Please Help me choose a 35mm lens,

[f16sunshine]

If you can afford the f2/biogon you can afford the f2.8/biogon which would be my choice at 35mm... I like the smaller size. Half - 1 full stop means nearly nothing with b/w film.


My true choice is the Summicron f2/40mm (or Minolta badged M Rokkor).
Cost is usually under $400. Image character similar to 35mm v4 summicron which brings in such high prices.
The 40mm is a beautiful and tiny performer.

 

[David Hughes]

Yes, I mean is the sun so dull in India that you need all these super fast lenses? And will most of your shots be indoors or at night?

In your shoes I'd be looking at a 35 and 90 around f/2.8 for travel. Picked carefully they need not break the bank.

Regards, David

 

[Juan Valdenebro]

It's hard to say: you're the only one knowing what kind of photography you'll do...
When we need one lens for everything, we can't have one lens that's the best for everything, so we must decide about priorities... For example, even being a bit big for street, the 1.2 Nokton would be my choice because:
1. Its optical quality is great.
2. Its speed is great.
3. Its ability to defocus background is great.
But if street is all you want, a smaller lens is nice, if speed isn't needed often:
With a bit less money than you pay for a 1.2 Nokton, you can get one of two marvelous lenses, the Zeiss Biogon-C 2.8, or the Leitz Summaron 2.8, both without distortion.
Another option (I did it in the past, and yet use both lenses even now I own a Summaron) is getting a really small but great lens for street (2.5 Skopar) and a 40 1.4 Nokton (inside pants pocket) for low light, night and indoors, distortion free and sharp at 1.4...
But, as I did what I did, now I'd pick the 1.2 to enjoy a new toy in my case...
But they're all excellent lenses...
The Biogon f/2 is a superb lens obviously, but as it isn't a leader in size and neither in speed, I wouldn't pick it as my only lens...
The 1.4 Nokton can be a great pick: small, fast, and beautiful, clean transition from focused areas to the background...
That's it: you get most things in a bigger lens, or get two smaller lenses, or get the 1.4 Nokton... Its distortion will basically never hurt at all a photograph if it's a good photograph...
The 1.7 Ultron is a splendid lens, but not too small... It all depends a lot on the size you prefer and if you want it for street or for indoors too...
Cheers,
Juan

 

[Daryl J.]

I have a 35 Summicron ASPH, 35mm 1.4 Nokton Classic SC, a 35mm 2.5 Color Skopar, and a 35mm Summaron 3.5.

I love them all and for different reasons.

The one that stays on my camera? The Nokton Classic. Why? I like its artsy rendering and sheer usability. The Chron is the "best" and the Nokton is the "worst". Except that's not really true. It's what creates what your heart and your eyes want.

My recommendation is the Color Skopar. Why? Consistent excellent results. Lighting issues can be handled with a little tripod and a cable release. Its lower price means more money for film and prints. It is so light and easy to use. And I dare you to place an image taken with the Chron and the CS on HP5 at F4 and have people consistently say which image was done with which lens.

It sounds like you have found a really enjoyable situation.


Enjoy!

PS: I'd love a CZ 2.0/35mm sometime!

 

[:: Mark]

The Zeiss Biogon f2 is a killer if you want sharpness. It's devilishly sharp even wide open...

That is not what I see with my ZM 2/35. Wide open the image is quite soft in the edges, and only ok in the centre. Stopped down to f4 or narrower, it becomes very sharp, and that combined with the non-existent distortion makes it an excellent lens for architecture.

Here is an excessively pixel-peeping example of the ZM 2/35 shot at f2, f2.8 and f4, showing a crop from the image centre:



This is soft enough to be obvious even when shooting film, so I tend to only use the Biogon stopped down (and ended up buying the 1,4/35 for times when I want to shoot wide open for speed or DOF).

 

[scigeek]

Leica Summaron 2.8. Read the reviews. You can pick up a good one for between £300/400. I was offered a good one last week, but I'm saving for another LTM body.

I don't have one, but it is evidently a VERY nice lens.

 

[borge]

Of those I would pick the 35/2 Biogon.
My wife has the 35/2 Biogon and loves it. It's got a beautiful rendering.
I have the Nokton Classic 35/1.4 MC ... It's a cool lens, but it's for sale at the moment. The barrel distortion can be quite significant in certain situations. But it's also got a very nice and classic rendering wide open...

