Stephen G
Well-known
I currently shoot an M8 + 50/1.5 Nokton.
Love the look of the lens in term's of - sharpness, contrast, the qualities of its bokeh, color balance, etc.
Now I am looking at a 25, 28 or 35 lens. Basically looking for an outdoor, daytime shooter. Street photography primarily. I am not completely settled on which focal length that I want.
Options I am considering-
25mm
25/2.8 Zeiss - not a lot of options @ 25mm.. looks good
28mm
28/2.8 Zeiss - decent balance of speed, price, size
28/2.8 Elmarit (though newest may be above budget and old one too large)
28/3.5 VC - great reviews, great size, great price.. flare resistant, but slow and maybe a touch too contrasty
35mm
35/2.5 VC - small, sharp, cheap - read its goot more contrast than zeiss though, maybe to much?
35/2.8 Zeiss - well reviewed, compact size
35/2.0 Zeiss - well reviewed, a little faster
35/2.0 Summicron - might as well mention I guess.. if I am looking @ Zeiss 35's, a used Summicron might drop into my price range.. though unlikely
Not considering
25/4.0 VC - concerned on the corner issues I've read about for M mount one
28/2.0 VC - focus shift, general softness
28/1.9 VC - size, availability, build quality
35/1.2 VC - too big, dont need the speed
35/1.4 VC - had it before, was not quite what I was looking for, don't need the speed
Love the look of the lens in term's of - sharpness, contrast, the qualities of its bokeh, color balance, etc.
Now I am looking at a 25, 28 or 35 lens. Basically looking for an outdoor, daytime shooter. Street photography primarily. I am not completely settled on which focal length that I want.
Options I am considering-
25mm
25/2.8 Zeiss - not a lot of options @ 25mm.. looks good
28mm
28/2.8 Zeiss - decent balance of speed, price, size
28/2.8 Elmarit (though newest may be above budget and old one too large)
28/3.5 VC - great reviews, great size, great price.. flare resistant, but slow and maybe a touch too contrasty
35mm
35/2.5 VC - small, sharp, cheap - read its goot more contrast than zeiss though, maybe to much?
35/2.8 Zeiss - well reviewed, compact size
35/2.0 Zeiss - well reviewed, a little faster
35/2.0 Summicron - might as well mention I guess.. if I am looking @ Zeiss 35's, a used Summicron might drop into my price range.. though unlikely
Not considering
25/4.0 VC - concerned on the corner issues I've read about for M mount one
28/2.0 VC - focus shift, general softness
28/1.9 VC - size, availability, build quality
35/1.2 VC - too big, dont need the speed
35/1.4 VC - had it before, was not quite what I was looking for, don't need the speed
ferider
Veteran
In terms of rendering, the 35/1.7 and 28/1.9 match perfectly. They are both built at least as well as the 50/1.5. And if you don't mind the 50/1.5 size, I am surprised you think the 28/1.9 is too big.
BTW, the 28/1.9 easily outperforms the 28/3.5, at all f stops.
BTW, the 28/1.9 easily outperforms the 28/3.5, at all f stops.
Stephen G
Well-known
ferider-
Thanks for the info.
However.. The 50/1.5 is too big
. That's one of the reasons for having a second lens for me.
I am looking for a wide angle that is compact, and I am willing to sacrifice on speed for that. However I don't want to sacrifice on image quality.
Also after having some adapter issues on the 50/1.5, I am somewhat biased against another screwmount unless I really have no other option.
For proper RF-lens alignment, I worry the adapter just throws a 3rd variable into the mix.
I'm not new to RFs (6+ years of use), but I am willing to spend a bit more (up to $1000, but under $800 would be nice) to get something I will be fully satisfied with.
I've traded in & out of too many compromise lenses. (Not to say the lenses you mentioned are bad, but if your budget went up to $1000 and you didn't care about speed, there are many other options)
Thanks for the info.
However.. The 50/1.5 is too big
. That's one of the reasons for having a second lens for me.I am looking for a wide angle that is compact, and I am willing to sacrifice on speed for that. However I don't want to sacrifice on image quality.
Also after having some adapter issues on the 50/1.5, I am somewhat biased against another screwmount unless I really have no other option.
For proper RF-lens alignment, I worry the adapter just throws a 3rd variable into the mix.
I'm not new to RFs (6+ years of use), but I am willing to spend a bit more (up to $1000, but under $800 would be nice) to get something I will be fully satisfied with.
I've traded in & out of too many compromise lenses. (Not to say the lenses you mentioned are bad, but if your budget went up to $1000 and you didn't care about speed, there are many other options)
porktaco
Well-known
40 summicron
ferider
Veteran
Makes sense. The adapter is a bigger variable than many account for, in particular with wide angles.
Actually, if my budget went up to US 1000, and I was looking for a 28 with similar rendering than your Nokton, I would still be undecided between 28/1.9 and 28/2.8 M-Hexanon. Would pick based on size and speed requirements.
If I was looking for a 35, I would patiently look for a 35/2 M-Hexanon (not the UC). A lens that you don't hear about very often, but a stellar performer. The pre-asph 35 Summicrons get too much credit, IMO, their biggest advantage is size, not optical performance. And the 35/2 ASPH is out of your US 1000 range.
The lenses I mentioned above have high resolution at medium contrast, much like the 50/1.5 Noktons that I tried. I find the Hexanons I tried similar, smooth OOF, sharp, well built, and not too strong in the contrast department. Also, if you want small, you might want to pick a lens that doesn't always need a hood - the Hexanons are like this.
My 2 cents,
Roland.
Actually, if my budget went up to US 1000, and I was looking for a 28 with similar rendering than your Nokton, I would still be undecided between 28/1.9 and 28/2.8 M-Hexanon. Would pick based on size and speed requirements.
If I was looking for a 35, I would patiently look for a 35/2 M-Hexanon (not the UC). A lens that you don't hear about very often, but a stellar performer. The pre-asph 35 Summicrons get too much credit, IMO, their biggest advantage is size, not optical performance. And the 35/2 ASPH is out of your US 1000 range.
The lenses I mentioned above have high resolution at medium contrast, much like the 50/1.5 Noktons that I tried. I find the Hexanons I tried similar, smooth OOF, sharp, well built, and not too strong in the contrast department. Also, if you want small, you might want to pick a lens that doesn't always need a hood - the Hexanons are like this.
My 2 cents,
Roland.
Last edited: