cmogi10
Bodhisattva
So I have money for either a nokton 40 or a skopar 35 and I just can't decide which one I should get. My only rangefinder lenses are 50's so I need a wider angle.
What is everyone here's opinion on these lenses?
What is everyone here's opinion on these lenses?
Last edited:
Stephanie Brim
Mental Experimental.
I like a 35/50 combo for walking around.
fishtek
Don
Depends a bit on which camera you're gonna put it on.....do you care about the frame lines?
Marc-A.
I Shoot Film
Stephanie Brim said:
Bonjour,
I like it too. That's why, last week, I ordered a 35/2.5 from Stephen Gandy, and it should arrive today, in a few hours
The Nokton 40 seems to be a great performer, but I couldn't use it (I need the frame).
Best,
Marc
cmogi10
Bodhisattva
I don't absolutely need the framline, and for a while I wanted to the 35 nokton, and I still kind of do it's just more expensive and huge!
rxmd
May contain traces of nut
Why not get a used Canon 35/2 (or even a 35/1.5) instead? The former used to cost around $300, you get the wide angle and some extra speed.
cmogi10
Bodhisattva
Hm...I have a canon 50 right now and it's good.
I guess part of me just wanted something different.
I guess part of me just wanted something different.
ferider
Veteran
Since you have an M4-P and 50s, get a 28/1.9.
Cheers,
Roland.
Cheers,
Roland.
cmogi10
Bodhisattva
I was looking at that lens as well, I kind of wanted something smaller. I will take a second look at the 28 though.
Bosk
Make photos, not war.
Both lenses are no slouch, if it were me I would pick the focal length I was most comfortable with and not look back.
ferider
Veteran
cmogi10 said:
I would be the last one not to recommend the 40 Nokton. I have 3
Great, great lens.
But 40 is a bit too close to 50. 50 + 28 is a great combo though,
in particular on the M4P.
If the Ultron is too big, the 28/3.5 Color Skopar is a great lens. Similar
color rendition than the 35/2.5. Here it is on my "Anaconda":
If f3.5 is too slow, there are several alternatives for 28/2.8, the M-Rokkor
probably being the best bang for the buck; KEH has several ones with clean
coating at the moment.
Remember that when going from 50 to 28 you gain 1.5 stops in hand-holding
capability due to the wider angle.
Best,
Roland.
Last edited:
cmogi10
Bodhisattva
At this point I'm almost tempted just to save up and get the 28 1.9 and the Skopar.
There are a couple 35 summicrons on KEH, but for the price I could get a 28 and a 35 Voightander glass. As much as I would love to have more Leica glass it just doesn't seem worth it a this point.
There are a couple 35 summicrons on KEH, but for the price I could get a 28 and a 35 Voightander glass. As much as I would love to have more Leica glass it just doesn't seem worth it a this point.
ferider
Veteran
Here is the one I meant:
Cheaper than Leitz glass.
But honestly: get the 28 Ultron and don't look back. It's smaller than
it looks without hood. Next to the 40/1.4, IMHO, the best CV lens.
Roland.
Cheaper than Leitz glass.
But honestly: get the 28 Ultron and don't look back. It's smaller than
it looks without hood. Next to the 40/1.4, IMHO, the best CV lens.
Roland.
cmogi10
Bodhisattva
Do you think the Summicrons on KEH are worth the price of a 28 and a 35? is it that much better? I just don't want to regret not getting the leica glass in the long run.
ferider
Veteran
I don't know about the 28/2. Too much money for a lens for me - I would
be afraid to use it.
I do use the 35/2 Summicron v3 (got mine like new in the box for US 700).
I like it for its compactness and close focus, mostly - its very small.
And I believe you get more lens for the money with the
v3, since the v4 has achieved such a cult status. Also, the 35/2 v3
has only 6 elements which I personally believe makes it more flare resistant.
At f2 it does behave similarly than the 40/2 CLE M-Rokkor and the
CV 40/1.4. Here you can see what I mean by flare resistance:
BTW, the Canon 35/2 and the UC Hexanon 35/2 (available on ebay
new for US 899) behave very similarly, since they share the basic design.
I should have asked before: what 50mm do you use ?
The 35/2 works very well together with a contrasty sharp 50 (I use
it in the same kit as a Canon 50/1.4 - similar behavior to the Nokton 50/1.5).
If you use either Canon 50/1.4 or 1.8 it is a great match.
Best,
Roland.
be afraid to use it.
I do use the 35/2 Summicron v3 (got mine like new in the box for US 700).
I like it for its compactness and close focus, mostly - its very small.
And I believe you get more lens for the money with the
v3, since the v4 has achieved such a cult status. Also, the 35/2 v3
has only 6 elements which I personally believe makes it more flare resistant.
At f2 it does behave similarly than the 40/2 CLE M-Rokkor and the
CV 40/1.4. Here you can see what I mean by flare resistance:
BTW, the Canon 35/2 and the UC Hexanon 35/2 (available on ebay
new for US 899) behave very similarly, since they share the basic design.
I should have asked before: what 50mm do you use ?
The 35/2 works very well together with a contrasty sharp 50 (I use
it in the same kit as a Canon 50/1.4 - similar behavior to the Nokton 50/1.5).
If you use either Canon 50/1.4 or 1.8 it is a great match.
Best,
Roland.
Last edited:
cmogi10
Bodhisattva
I use a summicron 50/2 and a Canon 50/1.8
ferider
Veteran
Both will match Canon 35/2, UC Hexanon 35/2 or 35/2 Summicron
very well.
Best,
Roland.
very well.
Best,
Roland.
ferider
Veteran
See for instance 150115429798 on ebay.
Roland.
Roland.
haagen_dazs
Well-known
Hey Roland
How did you get the anaconda skin?
It looks superb!
How did you get the anaconda skin?
It looks superb!
ferider
Veteran
haagen_dazs said:Hey Roland
How did you get the anaconda skin?
It looks superb!
It came with the camera, Mark. Replaced it with black lizard last week,
looks much better, IMO.
I think you can get it from cameraleather.
Everybody and their grandmother asked me about it (when shooting) ...
Cheers,
Roland.