I've personally downgraded from the 35/1.4 Lux FLE to the 35/2 Summicron ASPH, simply because I love the size and handling of that lens, and I got a very nice deal on it.
It might be a hair sharper wide open than the Biogon, but the Biogon's bokeh and rendering is in general more pleasing. The Biogon also has a warm saturated output, while the others will be more neutral.

 

[seakayaker1]

I don't think you can go wrong with a Ziess 35/2 or the 35/2.8 since they are both great lenses. Also at the moment Zeiss is offering rebates through December when buying a new lens. You can usually find them on the used market as well.

Good luck with your decision.

 

[johannielscom]

Might I suggest the Canon 35mm 2.0 lens, the 'Japanese Summilux'? With an LTM -> M adapter of course. Search Flickr with 'Canon 35mm 2.0 LTM' and find nearly 200 images to judge its quality.

You possibly will have enough cash left to get yourself a nice 50mm too.

 

[Jason Sprenger]

India? Slide film?

Zeiss ZM 35/2

 

[johannielscom]

That is not what I see with my ZM 2/35. Wide open the image is quite soft in the edges, and only ok in the centre. Stopped down to f4 or narrower, it becomes very sharp, and that combined with the non-existent distortion makes it an excellent lens for architecture.

Here is an excessively pixel-peeping example of the ZM 2/35 shot at f2, f2.8 and f4, showing a crop from the image centre:



This is soft enough to be obvious even when shooting film, so I tend to only use the Biogon stopped down (and ended up buying the 1,4/35 for times when I want to shoot wide open for speed or DOF).

Uhm, that can't be right.

Judging from the captions with the shots, you are opening up the Zeiss 35mm 2.0 to a 1.7 aperture.

Any lens would get soft from that 😛 😛

 

[ktmrider]

I own the 35f1.2 and 35f2.8 C-Biogon. I bought the Biogon because the 35f1.2 is big and I hiked 100 miles in Scotland a couple years ago and did not want to carry that monster. The 35 focal length is the only one where I own more then one M mount lens. You will not go wrong with either of those lenses in that focal length. I have also owned the 35f2.5 Color Skopar and you won't go wrong with that model either.

So, smaller lens with a modest aperture or monster lens with f1.2 which is the fastest 35mm made. Or something in between. I think they are all good and only you can decide. But there really is not a bad choice of all those listed.

Good luck and good hunting.

 

[Colin Corneau]

I'd go for the Zeiss. It's good for available light and, as mentioned, sharp sharp sharp.

I once owned the Voightlander 35/1.2 -- interesting but no real point to owning it unless you want to shoot everything at 1.2. It's good for what it is, but quite large and a little unwieldy for extended handheld shooting. It also intrudes into the viewfinder window which is a pain...honestly, I'd avoid it.

 

[Talus]

I just handled a brand new Zeiss 35 Biogon f2 at the PhotPlus in NYC today and I have to say that the focus ring on a brand new Zeiss is absolute garbage. It had so many tight spots and loose spots. I'm so happy my copy doesn't feel like that.

 

[Tom A]

I have most of these lenses. Summicron 35f2 v1 as well as Asph 35f2, a complete set of the Voigtlander 35's and the Zeiss 35's. The lens that I use for travel - usually on a MP with the 0.58 finder is the Nokton 35mm f1.4 SC - been like that for more than 10 years.
Don't know how many rolls of bl/w I have shot with it. must be in the 1000's by now. It is reasonably sized. it is light and it performs very well.
I have traveled with bigger/faster lenses (Nokton 35f1.2, Distagon 35 f1.4 etc) and they all weigh a lot at the end of the day.
If you go for the Nokton 35f1.4- get the proper hood - will serve as a bumper as well as a flare cutter in bright sun.
I did a trip last year with the Zeiss Distagon 35f1.4 - performance is impeccable and sharpness remarkable - but boy is it a big chunk!
Have great trip. whatever lens you get. and remember to post pictures here when you are back.
In India beware of stray sun in the lens - easy to burn a hole in the shutter, carry it turned "down" of towards the body.