haagen_dazs
Well-known
ferider said: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.
coz it looks great! at least in the product shots
what did you do with the anaconda skin?
E
Edward Felcher
Guest
Everybody hear's got difrent opinin in 35mm lense so better for u if U get 28mM f2.8 old Cannon, it;s ver sharp lense, yo. Nice for U.
cmogi10
Bodhisattva
everyone's offered some great opinions, I think I'm going to end up saving and getting the 28 and the 35. I know these more expensive lenses are better but in my opinion I would rather have 90% of the image and more options until I figure out what I really like. I will report back with my opinions on these lens but if what I've heard is true about the voightlander lenses I won't be disapointed.
mr_phillip
Well-known
I can't resist chipping in here as I use many of the lenses being discussed. All of the advice given above is very sound – I really can't argue with any of it.
The 35mm Skopar is a wonderful little lens with great sharpness, contrast and character (the bokeh is surprisingly nice too). It's tiny and an absolute joy to use. It's my number two 35mm, behind the v3 Summicron (a hugely under-rated lens, which makes it the nearest thing Leitz glass gets to a bargain). Also, being a screw-mount, I get to use it on my Canon P as well, which is a bonus.
The 28mm Ultron is also an absolute gem; one of the real picks in the Voigtlander line-up IMHO. It really isn't nearly as bulky in use as it looks and it blows all but the very latest Leica 28mm optics into the weeds. Wide open it's sharp but with reduced contrast, by f4 the contrast is up and from f5.6 onwards it's a match for even the current Leica 28. It must be one of the best L39 lenses ever made. Seriously.
If you opt to get both I'm sure you won't be disappointed.
The 35mm Skopar is a wonderful little lens with great sharpness, contrast and character (the bokeh is surprisingly nice too). It's tiny and an absolute joy to use. It's my number two 35mm, behind the v3 Summicron (a hugely under-rated lens, which makes it the nearest thing Leitz glass gets to a bargain). Also, being a screw-mount, I get to use it on my Canon P as well, which is a bonus.
The 28mm Ultron is also an absolute gem; one of the real picks in the Voigtlander line-up IMHO. It really isn't nearly as bulky in use as it looks and it blows all but the very latest Leica 28mm optics into the weeds. Wide open it's sharp but with reduced contrast, by f4 the contrast is up and from f5.6 onwards it's a match for even the current Leica 28. It must be one of the best L39 lenses ever made. Seriously.
If you opt to get both I'm sure you won't be disappointed.
cmogi10
Bodhisattva
*Groan*
Now I want it all...
and a M8
Now I want it all...
and a M8
thomasw_
Well-known
If you are going to get a 28 and 35, and you are NOT concerned about the extra speed past f2, then I will chime in here and recommend the ZM 28/2.8 and 35/2. Both biogons are very fine performers, and currently can be obtained for not much more than VC lenses. Again, only get the biogons if speed is NOT a factor for you.
That said, speed matters to me with my 35 FL shots, but not my 28mm FL shots. I urge you to get the VC 35/1.2 if you are going to use the lens to shoot in low light regularly; it is my favourite 35 FL lens and is so versatile: you will get used to the size/weight of it. You seem very keen on the VC 28/1.9, and so I infer speed matters? Thus I strongly urge you to get the VC 35/1.2, too: it is such a smashing performer.
That said, speed matters to me with my 35 FL shots, but not my 28mm FL shots. I urge you to get the VC 35/1.2 if you are going to use the lens to shoot in low light regularly; it is my favourite 35 FL lens and is so versatile: you will get used to the size/weight of it. You seem very keen on the VC 28/1.9, and so I infer speed matters? Thus I strongly urge you to get the VC 35/1.2, too: it is such a smashing performer.
thefsb
Established
cmogi10 said:
fine lenses for distinct applications.
the 1.4 is a specialist lens for people who need speed. but you pay for speed in several ways: cost, size, weight, performance.
the 2.5 is small, light, lovely, unobtrusive (so more like an rf lens than an slr lens), a cracking performer. but not fast.
there's a passage in london, stone and upton explaining why it's a bit silly to buy fast glass if you don't really need it. they have a point. but if you want it then you want it even if your photography doesn't need it.
would be interesting to compare transfer functions of these two. does anyone have the data?
O
onespeed
Guest
which lens??
which lens??
I like the skopar and the ultron, for the money a used skopar can't be beat
Robert
which lens??
I like the skopar and the ultron, for the money a used skopar can't be beat
Robert
cmogi10
Bodhisattva
Well
Since I started this thread I got a CV 35 Nokton, a 50 Nokton, and the 35 Skopar Pan.
Also a Leica 90mm Elmarit and a 135mm Hektor
And a coded 28mm Elmarit
Thanks for everyones advice!
Since I started this thread I got a CV 35 Nokton, a 50 Nokton, and the 35 Skopar Pan.
Also a Leica 90mm Elmarit and a 135mm Hektor
And a coded 28mm Elmarit
Thanks for everyones advice!
Geez disease; that's what overexposure to RFF is known to do!
gavinlg
Veteran
Carl, Heres a pic from the CV 35 f2.5 PII you bought from me on a trip to NY... I love the firefighters and their trucks over there!
This neg was incredibly sharp.
Neopan 1600 @ 800 etc
Probably can't see it in there but man was I impressed!
This neg was incredibly sharp.
Neopan 1600 @ 800 etc
Probably can't see it in there but man was I impressed!