Yoricko
Established
Hello guys,
I posted a thread about a 35mm giving a classic look a while back. Now I'm looking for a budget fast 35mm lens.
These are what I have in mind -
CV 35mm ƒ1.2 (V1)
CV 35mm ƒ1.4 MC
CV 35mm ƒ1.7
Canon 35mm ƒ1.5 LTM
Canon 35mm ƒ1.8 LTM
Not sure what to get. Do let me know if you know any other lens makes
The 1.2 has a huge filter thread which isn't compatible with my largest coloured filters. It also weighs quite a bit.
The 1.4 suffers from a lot of focus shift problems, which is very bothersome for me because I often work at distances under 1.2 meters. Also quite soft, but that is not the big issue here.
The 1.7 seems like a good lens for me, but it is almost like a collector's item now, and the minimum focusing distance is 0.9 meters I believe?
The Canon uses weird filter sizes, so I'll probably have to find some weird step-up on evilbay. There is also very little information on them in the web.
Don't ask me to get a Summilux, I am pretty broke right now.
I posted a thread about a 35mm giving a classic look a while back. Now I'm looking for a budget fast 35mm lens.
These are what I have in mind -
CV 35mm ƒ1.2 (V1)
CV 35mm ƒ1.4 MC
CV 35mm ƒ1.7
Canon 35mm ƒ1.5 LTM
Canon 35mm ƒ1.8 LTM
Not sure what to get. Do let me know if you know any other lens makes
The 1.2 has a huge filter thread which isn't compatible with my largest coloured filters. It also weighs quite a bit.
The 1.4 suffers from a lot of focus shift problems, which is very bothersome for me because I often work at distances under 1.2 meters. Also quite soft, but that is not the big issue here.
The 1.7 seems like a good lens for me, but it is almost like a collector's item now, and the minimum focusing distance is 0.9 meters I believe?
The Canon uses weird filter sizes, so I'll probably have to find some weird step-up on evilbay. There is also very little information on them in the web.
Don't ask me to get a Summilux, I am pretty broke right now.
Ranchu
Veteran
I've never had any of those, likely I never will, but if I was going to get one this would be the one, and this is some reasons why (not mine).
http://www.flickr.com/photos/luck00/
http://www.flickr.com/photos/luck00/
andredossantos
Well-known
For me, the 1.2 Nokton would be the choice. I usually shoot MF and mostly use 35mm and Digital for low light situations. In addition, you get that beautiful creamy rendering that at this point is almost universally lauded.
The second choice would be the f/1.4 Nokton. I used it quite a bit and never found it soft enough to notice or bother me. OK, I'm sure it's not as sharp as a Summilux or 'Cron but honestly Im not too exacting or demanding about that sort of thing. This lens has a bad rep but personally I think that's a bit overblown. I think it mainly suffers because the 1.2 is (or "was" I should say) not even twice the price, and rightly so.
Anyway, that's my 2 cents
The second choice would be the f/1.4 Nokton. I used it quite a bit and never found it soft enough to notice or bother me. OK, I'm sure it's not as sharp as a Summilux or 'Cron but honestly Im not too exacting or demanding about that sort of thing. This lens has a bad rep but personally I think that's a bit overblown. I think it mainly suffers because the 1.2 is (or "was" I should say) not even twice the price, and rightly so.
Anyway, that's my 2 cents
W
wlewisiii
Guest
Of those, I used to own Canon 35/1.8. Good lens, reasonably priced and, like all Canon RF lenses, exceptionally well made. It gives something of a "classic" look wide open but sharpens up nicely by f4. I should not have sold it.
William
William
back alley
IMAGES
you seem to have a pretty healthy 'budget'...the 1.2 is not what i would call a cheap lens.
and the lenses on your list...you have negative comments about all of them...doesn't seem like to really want any of them.
i find it all confusing...
Krosya
Konicaze
From your list - cv 35/1.2 is clearly the best lens you can get. It's not really a "budget" lens, but not too pricey either, considering what you get for the money.
