Summarit. Summaron. Biogon. Color-Skopar. Which 35?

[Roger Hicks]

I won't be parted from my V4 35/2 Summicron. OK, it *is* the only 35 I have but even so I think the handling and ergonomics of that lens just about perfect. Everything -- the short focusing throw, the tab, the square hood, the size and compactness -- make it a joy to use and the one lens I can truly say I can use really quickly and increasingly by instinct. I can't speak for other versions of the same lens...

And I sold my 35 Summicron because although it beats the Summilux at f/2 and f/4, by f/5.6 there's not much in it and at f/1.4 there's no contest...

Cheers,

R.

 

[Nokton48]

I'm Rather Fond of my Canon 35mm F1.5

I'm Rather Fond of my Canon 35mm F1.5

The speed is really what I need. And I love how it draws. I just sold my 35mm F2.8 M Summaron in the classifieds here, a really wonderful lens. But I have too many 35's. I sold my 35mm F2.5 CV Skopar and I don't miss it.

 

[---f]

I have the 35 Summarit. Love it. I've sold my CV 35 f1.2 and f1.4. I've been told that you can't tell the difference between the CV 35mm f/2.5 and the 35mm Summarit. But I do have the nice Leica name on the lens and it only cost 4x as much as the Skopar. So good value I think. One thing nice about the 35 Summarit is the really short focus throw, makes it really easy to handle. Look on my flickr, I have a set all done with the Summarit.

http://www.flickr.com/photos/fireboycreative/sets/72157625632264108/

 

[tbarker13]

I went through some of the same gyrations. Ended up settling on a 35 Summicron v.3. (all of the performance of the v.4, with a better build😀)

I sold my UC hexanon when I bought the Summicron. Not because I thought it was inferior, but because I felt like I essentially had two of the same lens, with one focusing down to .7 and the other focusing down to .9 (hexanon).

No magic bullet here, though. Virtually every lens mentioned in this thread has its strong points. And they'll all make good pictures.

 

[Roger Hicks]

I went through some of the same gyrations. Ended up settling on a 35 Summicron v.3. (all of the performance of the v.4, with a better build😀)

I sold my UC hexanon when I bought the Summicron. Not because I thought it was inferior, but because I felt like I essentially had two of the same lens, with one focusing down to .7 and the other focusing down to .9 (hexanon).

No magic bullet here, though. Virtually every lens mentioned in this thread has its strong points. And they'll all make good pictures.

Exactly. So buy on ergonomics. Which is why I recommended the Summarit(which I've used alongside the Color-Skopar, 35/1,7 Ultron and 35 pre-aspheric Summilux (my favourite)).

Cheers,

R.

 

[squirrel$$$bandit]

Have you seen any new rumors?

FYI

http://i.tuaw.com/2011/04/19/imac-supplies-constrained-indicating-possible-refresh-soon/

 

[Dektol Dan]

My old friend

My old friend

For size, weight, construction and ergonomics the Summaron is the best of all. Maybe a little bit showing its age, but its imagery has 'the look' and it shines with new Porta and Ektar films.

Of my 35mm collection, I use it 90% of the time, and the 10% I don't it's only because of speed, but I mostly do street shooting in the day time, so that's really not major issue.

 

[David Murphy]

The 35/2.8 Summaron is a first rate lens, no doubt. I've used the M mount version with eyes on an M2, and I was pretty impressed. I like the Canon 35/1.8 as well though - never had a problem with its ergonomics or optics. The Summaron probably slightly outperforms it, but at greater cost.

My current favorite 35mm lens is the Schneider Xenogon 35/2.8 in LTM - not at all common or easy to find at a reasonable price, but an outstanding performer.

I presently have two 35's, the Nokton f/1.2 and the Canon f/1.8. I like the compactness of the latter, but dislike its handling, and am thinking of selling it and getting a small, sharp f/2.something 35 instead.

I've been shooting lately with the Summarit 75, and am delighted by the look and handling of this new f/2.5 series, not to mention the amazing images; the 35 seems to be among the best of the bunch.

But if I'm going to shell out that kind of dough, why not an f/2.8 Summaron?

And while I'm at it, perhaps the Zeiss or CV offerings in this category would satisfy me.

Any thoughts? What's your favorite optic in this range, which I guess we could call small slow 35's?

 

[presspass]

For a combination of handling, size, and maybe price, the Summicrons are hard to beat. Having said that, mine sits in the cabinet while the pre-asph Summliux goes out. If price is the main issue, the Biogon-C 2.8 is a wonderful lens, although larger than either the Summicron or the pre-asph Summilux and probably sharper and less flare-prone than either. Haven't tried the Summarits yet, so I can't compare them.

