which was true). The Summicron was a nice lens, but not worth $1k+ in my book. I'm not touting it's superiority, just availability, etc.
I was also looking for the a 35/2 about a year later. Leica, Hexanon, or Zeiss. Never did find a used one for less than what the Zeiss went for new at the time ($700?), so after a couple months of looking, I just bought the Zeiss. The Hexanon 35/2 (non-UC) got rave reviews, but was harder to find for some reason and always commanded a higher price. I had my heart set on one, but it just never happened. And from what I've seen, the Leica 35/2 version 4 is a totally over-hyped lens.
I still do think the Zeiss 50/2 is probably the best bang for your buck at 50mm. The prices have gone up a $100 or so, but for $700, you get a brand new lens that is very good, and has a warrantee. If you go used, you can get them for $400-500, and even then, they can only be a couple of years old. If you can find a Hexanon 50/2 for $400 or less, by all means go for it. We just have different options now, and the price differences are different now then they were 4-5 years ago too.
And having used Leica, Zeiss, Nikkor, and CV lenses, I can't say any of them are built any better or worse. Yes, the Leica lenses tend to have smoother feeling focus and aperture rings than the other ones, but I can't say that's better build quality, just a better feel. The only lens I've had any problems with was a reasonably newish (several year old) Leica lens that had oil on the aperture blades.
sanmich
Veteran
If I'm not mistaken, the problem was between the Hexar RF and Leica glass, not the other way around, right?
marke
Well-known
I don't believe you.
35mmdelux
Veni, vidi, vici
Dang good point. Not long ago Hex wasn't even in the hunt. Seriously, a 35/2.0 UC for $1200 - someone is out of their mind. Id take that change and throw it on a 35 Summicron ASPH!
35mmdelux
Veni, vidi, vici
Hey Gary, sorry about getting burned. I got burned too under similar circumstances as you know. The experts work under the assumption that there is no such thing as coincidence.
Similar threads
