Please advice: Which 35mm on Leica M?

How odd.

No one seems to have mentioned the Zeiss Biogon 35/2.

(ordered mine yesterday :) )

Could be because they're sooo good, that no one sells them off and you can't get them second hand - which puts it out of the price range :)

colin
 
Go For The Summaron

Go For The Summaron

Nice ones can be had for less than the CV, and the Summaron is smaller, better constructed and the image is beautiful, especially in color as it has few elements. CVs look clinical and are devoid of personality or mood.

As far as 'the old timey look' claim that Summarons have that's bunk too. New lenses have multiple coatings and can take advantage of that, but the contrast gained is only on the order of 10%. Summarons don't give that 'wide' look (buildings leaning backwards, eliptical heads, or big noses). The image is naturally flat. Compare that with CVs.

I have newer lenses but still do all my street shooting with the Summaron, it's still my favorite 35. Just like everything else, once a peak is reached in performance improvements are more 'different' than better. What you want is balanced combination of good drawing in low light, flattering to humans, contrast that enables the photographer into shoot back lit subjects with grace, and dead sharp from corner to corner at f4 to f8. Sumarrons have the best bokeh of all Leitz lenses (except for maybe the 135 Elmar). V4 Summicrons come in second to Summarons.

Drawbacks? Speed (but it hasn't been too slow for me yet), they're old (so the pile of good ones is ever diminishing) and there is no UV filtering in their cement.
 
Oh Two said:
Nice ones can be had for less than the CV, and the Summaron is smaller, better constructed and the image is beautiful, especially in color as it has few elements. CVs look clinical and are devoid of personality or mood.

As far as 'the old timey look' claim that Summarons have that's bunk too. New lenses have multiple coatings and can take advantage of that, but the contrast gained is only on the order of 10%. Summarons don't give that 'wide' look (buildings leaning backwards, eliptical heads, or big noses). The image is naturally flat. Compare that with CVs.

I have newer lenses but still do all my street shooting with the Summaron, it's still my favorite 35. Just like everything else, once a peak is reached in performance improvements are more 'different' than better. What you want is balanced combination of good drawing in low light, flattering to humans, contrast that enables the photographer into shoot back lit subjects with grace, and dead sharp from corner to corner at f4 to f8. Sumarrons have the best bokeh of all Leitz lenses (except for maybe the 135 Elmar). V4 Summicrons come in second to Summarons.

Drawbacks? Speed (but it hasn't been too slow for me yet), they're old (so the pile of good ones is ever diminishing) and there is no UV filtering in their cement.
Click to expand...

I've had and used both the 3.5 and 2.8 Summaron, 3.5 Elmar, Canon 35/2, all Summirons and a couple of old Summilux's and have used the CV 35/1.2, 1.7 and 2.5, Zeiss 35/2, and Konica 35/2. At present I have and use the 35/2 v4 Summicron, 40/1.4 MC Nokton and 35/1.4 ASPH. This is over about 45 years of Leica usage.

The 3.5 Elmar and 2.8 Summaron are not really that similar. The 3.5 lenses are really 'older' in their rendition, while the 2.8 Summaron performs more like a slower Summicron, ie, very well in most every respect. This goes for clean glass, of course. The Canon is good, but watch the QC. Many are decentered. The Summaron is still better. The Summicrons, of whatever generation, are hard to beat, and are almost universally satisfying. The v4 is renowned as a 'bokeh king' and it's probably the most desirable of the lenses of f/2 or slower. The Zeiss is nice, but large and not better than the v4 Summicron. The Konica is excellent, and the closest inexpensive alternate to the v4 Summicron. The 40/1.4 CV is rather harsh and not as appealing. The non-ASPH Summilux is almost as nice as the Summicron, but too expensive now, and at f/1.4 is a lesson in coma and astigmatism. Still takes nice photos though. The 35/1.4 ASPH is harsher than the v4 Summicron, but not nearly as bad as the Nokton.

My v4 Summicron is staying, as is my 35/1.4 ASPH. The Nokton will probably go.

For a less expensive lens, go for the Konica if you don't mind the size. If the size is too much and you don't care about the speed as much, go for the Summaron. Both will fit in well with your existing lenses.

Both are likely to be a lot more pleasing in the long run than any of the CV 35's. BTW, the 35/1.2 is as good as the 35/1.4 ASPH at 1.2 as the latter is at 1.4, but at f/2 and slower the ASPH is noticeably better.

Henning
 
The v4 is renowned as a 'bokeh king' and it's probably the most desirable of the lenses of f/2 or slower.
Click to expand...

The trouble is, the "bokeh" doesn't kick in until the lens is stopped down.

I had the Hexanon 35/2 at the same time I owned the V4, and the Konica was plainly superior wide open. If using your largest aperture matters to you, the V4 is highly over-rated. And, thanks to internet-hype, it's highly overpriced, too. If you're a shooter and not a fetishist, there are better values for the money.
 
Haven't had time to react earlier. A lot of post with all good points. Thank you all very much for replying.
Don't want to cut out brands because of brands. I like to keep the things functional, it's just that the feel of a lens is just as functional as speed or sharpnes.

Kevin: this is a beautifull shot you posted. Thank you. Really nice. This Nokton lens is/was on my short list. Some of the others posts made me think. Based upon some of the pictures I have seen I also have the feeling this lens is a bit harsh (the difference between Sc and MC??) If you compare it with your Summicron V4. Can you place the remarks in the harsh direction?

The Hexanon seems to cost quit a bit. Also mr. Puts says it is not so well fitting on M bodies..?

I have looked at some of the Summaron pictures on the website of Oh Two. Must say that I like the look it gives. ('friendlier' than the Nokton 40mm. Which is a shame because there is a nice example for not to much money 305 usd. in the classifieds right now..)