 

[Bingley]

I haven't shot w/ a Summaron (in a way, I don't need to, since I've got the wonderful little Canon 35/2.8). I do have the Canon 35/1.8 like you and a CV Skopar 35 PII. The Canon 1.8 is new to me, and I'm still undecided about whether to keep it. Part of my indecision is based on a roll of BW400cn I just shot w/ the Skopar 35 w/ a yellow filter: I was surprised by the tonal range and pleasing bokeh, as well as the sharpness and contrast (which I already knew about). I hadn't seen this kind of result before from that lens. In terms of ergonomics, the Skopar 35, like the Skopar 50, is a real pleasure to use, not that I mind the Canon 1.8; that's a very personal thing.

That said, I've seen lovely results from the Summaron, but my impression is that clean ones go for twice what you'd pay for a new Skopar 35, and I'm really resistant to paying much more than $300 for any lens.

 

[jsrockit]

FYI

http://i.tuaw.com/2011/04/19/imac-supplies-constrained-indicating-possible-refresh-soon/

Thanks.....

 

[squirrel$$$bandit]

BTW, I am going with the Canon 35/2 for the time being. Affordable, similar to the lens I already own, and appears ergonomically perfect for my tastes. I'll put up the 1.8 for sale later today. Farewell, infinity lock! And good riddance.

 

[Turtle]

It does not matter that much. The 35 summarit is superb, but so is the biogon. the biogon is not as well built IMO, but the Summarit has very light focus which might or might not suit. The Biogon has more contrast, the summarit is somehow more gentle, but very sharp at the same time. the CV has more QC issues, but a good copy is almost as good as the summarit and every bit as good past f4. I have all three and were it not for the fact that I don't like selling lenses, would happily sell the other two and shoot with just the one.

Ergonomics is hugely important. I love the CV pancake 2 for street work bec it is tiny and has a vey stiff focus so it wont budge when zone focused. The biogon is the best handling because it is larger, bu the summarit is the smoothest and arguably a great compromise. My only gripe is the light focus which is common to this model.

PS my biogon is the F2

 

[Pirate]

Sorry I got here late. As I just stated in another 35mm thread, I'm liking the ZM 35 F/2 because the Distortion Curve is dead flat until it reaches Infinity, then it's only -.3 or so. This is the important part of a lens to me. I want no distortion. The ZM F/2 has that.

Good luck.

 

[squirrel$$$bandit]

Thanks! I'm not too concerned with distortion, esp. since Lightroom added correction sliders.

 

[ferider]

Rob, if you want to try the 35/2.5 P1, I am considering selling mine. Let me know.

 

[Nokton48]

The 35mm F2 Canon is an amazing lens, I personally prefer it to the V1 Leitz Summicron 35mm F2. And it is quite tiny and easy handling. You will like it, it's a little gem. Great choice.

 

[sparrow6224]

I love the 35mm 2.5 skopar -- you won't believe how crisp and contrasty it is, with real depth and mood. I just bought the 35/1.4 Nokton and it is not as good although of course almost two stops faster and nothing to shake a stick at.

Having said that, avoid the pancake version, which I have; handling is trouble, you can't find the focus and the aperture moves without you knowing it because your fingers are so close to the aperture wheel when you're focusing. The slightly larger original version is what I want.

The 28s have gotten very expensive; 500 is the cheapest you'll find now. The 35s you can get for $300 and are superb.

 

[Nando]

I have the Nokton 35f1.2, the current 35f2 Summicron ASPH and two 35f2.8 Summarons. I just use the Nokton when I need the speed. I prefer the Summicron's ergonomics. However, my favourite lens, in terms of rendering, is the Summaron. If you want that classic look, good edge-to-edge sharpness at all apertures and smoooooth tones, the Summaron is the one. An extremely underrated lens in my opinion. The resolution is astounding with newer low-grain films.

Rob,
BTW, I sent you a PM regarding the Summaron f2.8. 🙂

 

[Rob-F]

I have the Nokton 35f1.2, the current 35f2 Summicron ASPH and two 35f2.8 Summarons. I just use the Nokton when I need the speed. I prefer the Summicron's ergonomics. However, my favourite lens, in terms of rendering, is the Summaron. If you want that classic look, good edge-to-edge sharpness at all apertures and smoooooth tones, the Summaron is the one. An extremely underrated lens in my opinion. The resolution is astounding with newer low-grain films.

Rob,
BTW, I sent you a PM regarding the Summaron f2.8. 🙂

+1. I have the Version 1 and Version 4 Summicrons; the pre-ASPH Summilux; the ASPH Summilux; and the Summaron. They are all great (except that my Pre-ASPH Lux is weak wide open); but when speed is not needed, I often prefer my Summaron.