Gid
Well-known
I have a RD-1 plus CV 28 1.9, CV 35 1.7, CV 50 1.5, CV 75 2.5 and Summarit 50 1.5 (impulse buy). I mostly use the 28 and the 35. Generally I take only one lens when I go out with the camera and work within the constraints of that lens' field of view. I shoot whatever is interesting - sometimes landscape, sometimes architecture, sometimes street candids. I don't shoot indiscriminately just because its digital. I have images I am happy with from all of the lenses. I know the equipment doesn't make the photographer - just look at some of the old Magnum shots. I've read all of the reviews I can on CV, Leica and Zeiss (a bit thin on the ground) lenses and I know the CVs are well regarded especially at their price point. However, its Xmas, its annual bonus time and I like shiny things, hence the point of this thread.
I am considering "upgrading" my lenses. I've looked at either the 25 Biogon and possibly the 35 Biogon against the 28 F2 Summicron Asph or 35 F2 Summicron Asph. Price wise I can get both Zeiss lenses for about £1360 (new with shades) or save some money and buy just the one. I would have to pay £1500 for a new Summicron 28 or £1100 for a new 35 F2 Summicron Asph. I have seen a mint second hand 35 F2 asph for £850. I'm not keen on the 35 1.4 Asph as the reviews seem doubtful (not bad, but not as good as they should be considering the price) - at least compared to some others. I have no brand allegiance, but if I'm going to buy I want what is considered to be the best in the hope that I won't keep getting GAS. Other factors to consider are size/weight - the smaller the better - and I'll probably just keep the one lens on the camera for 95% of the time.
So help me spend or save some money. I know the most expensive lens won't make me a better photographer, but it will almost certainly make me get out more with the camera. The benefit of your experience and any alternatives will be greatly appreciated.
Best regards
Gid
I am considering "upgrading" my lenses. I've looked at either the 25 Biogon and possibly the 35 Biogon against the 28 F2 Summicron Asph or 35 F2 Summicron Asph. Price wise I can get both Zeiss lenses for about £1360 (new with shades) or save some money and buy just the one. I would have to pay £1500 for a new Summicron 28 or £1100 for a new 35 F2 Summicron Asph. I have seen a mint second hand 35 F2 asph for £850. I'm not keen on the 35 1.4 Asph as the reviews seem doubtful (not bad, but not as good as they should be considering the price) - at least compared to some others. I have no brand allegiance, but if I'm going to buy I want what is considered to be the best in the hope that I won't keep getting GAS. Other factors to consider are size/weight - the smaller the better - and I'll probably just keep the one lens on the camera for 95% of the time.
So help me spend or save some money. I know the most expensive lens won't make me a better photographer, but it will almost certainly make me get out more with the camera. The benefit of your experience and any alternatives will be greatly appreciated.
Best regards
Gid