Ordered my m2, but which lens? Confusion...

[adamspeck.com]

Hey, I'm pretty new to this forum- I've been reading for ages, but this is my first post... Picking which camera i wanted was easy- the m2 has everything i need, nice clear viewfinder, no meter to get in the way,and i think its one of the sleekest camera designs ever, so no problems with that... Its on its way as I type this- should be here in three or so days... Which lens to go for however, is another matter...

I've been researching lenses for the past 2 weeks, and i have to say, I'm more confused than ever...Im just after one right now (overall plan- 35mm f1.4 for low light, 50mm f2 for general everyday stuff), and my budget is up to £500 ($1000)... Wanted to go for a fast 35mm, and the nocton 1.4 looked perfect- did a bit of research, and some of the pictures that looked nice, but the further i read the more this focus shift thing cropped up...Ok, so i had a look on ebay, but the all the 1.4 leica lenses go for silly money....At this point i should state that I'm not after ultimate sharpness, while the 35mm 1.4 asph looks lovely, if i need that level of sharp I'd use my hassy system...What I'm after is a lens with nice tonal transitions, I'm not a boken freak, but don't want the oof area to be distracting, and vignette is no problem- i do this in the darkroom anyway...

So from my above ramblings can someone please point me in the direction of a 35mm lens that has the characteristics described above... Im not sure if such a lens even exists, at this point id probably consider an f2, so please help me decide- after-all if my m2 arrives and I'm still none the wiser i wont have any way to burn film with it...

Cheers...
Adam...

 

[Pherdinand]

Adam- how about a 40/1.4 nokton? C'mon, 5 mm is not that much🙂

 

[ferider]

Get a 35/1.7 Ultron. You won't be disappointed.

 

[Steve Bellayr]

NO. 1 option 35mm Summicron
After thant I'd Look at the Zeiss Biogons & CVs (in chrome) 35mm.
All depends on price & availability.
Do you really need 1.4? that makes the lens large & heavy. for some it defeats the purpose of the rangefinder.

 

[funkaoshi]

Maybe look at the CV 35mm f/1.7, if you aren't impressed with the CV 35 f/1.4. I'm not exactly sure how big an issue this focus shift thing actually is. Many people use them without complaint as far as I can tell. The CV 35mm f/2.5 is also a great lens. It's very small and takes nice enough photos. For 50mm i'd get one of the M-Hexanon 50s that are on sale right now in the classifieds.

 

[Athos6]

Get a 35/1.7 Ultron. You won't be disappointed.

+1 on the Ultron, I got it, as well as the 50mm f1.5 Nocton, both + some accessories and you would have money left over.

Or

Get one lens the 35mm 1.2 Nocton and use it for everything 🙂

 

[BigSteveG]

F2 is actually quite usable in low light. The lens should be smaller and easier to handle. When I first started, I felt the fastest lens was need for low light. Not so, I now believe. A combination of push processing and shooting technique can compensate for a 1/2 stop. Look at the Konica-Minolta UC 35 Hexanon. It's a real sweetheart of a lens.
p.s.-wanna buy a 35 'lux asph? I've learned to work w/ 2.0.....LOL

 

[Tom A]

I have the 35f1,4 Nokton and the so called focus problem is not that big - remember that all lenses have some back focus issues at certain apertures. The Nokton is very sharp wide open - and with a fast lens, that is the critical part. It is not large and quite comfortable on a M2 (mine has been on one since I got it -a 100+ films ago!). I tend to shoot either wide-open in gloomy light or use it in "normal light" and so far I have had no problem with it what so ever!
For what you spend on 35f1.4 with your budget, you could add either the 50f1.5 Nokton and the required adapter and have a low-light kit that would work well for regular light too, or you could try to find the 50f2.5 Color Skopar as a compact 50mm lens. Very sharp and small. You could also go Leica here and pick up a Elmar 50mm f2.8 - the first version from the 60's. Compact and very smooth tones.
However, I would recommend the Nokton 35/1,4 and stick with it for a while and pick up the 2nd lens later. You might find that you want something longer to complement the 35, maybe even a 90mm. Or you might simply say - this is all I need!
The idea is to keep it small and compact (and light!).

 

[thomasw_]

I agree with Tom in keeping it small and light with the M2. The 3,5cm focal length is perfect on the M2 in my view; but I would suggest going with an older summicron or even the summaron 35/2,8 (the M2/4 version, a wonderful all-round lens), as they have such a classic look. I think you will need to look at the m-mount group on flickr, though, so that you can see different image samples.

