quality of CV 28/3.5 versus CV 35/2.5 C ?

[corot]

Which, if either, is the better (or "better" !) lens in terms of optics - CV 28/3.5 or CV 35/2.5 Classic?

More precisely, is there a difference in image (apart from focal length) between these two?

I'm interested in the quality only (optics and build) as I can live with either of these focal lengths which will complement a 21 and 50 on a IIIf.

Thanks for your advice!

 

[fixbones]

Corot,

I have the CV 35/2.5 classic and find to be an excellent lens. I bought the LTM version as it comes with the hood and is a smaller overall lens with the hood on. I think there hasn't been a bad review about this lens. Only thing is the lens can be a bit slow if you do a lot of low light photography. Otherwise, it holds itself very very well against the summicrons!! (so i've heard)

The CV 28/3.5 is also another lens with little to no bad reviews. I know because i was considering this lens a week ago and did my fair share of research. Again, the only thing is that it is a bit slow. Ended up buying the LTM version again because it comes with the little hood that i am rather fond of (just like the one my 35/2.5)

As to which one to get. I think they are both equal performer optically. Your choice should be 28mm vs 35mm and f2.5 vs f3.5.

my 2 cents

 

[jonmanjiro]

They're both outstanding performers optically. Just choose the focal length that works best for you.

The 28/3.5 is only available in LTM. The 35/2.5 is available in LTM and M-mount.

 

[Turtle]

I own the 35 and get the impression that they both have a certain amount of vignetting in common at wider apertures but are in most other respects pretty similar in terms of contrast and look. The 35 is miniscule (I have the pancake) and it is hard to imagine tht the 28 is even smaller...