I LOVE the Planar 35!

[Socke]

I don't know what the people have against this lens, it's small, reasonably fast and as sharp enough for handheld available light shots like this one in a bar in Madrid past 10:00pm on Elitechrome 400.

 

[venchka]

I can't read the price list. Send the lens to me. I will fix it. You will never have to use such a terrible lens again. 😀

But seriously, folks. What's not to like about this lens?

 

[rhogg]

..but you can see the bull's dead!

 

[jano]

I'm not sure, either, what others find wrong with the lens. It's really quite wonderful 🙂

 

[Issy]

No personal experience, but...

No personal experience, but...

...I thought I've read a couple of times that users did not feel it was up to par with it's 28 or 40 counterparts (in sharpness).

Socke, what do you think?

I do like the 35mm FOV for a walk-about lens.

 

[Socke]

I've used it for about half of my shots in Madrid in April, mostly stopped down to f8. Only a few shots fully open and then I had to use shutterspeeds well beyond tack sharp pictures.
When I'm back home I'll make a crop from the price list, projected it is very sharp for a handheld shot.

As allways I had my tripod in my car and my car was some 1000 miles up north 🙂

 

[Socke]

Oh, I forgot.


The MTF data is not as good as those from the 28 or 45, but I think this makes no difference in handheld shots in typical shooting situations.

What I got from my slides is limited by my scanner, projected there is much more in them then what I can get out with 2720 dpi. Even with Elitechrome400 which I shot for the first time then.

 

[jano]

...I thought I've read a couple of times that users did not feel it was up to par with it's 28 or 40 counterparts (in sharpness).

On paper it's like that, but in practice, I've found it doesn't make a difference. 😛 These here done with the G2 in almost no light with the 35 (family photos, beware):
http://jano.smugmug.com/gallery/1064247

I wonder if this theory vs practice applies to that zoom lens they have as well? Been thinking about getting it, swapping around lenses is a pain in the arse! 🙂

 

[Socke]

So here's a crop from the sign.

Not bad for a handheld shot IMHO

 

[Trius]

So here's a crop from the sign.

Not bad for a handheld shot IMHO

What did you order? Any recommendations? I'm hungry and thirsty!

 

[Socke]

Tapas with Jamon Iberico and Chorizo, and a beer 🙂

 

[Trius]

Sweet! Chorizo knocks me out.

 

[rich815]

This lens is by no means bad it just is not a stellar performer when compared to the 28 or 45. The latter two completely blow my socks off in terms of contrast, sharpness and "3-D" look. The 35, while no slouch, is nothing special or over the top. Good, sharp results, but nothing that thrills me as the other two do.

 

[jaap]

The planar 35mm is a wonderfull beaty. Wide open it's a bit soft (more thean the 45mm planar). But this is stil one of the best 35mm. It's very very sharp and high contrast at F 4.0 !!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!
However the distagon 35mm f1.4 is better at f2.0 So if i need f2.0 i take my distagon ;->.
So socke enjoy your planar 35mm at least i do !

 

[Socke]

Jaap, I think so too, perfect "f8 and be there" photojournalism/streetshooting lens.

 

[jaap]

I've never shot with it at f8.0 to be honest !
I use it most often between f 2.8 and 5.6 and i like it a lot

 

[rich815]

Good you like it so much. Of course each of us has our favorites as to what we want out of our lenses. Out of curiousity, do you own or have you used the 45/2 G-Planar or 28/2.8 G-Biogon?

The planar 35mm is a wonderfull beaty. Wide open it's a bit soft (more thean the 45mm planar). But this is stil one of the best 35mm. It's very very sharp and high contrast at F 4.0 !!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!
However the distagon 35mm f1.4 is better at f2.0 So if i need f2.0 i take my distagon ;->.
So socke enjoy your planar 35mm at least i do !

 

[Socke]

Rich, I have the 28, 35, 45 and 90. Got the 35 much later since 45 was often too narrow and 28 too wide for me. So I changed lenses a lot and bought a second body to avoid frequent lens changing. Which had the negative effect that now I usualy had different films in them 🙂

When a 35 turned up for a sensible price I got it and I have to say that it's my most used lens now. One reason is the perfect, for me that is, compromise between wide and normal and it is a good performer, much better than what the labs make from my negs and what I can get from my scanner.

It may not be stellar, but it outperforms everything else I have in this field of view, may be with the excpetion of the SLR Distagon 35/2.8.

 

[rich815]

It may not be stellar, but it outperforms everything else I have in this field of view, may be with the excpetion of the SLR Distagon 35/2.8.

Ah, there's MY problem. I have and use the 35/2.8 Distagon PC. AMAZING lens! ;-)

Richard

 

[Socke]

I've heard a lot about the PC but I've never gotten my hands on one. Must be realy impressive.