 

[Mike Richards]

Another vote for the classic 35mm f2.8 Summaron. It makes a very sweet package with my M2. Good handling and focusing -- like it was designed for the M2 (perhaps it was).

 

[Keith]

Maybe just maybe ... you should consider the 1.2 Nokton. I know everyone says it's big which it is but the M2 is hardly a pocket camera and with it's viewfinder magnification really suits this lens. I find a camera round the neck on a strap is no more annoying with a lens this size than than say ... my 35mm Hexanon which is average.

With your predicted budget of $1000.00 maximim this lens cannot be beaten in any area ... it's only fault is it's size and it has never bothered me at all to be honest and if you're into to available (read low) light photography, this lens has no peers and is absolute heaven! 🙂

 

[Tom A]

The only problem with the 35f2.8 Summaron is as an only lens, it is limiting with the speed. It is a great lens and in many ways superior to the 35f2 of the same era. It is particularly good at close up. As a "starter" lens it is a bit on the expensive side for the speed and they are all 40+ years old and if pristine - expensive and if "well seasoned" prone to scrtaches and coating problem.
The 35f1.2 is unique - fastest 35 ever for a Rf and a very good lens - but it is BIG and for a walk on the sunny side - its overkill. However if your intentions is to live the rest of your life in dingy bars and pubs (not a criticisms - more like wishful thinking) it is perfect.
Lenses like the 35f1.4 VC/35f1.7 VC and the 35f2.3 II allows a much larger initial film budget too.
The 40mm f1.4 is another good choice as it is well priced and very good. It can substitute for a 35 or a 50 with some footwork.
I restate my opinion - in the beginning, just get one lens and a lot of film instead.

 

[Keith]

I forgot to mention the 35mm f2 Hexanon KM ... great lens and can be had for around five to six hundred dollars second hand. Incredible build quality and as good a 35mm lens as near anything out there!
🙂

 

[former member]

The v3 Summicron, or "Type 2 Rigid" is a good match for the M2 as it can close-focus to 0.7m. It, and the 35/2.8 Summaron will fit well within your budget.

 

[adamspeck.com]

Wow! Just back from band practice, and i thought id check to see if anyone had replied... 13 posts! This is without a doubt the most helpful, useful forum I've ever come across...Some good advice form all of you...

I looked at the other voigtlander lenses- and the reason the 1.4 appealed to me is the size as well as the speed...the 1.2 looks nice, but its just too big- I'm trying to make this kinda compact...the 1.7 looks a bit big, and the 2.5 is a bit slow, so thats them out...The summicron leica however, theres an interesting idea-right now im still swithering between that and the nokton 1.4...

Film budget is not really an issue- I've actually been shooting film for about 5 years now, and have built up a stock pile of several hundred assorted rolls...I use to shoot low light (as well a all other tyes of light) with a nikon fm2, a nikkor 28mm f2, and a nikkor 50mm f1.2...Sold all that though-thought i could get by with a d200 and a couple of 2.8 zooms/fast primes...my images just didn't have that tactile feel i got from fiber prints-and i missed hp5 to much...I always wanted to crop the 28mm which is why I'm after a 35 and a 50 instead this time (and why i think I'll rule out the 40mm vm)...

Tom- you actually have the lens, which is great because id like to know a little more if possible- is the focus thing digital, or does it happen on film too? I read the Roger Hicks article about the 50mm zeiss sonnar- does the back focus happen in the same way (the dof covers you, and in effect you just get more in focus behind the subject, and not alot in front), or do you have to compensate somewhat...I probably will rarely shoot any smaller apatures than f2.8, ocasionally f5.6 (maybe one in ten), but other than that f1.4 or f2 most of the time...

Also, the zeiss 35mm f2 has yet to be mentioned- looking about, its roughly the same as what id pay for a 35mm summicron- how do they compare?

Right, enough rambling- ill post a couple of my photos below to give you guys an idea of what I'm after- i have alot more at my website- www.adamspeck.com if anyone is interested...Once again, thank you all who responded, and I'm still most interested in what you've all got to say, so keep em coming...

Cheers...
Adam...

 

[adamspeck.com]

Ok heres a couple of my pics taken with my previously mentioned setup...Also ment to say- right now I'm happy with just one lens, but i will add a 50 at some point later on...

