Help me choose a 35mm lens

Which of these 35mm lenses should I buy?

  • Total voters
    10
  • Poll closed .
Another factor for Digital: LTM lenses were designed for Film, including the 35/1.7 Ultron LTM. At F4, the Ultron was measured at 90lp/mm. I have a copy of the Pop Photo test of the lens. Wide-open, lower contrast. It will not do as well on a Front-Side Illuminated CMOS sensor as it does on the Back-Side Illuminated KAF-18500 used in the M9.
 
I had the Color-Skopar 35mm f/2.5 lens when I had the M9 and found that it performed nicely. However, a lens I'd been looking for came available (Summilux 35/1.4 v2) at a price I could afford, I bought it, and I never used the Color-Skopar 35 again. Not because the CS35 was bad, but because the 'Lux35 is just so darn nice. 🙂

Never had or used any Canon RF lenses so I cannot offer any comparison or recommendation on that.

G
 
At this point- best for the OP to give a price range and example photos of "the look" that is desired. A budget of under $500 eliminates a lot of options.

I have noted several early Voigtlander lenses develop Clouding in the Cement of the optics. My Ultron- free and clear. A flashlight test is required. Even light haze can radically change the behavior of the lens, noted on the LTM APO Lanthar 90/3.5 and 85/3.5 that I picked up cheap. Backlit scene, like Landscape- flares badly.

The Canon wide-angle lens that I liked most: the 35/2.8 Chrome version. Close to the Summaron. In the end- kept the Nikkor 3.5cm F2.5. The Canon- one of the lenses I truly regret selling.
 
Your point made me check - Using the brightest light I have, I see a very light haze. Holding it up to a regular light as I've done previously, I see nothing. Would that have the impact you describe?

Yes, my budget is $500 absolute maximum. The ones I've have mostly been considering are $300 to $450.

Recent examples:
Sonnar 50/2

L1007706.jpg

Chiyoko 50/2
L1007742.jpg

Elmar 50/2.8
L1007776.jpg
 
Only now noticed it is for digital 🙂

I had CV CS 35 2.5 on M8 and M-E 220 and it was fine lens. Not bad at all, comparing it "performance" on BW film.
It was not providing anything fancy. Just fine digital image.

J-12 might be more fancier on digital, those are very affordable and easy to re-shim, if needed. They don't have glass problems comparing to old Leitz and Canon lenses.

J-12 on M-E 220:

49191110487_c2fbb10f17_o.jpg
 
I do have the 35mm Canon f2 LTM. It does not have a focusing tab. More modern look to the design. The lens is recessed so it does not need a lens hood. The filter thread is 40mm. New uv filters for the Fuji x100 will fit, but the thread pitch is slightly different so be careful not to force them. Color filters are hard to find.
At f2 it is very sharp in the center and softens up towards the edge. Bokeh is soft and well behaved. Almost no chromatic aberrations. Vignetting noticable especially in the far corners.
At f5.6 it is sharp edge to edge. Vignetting is greatly reduced or gone.

If the price is the same, I would probably go for the color Skopar in M mount. No need for an adapter, and more likely to find a clean example.

I have a variety of vintage LTM 35mm lenses and I don't have anything to complain about their image quality. I have Canon f2.8 both versions, Canon f2, Nikkor f2.5. Also had the Canon f3.5 and that was the one I sold but have heard good things about it. May have been my copy.
 
SO... I had decided on the Color Skopar.

But I didn't buy the 35/2.5 after all...

s-l500.jpg



Saw this for a price I could swing and though watched by a dozen others, I got paid first. It's got a good reputation (Raid likes his a lot). I remember having a Canon 28/3.5 along with a 50 & 90 on my Leica CL in the past. I think this will make a nice combo like that for the 240. When I do want a 35, I've been quite happy of late with my J12 as it seems to play nice enough with digital.

Thank you all for your thoughts and your patience.
 
I have a few 35mm, J-12, Canon, CV. The Canon 35mm f/2.0 LTM is a good lens in color and IQ and is reasonable at $275 - $400. I paid ~$325 for mine and it is clean, no haze or separation and a good lens to play with.
 
the chrome Canon 35/2.8 is a really interesting lens. The build quality was incredible and the images were fine.. but at wide apertures the soft corners bugged me. I ultimately sold it in favor of the ZM 35/2. I prefer it’s image quality but do miss the Canon at times on sunnier days. Something about using it resonated why me.
 
wlewisiii said:
SO... I had decided on the Color Skopar.

But I didn't buy the 35/2.5 after all...

s-l500.jpg



Saw this for a price I could swing and though watched by a dozen others, I got paid first. It's got a good reputation (Raid likes his a lot). I remember having a Canon 28/3.5 along with a 50 & 90 on my Leica CL in the past. I think this will make a nice combo like that for the 240. When I do want a 35, I've been quite happy of late with my J12 as it seems to play nice enough with digital.

Thank you all for your thoughts and your patience.
Click to expand...
What lens did you get? I don't see the image.
 
Kobalux 28/3.5. not sure why it stopped showing up...

(Edit: it wasn't for me but now it is again. Is it showing for you now?)

There is another post in the "what did you just buy thread too.
 
Last edited by a moderator:
You must log in or register to reply here.

Similar threads

8
Canon LTM Help me Choose a 35mm for an Canon RF Article
2
Replies
22
Views
1K
wlewisiii
W
Shab
A 35mm lens for a Nikon FM3A
2 3
Replies
42
Views
3K
Dogman
Dogman
J
  • Article Article
Compact Fast Lensed Rangefinder 35mm Cameras
2
Replies
22
Views
8K
Jason Schneider
J
J
  • Article Article
Compact Fast Lensed Scale Focusing 35mm Cameras
2
Replies
22
Views
3K
Mos6502
Mos6502
J
  • Article Article
The Rise, Fall, and Resurrection of the 110 Format By 2009, 110 was kaput. Lomography brought it back! Part 2: A selection of fascinating 110 cameras.
2
Replies
39
Views
3K
Jason Schneider
J
Back
Top Bottom