Some CV 35/2.5 Samples

[taffer]

Ops...

I meant $130 😛

Still, a great price that deserves a :bang: or two for not getting it !

 

[peter_n]

Well, that's only a fairly good price after it was $13... 😉

 

[bruenhilde]

35 f2.5 has to be obligatory for every Barnack Leica user...

35 f2.5 has to be obligatory for every Barnack Leica user...

🙂 My camera is more than half-century old (made in 1950), CV 35 2.5 Classic was made in 2000.
So, 50 years age difference, but both look like they were made to be paired together... 😛 .
These camera and lens are my faithful companions when riding my bike around the country.

 

[Doug]

Mismatched in years, but well-matched for function; nice rig, bruenhilde! And some magnificent countryside for motorcycling...

 

[peter_n]

Oooh look at those clouds! Oh to have a red filter & B&W! 😀

 

[RayPA]

aaah! Cohiba! Oh... and very nice camera, BTW. 😉

 

[Aperture]

I can only add to the praise of this fabulous piece of glass... Bought the 35/2.5 classic a few weeks ago, came with an R attached to it, and I doubt I'll be craving for a "new equipment fix" soon. It's giving lovely results and it's such a nice compact outfit! My father in law actually liked it so much he is selling his G2+45/2 and wants to go CV35/2 as well. Will post some pics soon to add to the 35 archive.

 

[sockeyed]

Here are a few more new samples from this lovely lens, taken on the weekend up in the Kootneys, BC. The B&W are using Tri-X at 250, the colour are on Fuji NPH.

 

[peter_n]

Great! And the last one is interesting because its the first time I've seen a shot from this lens with the area in front of the plane of focus being OOF. Looks good! 🙂

 

[sockeyed]

Peter - I might have boo-booed. It's possible that the last shot was taken using my Serenar 50/1.8. I know for sure the others were on the CV35, but that one...not so sure. Ooops.

 

[arthur2]

I agree the CV 35/2.5 Classic is a very good lens, and a bargain as well. I recently purchased one to use on my Leica M2. Here are two pictures I took recently, if I remember correctly at f/2.8, which came out pretty sharp.

 

[jja]

Arthur, love the first one especially. I'm looking for a 35 to put on my M2, and this is looking like a worthy candidate. Other than the speed, are there any downshides to this lens? How is the handling and build quality?

 

[sockeyed]

The only downside I've heard mentioned in the posts I've read is the speed. If you need the extra speed, people say the 35/1.7 has very similar optical characteristics, but of course is bigger and more expensive.

I should also note that the 35/2.5 is a fairly contrasty lens, and that's not always to everyone's taste.

 

[arthur2]

jja, the build quality of the lens is good. I like that it has a little focusing lever like my old 50/2.8 Elmar. Compared to the Elmar, focusing is not quite as smooth, but that's not really a problem for me. The arperture ring turns quite easily, it can happen that you turn it and change aperture by accident.

I was tempted to get the 35/1.7 Ultron. I weighted the pros and cons of it against the Color Skopar:

Ultron:
Faster
(Maybe) slightly better image quality

Color Skopar:
Small and light
cheap
good image quality
closer minimum focus disctance (.7m, Ultron .9m)

So far, I have not regrettet getting this lens. I have not had time to use it extensively, but the results so far are very good.

 

[jja]

Yes, small, light, and affordable are good combinations if you are trading off a little speed. I recently acquired an ltm adapter, so it's just waiting for the right lens. Thanks for your input.