M8 and another 35mm Thread

[jpmac55]

There's enough information on 35mm lens options out there to make your head spin. From Voigtlander's line up of 35's to Zeiss to Leica. Of course then you need to hone in on before and after asch, version 3 or version 4? Some have mounting issues on M8's, some need coding while others just need a hood.

Now that I posted this much, we can fill on the blanks on almost any lens length option. 🙂

Let's keep this focused on 35mm though. What are you using on your M8? Would you buy that lens again?

Thanks!

 

[sepiareverb]

Just getting started with the M8, out with the 35/2.0 ASPH the other day. No IR filter yet, but I'm getting a feel for the set-up. I wouldn't swap my 35 for any other 35- film or digital.

 

[DC1030]

If i only had to choose one 35, it would be the Nokton 1.2/35. Very sharp at all apertures and a very special look wide open. But very heavy and big.
Best alround lens in my setup: 2.0/35 pre asph, focuses to 0.7 meters, very small and very good quality.
Very special: 1.4/35 pre asph, very anoying is the fact that the filter is screwed in the sunshade. so it gets too big for the pocket.

 

[cam]

Very special: 1.4/35 pre asph, very anoying is the fact that the filter is screwed in the sunshade. so it gets too big for the pocket.

i bought one of these used and the lens was all tricked up with additional focusing levers, etc. best of all, the gentleman also seems to have put in a custom thread so that the filter screws directly into the lens. perhaps you can check to see if anyone can do this for you? (i've never used a hood and rarely run into a problem.)

 

[Tom Niblick]

Yes. In a heartbeat. 35/2 Summicron IV.

 

[kipkeston]

35/2 summicron IV here. Love everything about it except at f/2. There I have my doubts. But I'd buy it again.

 

[jpmac55]

Voigtlander Nokton 35mm f/1.4???

Voigtlander Nokton 35mm f/1.4???

I wonder how many M8 users have the Voigtlander Nokton 35mm f/1.4? This CV model has been mostly bashed but I have to think a few well intended opinions resulted in many of us shying away from it. It's affordable, small and light yet few appear to talk about their copy.

I'd like at least one lens for low light shots. I have a 28mm/2.5 and a 50mm/2.0 so thought a 35 was in order. Of course I've read many 'fast lenses' are producing nothing good until they get past 2F and beyond so go figure.

 

[cam]

Of course I've read many 'fast lenses' are producing nothing good until they get past 2F and beyond so go figure.

can't speak for the CV, but i have the 35 pre-asph Lux and use it wide open all the time. it's an astounding lens at f/1.4.

 

[kully]

For me it's the CV35/1.2 - although I need to get it modified so it can focus to infinity. I'm using the 40/1.4 at the moment and the M8 really shows up its faults (softness wide open) whereas I never really cared with film.

I say faults, but they're nothing I cannot live with.

 

[noimmunity]

Because of the M8s relatively stunted high ISO capability, there are times when you will definitely want the fastest lens you can possibly get. If you can live with the size and the weight, there is probably nothing better than the CV 35/1.2 . It has a rendering with great character. I've found that I sometimes prefer a smaller, lighter package so I picked up the CV 35/1.4 in addition (after having got rid of other 35s that I had), but I only just got it so I cannot really comment. There have been plenty of defenders singing praise of this lens here on RFF, most of them film users, some also using the M8. The 35/1.4, like many lenses, will show some focus shift on the M8 at mid-apertures. The 35/1,2 does not. You'll live.
Fast lenses not producing anything good until stopped down sounds like one of those statements that is true and myth at the same time. In ultimate terms it may be true, but when you consider the conditions in which you may be likely to use full aperture for light-gathering purposes and not for DOF effect, the low shutter speeds and hand held camera are going to make ultimate sharpness a moot question. The softness and coma that some lenses exhibit wide open is often what especially attracts people, especially in older Leica lenses.
Think of the CV 35/1.4 as an updated modern pre-asph summilux. It has, I understand, the same design. But because it is modern, there are people who wil find it has less character--"character" being what comes from all kinds of aberrations. The bokeh can be a bit vexed wide open, but it depends on what you shoot.
If you look around however you will see that there is really nothing like it (just as there is nothing like the 35/1.2, either). Small, fast, inexpensive, flare-resistant, readily available 35 with a classic rendering slightly stopped down. What's not to like?

 

[jpmac55]

Well, Jon, you're one person who appreciates my fondness for lightweight gear. That said, the CV 35/1.2 will likely be used mainly at home or for a special event which suggests I won't be carrying it all that often. When I think about some of the dSLR lenses I have or owned, the CV 35/1.2 is like a runt.