Best value for money would be Cv 35/1.7 IMO. Great Image quality and CAN be made to focus closer: - see this thread:
http://www.rangefinderforum.com/forums/showthread.php?t=97167
I like Canons too, but not as all-around lenses.
Best value for money would be Cv 35/1.7 IMO. Great Image quality and CAN be made to focus closer: - see this thread:
http://www.rangefinderforum.com/forums/showthread.php?t=97167
I like Canons too, but not as all-around lenses.
elmer3.5
Well-known
Canon!
Canon!
Hi, i had many VC lenses but only the ultron 1.7 in your list.
But i have currently the LTM canon 35mm 1.8, (ebay aprox 300 usd) i´ve read this is an average lens but to my experience it is superb optically and very small.
Check on these.
Canon at f4
Summilux at f4 version 3.
Canon, it doesn´t flare either!
I sold out many 35´s and at last kept this canon ltm and the summarit 35mm.
Bye!
Canon!
Hi, i had many VC lenses but only the ultron 1.7 in your list.
But i have currently the LTM canon 35mm 1.8, (ebay aprox 300 usd) i´ve read this is an average lens but to my experience it is superb optically and very small.
Check on these.
Canon at f4
Summilux at f4 version 3.
Canon, it doesn´t flare either!
I sold out many 35´s and at last kept this canon ltm and the summarit 35mm.
Bye!
Last edited:
f16sunshine
Moderator
Nice deal on a cv f1.7/35mm in the rff classified right now.
SolaresLarrave
My M5s need red dots!
Where did you get your information on the Nokton 35 f1.4?
Reading your list... seems to me that you just painted yourself into a corner for no other reason other than internet gossip. Of course, after reading your note I wondered about your sources...
And you forgot the Konica Hexanon 35mm f2.
Go for the CV. Either the f1.2 or 1.4 fit your description. Take care!
Reading your list... seems to me that you just painted yourself into a corner for no other reason other than internet gossip. Of course, after reading your note I wondered about your sources...
And you forgot the Konica Hexanon 35mm f2.
Go for the CV. Either the f1.2 or 1.4 fit your description. Take care!
batterytypehah!
Lord of the Dings
Which body would this be for? I can't tell from your post(s). Are you sure you can accurately focus a really fast lens? Does it matter to you or would you rather risk missing the focus versus not getting the shot at all? Even at 35, DoF gets mighty thin at 1.2... Not to mention the physical sizes of the lenses.
My fastest lenses are 50/1.8 on the Contax (not trivial, even with its long base length) and 40/1.7 on the Revue (hit and miss, the puny RF is not up to that speed). Not sure I'd want to go any faster, although the Sonnar 1.5 always beckons...
All of which is to say, if I were you, I'd start with a 1.8.
My fastest lenses are 50/1.8 on the Contax (not trivial, even with its long base length) and 40/1.7 on the Revue (hit and miss, the puny RF is not up to that speed). Not sure I'd want to go any faster, although the Sonnar 1.5 always beckons...
All of which is to say, if I were you, I'd start with a 1.8.
Yoricko
Established
I have that lens and it is a nice, sharp, medium-low contrast look.
ƒ2.5 isn't going to help me with dimly-lit streets, even with Tri-X at 1600. No, I do not want to specifically buy Delta 3200 or TMax 3200 just to shoot dimly lit streets (although the tonality is quite pleasant).
I'm looking for personal opinions and first-hand experience with these lenses or ... if they know something that I am unaware of, that would be very nice.
A well-used condition of the older generation of Lux is about 1650USD? The CV 1.2 only costs 950USD, and if I can find it used it might be a little bit cheaper.
Woah! Thanks for the heads up! Didn't know my favourite 50 ƒ1.5 can be modded as well (though I've already sold mine.. dear me)
Thanks for the pictures! I've seen those test shots somewhere before. I can only hope it appears in my local buy & sell.
Thanks for the heads up. Cheers!
Where did you get your information on the Nokton 35 f1.4?
Reading your list... seems to me that you just painted yourself into a corner for no other reason other than internet gossip. Of course, after reading your note I wondered about your sources...
And you forgot the Konica Hexanon 35mm f2.
Go for the CV. Either the f1.2 or 1.4 fit your description. Take care!
Maybe I like to .. corner myself with negative things.
Bah.
A friend of mine told me about the review on 35mm lenses at reidreviews.
Seems reliable. Also did a small search on the net and it seemed more of a QC problem than the lens design problem. If I were to buy this lens, I would need an M9 to test with (using M6).
M6. I use Tri-X at 200, 400, and 1600. I plan to experiment and find a timing for EI6400 in the near future.
Right now, most of my pictures are not plagued with focus problems but subject movement and camera shake (shooting at poor lighting conditions at 1/8th and 1/15th at 1600 with a ƒ2.5 lens). A moderately fast lens like the 1.7 could probably bump up the shutter from 1/15th to 1/30th, which makes a BIG difference. I also do not want to rely on rating my Tri-X at 6400 (high contrast, different look form my body of work) or buying specialty film (cost and trouble).
Tipton
Tipton Photo
FWIW I know you'd be happy with the 35 1.2 if you don't mind the size. I've grown to love using the lens. If you don't mind f2, I can't say enough good things about the tiny 40mm Summicron.
Just my 2 cents.
Just my 2 cents.
filmtwit
Desperate but not serious
What about the Zeiss 35mm f2 Biogen?
Yoricko
Established
I've dearly regretted selling my cron. The 1.2 is a good lens, the weigh will not bother me that much since it'll be in the bag most of the time, out only in low-light situations and such. Just a little quirk that I can't use my coloured B&W filters on it.
dyao
Well-known
The Canon 35/1.8 only focuses to 1m - also if you're thinking about that one, why not think about the 35/2 as well?
The 35/1.8 is my primary lenses - most of the shots on my tumblr are taken with that or the canon 50/1.5
The 35/1.8 is my primary lenses - most of the shots on my tumblr are taken with that or the canon 50/1.5
makeitmine
Member
hi yoricko,
among all the lenses, i have experienced with only the CV 35mm f1.4mm. In fact, i have own the lens 3 times, 2 MC versions [ sold the first one, regretted. Bought the 2nd one, stolen ] and so now i bought the 3rd one, a single coated version.
I am not too sure if you shoot colour or black and white film more. But personally i notice that there are slight difference between the sc and mc, with sc retaining more highlights, subtle colour (colour films) while mc really produces punchy, contrasty images.
you mentioned that you are concerned about the focusing shift issues. i think i was lucky, in all 3 lenses i had, i never experience that issue. So perhaps, it really depends on the copy you purchased? If getting new is not an issue than maybe you can find the right copy at your local store.
good luck in your search!
among all the lenses, i have experienced with only the CV 35mm f1.4mm. In fact, i have own the lens 3 times, 2 MC versions [ sold the first one, regretted. Bought the 2nd one, stolen
] and so now i bought the 3rd one, a single coated version.I am not too sure if you shoot colour or black and white film more. But personally i notice that there are slight difference between the sc and mc, with sc retaining more highlights, subtle colour (colour films) while mc really produces punchy, contrasty images.
you mentioned that you are concerned about the focusing shift issues. i think i was lucky, in all 3 lenses i had, i never experience that issue. So perhaps, it really depends on the copy you purchased? If getting new is not an issue than maybe you can find the right copy at your local store.
good luck in your search!
rxmd
May contain traces of nut
I agree with SolaresLarrave that it looks like you're relying too much on third- or fourth-party hearsay evidence on the Internet.
What do you want the M9 for?
If you use an M6, it seems perfectly sufficient to me to test the lens on your M6.
From your list, I'd buy the f/1.2 if you have the money. If you do need larger colour filters, consider them an investment into the future.
It is still the cheapest fast option I know of so I can't see how you'd say this...
rxmd
May contain traces of nut
What's the problem with a lens that you can get under $500, if you're willing to consider the 35/f1.2 which costs $750 used, or the Canon 35/f1.5 that actually is a collector's item?
Yoricko
Established
I guess so.
So I can tether up and test the lens in the shop to find a good copy. Sounds like an ass thing to do, but ....
Cheapest, yes. Availability, low.
Didn't know that :S