Probably should get some sleep- its 1.30am here, and im up at 7...Gahh... Some flickr checking before i got to bed cant hurt tho...As i said before- really appreciate all the replies...

Cheers again...
Adam...

 

[Tom A]

Adam, looking at your shots I think that a 1,4 is almost a requirement. Even with pushed film to 800/1600 "back stage" stuff usually requires high speed lenses and film!
The fact that you are shooting mostly close and tight - the back focus on the 35/1,4 does not really come into play until between f2-f2.8 and then you have a "nose-width" shift towards you. Once you get used to a lens and have learned its foibles - you tend to compensate.
Virtually all fast lenses have back focus at some point. The one with the "mostest" is in my opinion the 75f1,4 Summilux, closely followed by the Noctilux and then the C-Sonnar 50f1.5 and the Asph Summilux and right around in there you have the 35f1.4 VC.
What continues to amaze me with the VC 35/1,4 is how sharp and tight it is @1,4!
Oh, if this style of shooting (the three samples) is your mainstay -the Summaron is NOT fast enough! Even a Summicron @f2 would be problematic. It is not that one cant handhold the camera, particularly a M2 at very slow speeds - with the 35 you can get away with 1/8 or even 1/4 sec sometimes. It is that you need the 1/30 or 1/60 for the people in the shot to stay sharp, not just as motion blur. At some time in future you will need the 35f1.2 though.

 

[adamspeck.com]

Thanks for that Tom...at this stage I'm thinking im gonna go with the nokton 35mm 1.4, but i get the feeling I'll eventually end up with a 35mm summicron as well...Unless of course I find a 35mm summicron for a song, dont think thats going to happen tho... Camera should arrive tommorrow- probably order the lens tommorow too- that means i can do a coupe of rolls on fri, which is my next day off... 🙂

I don't want to go on about this focus thing, but id like to know how its going to play out...You say at f 2-2.8 it is focused about an inch closer to me- does that mean i will be covered by the dof? If i for example frame up a portrait at about 1m and focus on the eyes, will they be sharp from the dof, or will the nose be sharp, with the eyes somewhat lacking? And as i stop the lens down does the focus shift increase? And is the increased dof going to cover it at say f5.6-f11, or will i still need to compensate...

And are focus shifts commont to lenses starting with f2, or is it really just the f1.4's? What about the summicron 35mm, or the zeiss 35mm biogon?

Thanks again-so excited about my m2- already got my locations and film sorted- i cant wait...

Cheers...
Adam...

 

[Tom A]

Adam. there might be sample variations between lenses (any lenses) and your best bet is to enlist a patint friend for a session. Put the camera on a tripod and shoot portrait style stuff and rack through all the apertures, without changing focus between resets. I have two of the 35f1.4's - both SC's and I have not really found a problem shooting with either one. The second one I have only had for a week so I really have not had a chance to try it for focus shift. As for the shift being apperant at f-stops beyond f4 - I cant see any and it could be that the DOF takes care of it or there is none.
I still think that part of the problem is with digital versus film. Digital is brutal (to quote a friend with a M8) when it comes to showing up lenses and any shortcomings.
The Summicrons are nice, both the version III and IV, but they are a bit "soft" wide open. The ASPH Summicron is probably the one that appears the sharpest at f2, though I suspect that it has more to do with contrast than with pure resolution. The Zeiss ZM 35/2 Biogon has, at least in my opinion, the best mix of sharpness and contrast of the f2's. It is smoother than the Asph Summicron and higher resolution than the version III/IV Summicron's. A bit "chunky" as a "walk-about" lens, but top class anyway. However. it is a stop slower than the Nokton 35/1,4 and almost a stop and a half slower than the Nokton 35f1.2 which can be critcial at low light.

 

[adamspeck.com]

Thanks for that tom (and everyone who posted earlier)...really appreciate the help...think I'm gonna to go with the f1.4 nokton for the moment- its cheep (relatively), and its probably as good a lens as any to start with...plus the size is a bonus- and i originally wanted a range finder that would be small- the 1.2 is just a bit big- I'm used to a d200 with a 17-35mm f2.8 which is huge, the nokton 1.4 should be a refreshing change...

Ill shoot alot of film, play about with the lens, and see how i get on...Might even post some pics... 🙂 My m2 will be ariving at work tomorow before 1 oclock- my first leica- can't wait!🙂

Cheers...
Adam...