I know the upcoming, revised CV 15mm is on my wish list so am on the fence with the 35mm.

 

[boy_lah]

Let me say the answer to your Q is: 'it depends'. Depends on what you shoot and depends on what you like/value. So without knowing more about your preferences it is difficult to say what is best. I would however assume given you're asking this question then you're new to RF and perhaps have not developed a preference/taste yet. This being the case, I will share my personal journey having started using RF not too long ago.

I initially got the CV 35/1.2 thinking i needed the speed. Though it was lovely, as Jon and others have commented, as my first/only 35, it was not to be. Too big/heavy for everyday. Also if i needed the extra speed did not make that much of a difference. Some will disagree I'm sure.

I then got CV 35/1.4 which after using the 1.2 I was in love with the size and weight. Fully open, the pix often came back 'fuzzy' and the bokeh can be 'strange' looking. At 2.8, it's sharp and fantastic. I now use it from 2.8 up and it has plenty of character but I tend to use it with my film M - it just 'works'.

I now have the Leica cron IV. This is most 'sharp enough' for me @ f2 and is tiny. It works well on the m8 and the colour is most rich and pleasing for me. So, this is my 35 on the m8.

My conclusion? I value size/weight most. I shoot wide open often but iso640 @ f2 and 1/15 is fine for most of my needs. I'm don't worry about bokeh and I don't shoot landscapes nor architectures. I shoot mostly colour on the m8.

If you've not developed your taste/preference, then you may just have to 'try and see'.

Some pix...more on Flickr - all appropriately tagged with the lens used.

Leica Summicron IV + m8

CV 1.2 + M7

CV 1.4 + m8

CV 1.4 + M7

 

[jpmac55]

boy lah - thanks for your advice and posting some of your photo's. I think you'd get good results with a cracked lens. I fall on the side of needing all the help I can get my hands on ;-)

I just happen to know someone who maybe selling his Leica cron IV.

 

[miklosphoto]

I never had anything but Leica glass on my M6, M7, M8. My standard lens on the M8 is the 35/2. I am happy with it, small, sharp. I don't know anything about the CVs.

 

[baycrest]

I enjoy using the Zeiss Biogon because of its small size and ease of use. Its easy to focus bang on 99% of the time. Its rather high on the contrast issue.

I then thought I would "save" some money and avoid the Lux by picking up the CV 35 f/1.2, which is a great lens (good bokeh) albeit big and heavy when compared to Zeiss or Leica. As others have said its very sharp and easy to focus as well.

A year later, I got bit by the Lux bug, and love the colours and lower contrast and bokeh. I do find it a tad more difficult to focus than either the Zeiss or CV.

For sheer ease of use the Zeiss is #1 IMHO
For best drawing and colour rendition and lower contrast, go for the Lux.
The the best of both worlds, but comes at a steep price on size and weight, go for the CV.

Rob

 

[kipkeston]

Leica Summicron IV + m8

These are really the tones I see when I scan tri-x made with this lens. how are you processing your b/ws? 😀

 

[eleskin]

I have thought about getting the Nokton 35mm f1.2 as a much cheaper Noctilux alternative. What I would like to see are some Pics of it used on the Leica m8. I would like to see a full image and zoomed in crop to show various details in the center of the frame, and at the edge of the frame, wide open at f1.2, and at the other f stops. I have hesitated getting one in that I feel I have to try it first on my M8, only I have to drive to NY to B&H to do so (I live in Allentown PA). Maybe if there are some really good pics that I can evaluate I can save myself a trip.

 

[cam]

one of the members here, yanidel, has quite a few M8 shots with the 35/1.2 on his blog and i know he prefers to shoot it wide open.

 

[boy_lah]

boy lah - thanks for your advice and posting some of your photo's. I think you'd get good results with a cracked lens. I fall on the side of needing all the help I can get my hands on ;-)

I just happen to know someone who maybe selling his Leica cron IV.

Many thanks. All compliments welcomed. 😱

If you can afford it, find a good deal, you can't really go wrong with a cron IV. Besides, when i started out (15months ago) it was nice to own a leica lens.


Have you made a decision?

 

[boy_lah]

These are really the tones I see when I scan tri-x made with this lens. how are you processing your b/ws? 😀

First one is done using LR2 'manually'. What I normally do is convert a 'flat' photo from RAW then tweak the curve. I think the 'look' had a lot to do with the light from that day and my post processing.

The second pix was done using TMAX or TRIX 'emulation' using Nik's BW software.

Hope this helps.