rogermota
the rain drops
I wasn't entirely sure if the Canon RF lenses were LTM or M. but yeah basically the idea was, what lens to use that would fit an M-mount (in which case LTM with adapter is a viable option)phototone said:
I'm going to be using the lens in an R-D1 (oh the horror, no film!) and after reading up on the performance on the skopar 3.5, it's clearly outdone by the 1.9. However, the thing is HUGE. And it does leave me wondering why Sean Reid in his review of the lenses' performances on the R-D1 (link) prefers the canon. He dealt with both lenses and sure, the 1.9 is a very fine modern lens, but there's still something there that makes him prefer the canon.
back alley
IMAGES
he likes the lower contrast of the older lenses.
backalley photo said:
Bingo, the dynamic range of the current digital sensors is very narrow causing high contrast lenses to either blow out the highlights or block up the shadows as they resolve beyond the sensor's capabilities.
One of the last few feathers in film's cap.
Apparently the 28 Ultron bests the Skopar on the R-D1, which is the relevant platform under discussion. (And I think Sean found the Ultron preferable even over the 28 Summicron.) But I'll defend the Skopar's honor as an excellent and gem-like lens with film. 
Sample below...
Sample below...Graybeard
Longtime IIIf User
Both of the CV 28 lenses are fine performers, optically and both are available, new, for much less than $500. If you do your own B&W darkoom work, contrast or lack thereof should'nt be much of an issue; it isn't for me.
When the CV 28mm/f3.5 was first introduced there was quite a bit of favorable comment about the mechanical build quality, that CV had improved the mechanicals over the 28mm/1.9.
I can't say that I've had a problem with either lens. I shoot quite a bit of available light and, at times, really need a fast WA. The CV 1.9 is just the thing to have then. Most recently, I used the lens to photograph the guests at a wedding rehearsal dinner in a dimly lit restaurant and the CV 28/1.9 performed quite well indeed (Tri-x pushed to ASA800 in Xtol).
If you don't need the speed, get the CV f3.5, it is tiny and readily carried. If speed is important, the faster CV lens will probably serve well.
When the CV 28mm/f3.5 was first introduced there was quite a bit of favorable comment about the mechanical build quality, that CV had improved the mechanicals over the 28mm/1.9.
I can't say that I've had a problem with either lens. I shoot quite a bit of available light and, at times, really need a fast WA. The CV 1.9 is just the thing to have then. Most recently, I used the lens to photograph the guests at a wedding rehearsal dinner in a dimly lit restaurant and the CV 28/1.9 performed quite well indeed (Tri-x pushed to ASA800 in Xtol).
If you don't need the speed, get the CV f3.5, it is tiny and readily carried. If speed is important, the faster CV lens will probably serve well.
rogermota
the rain drops
Thank you for all the responses guys! I specifically posted in the Leica M forum because I thought the fact that I would use the lens on a digital was irrelevant. But as it is becoming more and more clear, the digital sensor plays a major role in the final image (as does film and slide). I've actually stumbled upon a great (somewhat old) thread here on RFF (post #6) regarding lens contrast and the recording medium (b&w film, colour film, slide, digital).
The summary, as Rover has pointed out, is that digital sensors have about the same limited dynamic range as slides. But where slides are concerned, you typically shoot colour and what you shoot is what you get -- so modern lenses are the optimal choice. However, on the digital sensor, because you can do post processing in photoshop, the best b&w lenses are the ones with lowest contrast, which are able to preserve the greatest dynamic range for use in photoshop.
So for digital, the flatter the image, the more you have to play with. Its the same with film, but because there's a greater dynamic range, you can go with more contrasty lenses and still have plenty of room.
I'm no technical guy, but interesting stuff eh?
The summary, as Rover has pointed out, is that digital sensors have about the same limited dynamic range as slides. But where slides are concerned, you typically shoot colour and what you shoot is what you get -- so modern lenses are the optimal choice. However, on the digital sensor, because you can do post processing in photoshop, the best b&w lenses are the ones with lowest contrast, which are able to preserve the greatest dynamic range for use in photoshop.
So for digital, the flatter the image, the more you have to play with. Its the same with film, but because there's a greater dynamic range, you can go with more contrasty lenses and still have plenty of room.
I'm no technical guy, but interesting stuff eh?
SolaresLarrave
My M5s need red dots!
Roger,
There's another choice... an old breed of (slowish) glass, manufactured by Kobalux and marketed under the brands Bower and Adorama. These are M-mount lenses, 28/f3.5, relatively small but well recommended by those who have used them. I was offered one a long time ago, but I passed it because I was in the lookout for a 35mm. They have been discontinued for a while, but still pop up on eBay from time to time. Price-wise: moderate, from US $200 to $400.
Otherwise, you've gotten already excellent advice here!
There's another choice... an old breed of (slowish) glass, manufactured by Kobalux and marketed under the brands Bower and Adorama. These are M-mount lenses, 28/f3.5, relatively small but well recommended by those who have used them. I was offered one a long time ago, but I passed it because I was in the lookout for a 35mm. They have been discontinued for a while, but still pop up on eBay from time to time. Price-wise: moderate, from US $200 to $400.
Otherwise, you've gotten already excellent advice here!
rogermota
the rain drops
SolaresLarrave said:
Yeah I've heard of the Kobalux lenses, cameraquest has some good things to say about it. The interesting thing tho is that I feel like I "know" the canon 28/2.8 but the canon 3.5 & kobalux 3.5 are a bit unknown.
Sure a faster 2.8 is appealing but 3.5 isn't the end of the world. What I'm more interested in is the resolution of the lens (and sharpness on the edges to some extent). I'd go for either of the 3.5s if I knew they were pretty much identical to the 2.5 except being slower.
It'd be interesting to hear from someone who's used the 2.8 and either of the 3.5s in b&w for comparison.
Funny how it feels like buying a flat
phototone
Well-known
My experience with lenses on digital SLR's has proven to me that faster lenses, that is lenses with wider maximum apertures, such as f/1.9, or so give more even results with digital imagers, because of a wider exit pupil which places the light rays more parallel to the imager. It is the light rays hitting the sensor at a severe angle that causes the vignetting and chromatic aberration artifacts towards the edge of the image. I would assume that this would also hold true for a digital RFDR camera. Exterpolating on this theory, it would seem that the VC 28mm f/1.9 would be the optimum 28mm for the RD-1, if one had a budget of $500 or less. Cosidering that the Summicron and Summilux from Leitz are vastly more expensive.
Ben Z
Veteran
I recently bought a Voitlander 28/1.9 Ultron for $265, it was rated in Bargain condition which turned out to be because the hood was missing and some bozo had blacked out the Voitlander etc engravings on the front rim. The OEM hood, an (to me) gross, ugly-looking crinkled finish thing with a silver thumbscrew to hold it in place, would've cost $50 to replace. For $20 I got a vented screw-in shade for the Hexar RF lens, still in its velour pouch. I already had a 28/90 M adaptor so I was all set. I am happy with the performance and ergonomics of the lens and my shade. I had been looking for an Elmarit for a while and found nothing but really beaten ones for nothing less than $700, and by beaten I don't mean just paint loss which I could care less about, but evidence of amateur tampering, and scratches on the front element (you know, the kind that Leica coatings are too tough to get).
R
rpsawin
Guest
Don't ovgerlook the Konica M mount 28/2.8. It is a wonderful lens and on par with the pre-asph leicas. They do show up on e-bay from time to time and will probably be ~$500 or more.
Bob
Bob