So I had a quick look at summarons 2.8. Could only find ones with gogles and one without but for a lot of cash. So what would a good price be for the summaron? How close will it be to the summacrons.

And how about the look of the VC 35 2.5 (If i am now also looking at slower lenses) Does it perform wide open?
 
kevin m said:
The trouble is, the "bokeh" doesn't kick in until the lens is stopped down.

I had the Hexanon 35/2 at the same time I owned the V4, and the Konica was plainly superior wide open. If using your largest aperture matters to you, the V4 is highly over-rated. And, thanks to internet-hype, it's highly overpriced, too. If you're a shooter and not a fetishist, there are better values for the money.
Click to expand...

I used the Konica at the same time I had my current v4 Summicron, and my experience was nearly the opposite of yours. With respect to the price, I fully agree.
 
Roel said:
The Hexanon seems to cost quit a bit.
Click to expand...
True. Its a nice lens, but hard to find and so a little on the expensive side. But I thought it was well worth it.
Roel said:
Also mr. Puts says it is not so well fitting on M bodies..?
Click to expand...
He may have said it, but it is not true. That myth seems to be one that that just won't die. M-Hexanon lenses work fine on any M camera. They are good lenses, too, if my 50/2 and 35/2 are anything to go by. The Hexar RF is an M camera and works just fine with any M lens, from any manufacturer and works just as well with LTM lenses and a decent adapter. Obviously I haven't used mine with every lens out there, but I figure if I can get good results with a Summilux 75/1.4 wide open then that's close enough for me (even if focus is a lot more fiddly with the .6x Hexar RF than using my M3).

...Mike
 
bafonso said:
This discussion regarding high-quality lenses is akin to discussions in high-end audio. A lot of people stand by some brands, but in a blind-fold experiment can't distinguish them...

I wonder how can one really distinguish from a jpeg on a web the difference the summicron would have made over a CV... oh wait, you can't. :)
Does anyone actually care what lenses were used when you see a great photograph on display? other than sheer curiosity, I see no point.
Click to expand...


I totally agree!
 
I used the Konica at the same time I had my current v4 Summicron, and my experience was nearly the opposite of yours.
Click to expand...

Weird. The Hexanon was much better than the V4 wide open, and that was on an M6TTL body. :confused:
 
Based upon some of the pictures I have seen I also have the feeling this lens is a bit harsh (the difference between Sc and MC??)
Click to expand...

Here's the only wide-open shot I have handy from the VC Nokton SC, and you can make up your own mind. (This was just a focus test, so it's a bit dull...)
 

Attachments

  • test40-1.4-web.jpg
    test40-1.4-web.jpg
    121.8 KB · Views: 1
x-ray said:
the biggest difference is the final image is the photographer who makes the image and not the equipment. Eqipment too often becomes the whipping boy for photographic failure. There's no magic in any make of lens and no piece of equipment will make you a better photographer.
Click to expand...
Wise advice.

That being said, one recommendation that has not been made, Roel, is that you at least get a feel for how these lenses handle. I think that would make a much bigger impact than any subtle differences in optics. The 35mm lens on a Leica = fast, candid photography. You would want something that feels right for you and let you take the shot at the right time. Not twiddle with long focus throws or fumble with tiny tabs or infinity locks. Something not too big and not too small. Something that you will more easily learn to handle instinctively. From the excellent photos shown, it is obvious that, with practice, this can be true of any lens for certain people. However, you will need to see which lens fits you.
 
Last edited by a moderator:
Magus,

I'm glad you managed to pick Leitz out of the tests posted here. Sorry to hear about the hipersensitivy thingie, I can imagine that it might be sometimes really bad. Can't comment on your claims about audio though, heard too many of them already to believe in any, sorry. :) but we digress. (wine tasting is always good though... and that is much more easy to grasp. I actually knew a lady that used to do a lot of it, remarkable lady)

Remember that it is the photographer that makes a difference and in art perception, "better" is hard to measure, achieve or define. You like Leitz, that's ok. I like it too, probably more the really old ones. But still, photographers will make a difference where lenses will not. Just like Keith Jarret made a difference and then simply made the best ever solo piano record with one of the crappiest pianos he ever played in his life. That's art for me. Means are just means.

stay cool & enjoy art.
 
Are there any votes for the Leica summicron-c 40mm f2. It's said it is of summicron quality.

Magus (or others): how would you rate this lens next to the Summaron 2.8.
 
My recommendation: Nokton 40mm/1.4

My recommendation: Nokton 40mm/1.4

Roel said:
...I want to try the 35/40 mm. Don't want to spend to much cash (less than 450 usd) yet for Leica summilux/cron asph. First see if this will become my standard FL...
Click to expand...

Take the fastest. Speed matters, as you say yourself. The CV 40 is a great lens, sharp, contrasty, compact. It's true it's bokeh is not great in certain situations, especially distant highlights in the dark. There's a thread about that here, with a lot of pictures, some from me.

The advantage of it's speed and compactness weighs much more than the bokeh issue which I consider as minor. These bokeh situations are rather rare, and if they once happen, just stop down to 2 or 2.8 and gone is the "bad" effect. I used it as main lens the past 2 years, on a M6. It became a bit "too long" since i use a R-D1s mostly, but is still sticked on the M6.

One can't go wrong with that lens, and I'd prefer it over the Ultron in any case.

Didier
 
colinh said:
How odd.

No one seems to have mentioned the Zeiss Biogon 35/2.

(ordered mine yesterday :) )

Could be because they're sooo good, that no one sells them off and you can't get them second hand - which puts it out of the price range :)

colin
Click to expand...

I'll second that. This lens is blinding.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top Bottom