Giving up the M-Hexaon 28/2.8 for Voigtlander Color Skopar 28/3.5

[maenju]

Hi,
I'm new to this whole RF(F) thing 🙂 I got the said Konica lens for my M8 and really really like the perspective and the images it produces. Now, I know this might be the wrong forum to ask, but despite all its goodness I'm pondering about whether to exchange it for a Voigtlander 28mm Color Skopar. Why?
- I dislike that the viewfinder window is obstructed, even more so when using a lens shade
- I usually shoot between f/4 and f/8 anyway, as so far my 28mm has been -- and will be -- primarily a street lens using zone focusing
- even disregarding that, the difference between 2.8 and 3.5 is certainly there, but not a game stopper
- the Voigtlander seems comparable in terms of sharpness, would lighten my gear by about 100g and would bring about 200 bucks to my pocket if I sell the Konica for it

So, this is the pro side. Am I missing anything? Would anyone who has owned both lenses be able to say something about the more general characteristics of the lenses? Am I foregoing the Konica magic for some el cheapo piece of glass? Even better of course would be a comparison based on the M8...

 

[flip]

Every lens has its boosters. Sounds like you've thought this out.

 

[Pickett Wilson]

If you don't need the 2.8 of the Hexanon, and aren't convinced of some magical quality inherent in it, go for the Voigtlander. No reason for any angst. Most folks who will look at your photos won't know the difference. Smaller and lighter are good in RF lenses. Go for it.

 

[Ljós]

I have no experience with the Konica lens, but I had a Skopar 28. Only reason I sold that one was that I wanted a 35mm focal length more, trying to simplify my gear: using a 35mm without need for external viewfinder on my M2 seemed to make more sense to me. Plus for "allround" purposes 28mm turned out to be too wide for me.

That said: I loved the 28mm Skopar, and I think the handling is great. Build quality is outstanding, VERY smooth focusing. Loved the lens shade: that you can mount a yellow filter, and the length of the lens will not change, since filters fit inside the shade. Camera with lens and shade and lens cap mounted was very slim and easily fit my jacket pockets.

The lens speed: you are giving up 2/3 of a stop. You will at some point find yourself in a situation where you wished the Skopar was a smidgen faster. But, you can look at it like this: many here at RFF like the collapsible 50mm f3.5 Elmar for street. And 28mm is much easier to handle shutterspeedwise than a 50mm lens... so... 🙂

 

[ampguy]

I've had both. I loved the M-Hex, the 28/3.5 CV was too slow, and oddly vignetted on some of my cameras.

No blockage with the stock vented hood with the M-Hex.

 

[lawrence]

I've just got the M-Hex as a result of a swap and haven't had a chance to try it out much yet. I've had the 28mm CV for about five years and it's just great, however I'd strongly recommend that you buy the M-Hex and compare it, then sell the lens you like least. The CV is an aspheric design while the M-Hex isn't, which usually means that performance at full aperture will be better with the CV. Also, the M-Hex is quite a bit bigger/heavier than the CV, the focussing is stiffer and it doesn't have a focussing tab (or 'spur') so you can't feel-focus. Although you may very well like the 'upgrade', lens signatures are a personal thing and it would be a shame to do this and find you didn't like the CV after all.

 

[maenju]

thanks for the opinions, which support my gut feeling. I've already ordered the Voigtlander now and will probably have the chance for a brief shoot out before making a final decision. in case I still remember this thread in a few weeks, I might make a short report about the result. thanks guys!

 

[Bob Michaels]

I have both lenses. I have used the CV 28mm f3.5 for about 2-3 years and the Hexanon 28mm for about 5-6 months. 28mm is my almost exclusive focal length so I have a significant experience with both.

The differences seem to be in weight, size and 2/3 of a stop. Not much else. I cannot tell the difference in prints made from one vs. the other. I admit to not being a lens signature fanatic. Here are 40 shots, about half shot with the CV and about half with the Hexanon. See if you can tell a difference. I cannot.

I carry a camera & lens in my hand for hours, frequently all day. No strap, no bag. So weight is important. I find that 2/3 of a stop to be helpful in a few occasions. I am deciding the reduced weight of the CV lens is more important to me than the 2/3 stop. I think I will probably sell the Hexanon.

 

[back alley]

why no strap or bag?

 

[Bob Michaels]

why no strap or bag?

Joe: I like to carry only the minimum equipment since I am always on foot when shooting. Hence no bag, just a camera / one lens, pocket full of film and spare battery.

No strap because they seem to get in the way for me. When the camera is in my hand, I am ready to shoot instantaneously. I almost always prefocused depending on the environment.

Also with a hand grip, I can carry the camera quite discretely in one hand down at thigh level. No one seems to notice that I am even carrying a camera until I make the decision.

I am not a stealth shooter. But I do find that subject reaction is better when I am not carrying so gear that it shouts "BIG TIME SERIOUS PHOTOGRAPHER AT WORK"

 

[back alley]

i use a wrist strap plus a grip, makes me feel a bit more secure, plus i carry a small bag for when i am not shooting.

 

[Bob Michaels]

i use a wrist strap plus a grip, makes me feel a bit more secure, plus i carry a small bag for when i am not shooting.

Joe: I like to be able to move the camera to the crook of my left elbow if I need to do anything with my right hand. Just different preferences. I have never dropped a camera in all these years. Hope I don't jinx myself by saying so.

Here is a shot I recently saw and grabbed within 1/2 second. Then it went away. I was already set at 5.6, AE, prefocused at 4' so I could just raise the camera and shoot.

OP: this was with the Hexanon.

 

[jsrockit]

But I do find that subject reaction is better when I am not carrying so gear that it shouts "BIG TIME SERIOUS PHOTOGRAPHER AT WORK"

To compensate for my Leicas, I just wear that phrase on a t-shirt instead. 😉

 

[ferider]

I would stay with what you have, or at least try both lenses before you decide.

The Hex is not only faster but significantly sharper. This will not show on web-postings or small prints, since the Color Skopar has great micro-contrast, but if you pixel peep you might be disappointed.

Note that I am keeping 28/3.5 and 28/1.9, one for compactness and color, the other one for big prints 🙂

There is also the practical aspect of filters. You might want to standardize on the same filter size if you carry multiple lenses.

Roland.

 

[back alley]

roland, what do you consider a 'big print' to be?

 

[ferider]

10x14 or more, Joe. Glad to have her back 🙂

 

[Bob Michaels]

<snip>
The Hex is not only faster but significantly sharper. This will not show on web-postings or small prints, since the Color Skopar has great micro-contrast, but if you pixel peep you might be disappointed.<snip>
Roland.

I am not sure of your definition of "big prints" but I cannot tell the difference in 12"x15" prints. (neg scanned with a Minolta MultiPro) I am not a pixel peeper.

I certainly will agree that you cannot tell much from an 800 pixel wide JPG.

 

[ferider]

Differences are small Bob. For example, with my usual combo, APX 100 + Rodinal 1:100, I wouldn't be able to tell the two lenses apart. On C41 film, the difference shows, however.

I just thought I should mention it, since the OP uses an M8. On digital there is also the vignetting aspect. My main advice is not to hope for better photos by trading the Hex for the Color Skopar.

Roland.

 

[leicashot]

The Hex is definitely the best lens in terms of build quality, performance and handling. While it obstructs the viewfinder it's much nicer to handle. Differences in image quality are going to be minimal. Sometimes I think it's just silly the rational we make in our heads to justify getting something new that we know is of no 'real' benefit.

Viewfinder blockage is something an M user should be used to, especially if they expect the ultimate modern performance from their lenses, which are usually larger than older lenses.

 

[Bingley]

I have both lenses. I have used the CV 28mm f3.5 for about 2-3 years and the Hexanon 28mm for about 5-6 months. 28mm is my almost exclusive focal length so I have a significant experience with both.

The differences seem to be in weight, size and 2/3 of a stop. Not much else. I cannot tell the difference in prints made from one vs. the other. I admit to not being a lens signature fanatic. Here are 40 shots, about half shot with the CV and about half with the Hexanon. See if you can tell a difference. I cannot.

I carry a camera & lens in my hand for hours, frequently all day. No strap, no bag. So weight is important. I find that 2/3 of a stop to be helpful in a few occasions. I am deciding the reduced weight of the CV lens is more important to me than the 2/3 stop. I think I will probably sell the Hexanon.

I'm piping up to say that those are fantastic photos, Bob. Great slideshow of rural and urban Cuba.

I'm another very satisfied user of the CV 28/3.5, but I've never used the Hex so I don't have a basis to compare the two as do Bob and others on this thread. I will say that the Skopar's very small size and solid construction are big plusses for me, and I have not been disappointed in the slightest with image quality from this lens (but then, I haven't enlarged any photos over 8x10).