dfoo
Well-known
Exactly you cannot get smooth highlights with such a short focal length. The background simply isn't that out of focus.
JRG
Well-known
Well, current V4 prices make what I spent seem a bit less insane.
Images from the V4 have been terrific. But I'd guess that I could have nabbed most of them with a CV 35/2.5, for a lot less money and not too much difference in result. I also had a 35/2.5 Summarit that I bought for well under the V4 price; it was pretty darned good, too.
Still, I'm not about to sell my V4 just yet.
yanidel
Well-known
It got its bokeh king title because of the rendering at F4 apparently. Not wide open shots which are often quite curly. But people use it mostly at F2 for bokeh ...
This being said, you are right, the 40mm Cron is an amazing and way undervalued lens.
Instantclassic
Hans
I think the discussion about value is not clear enough.
The market value is the market value. The value you get when you use it has nothing to do with market value.
Is a german v.IV more usable than a candian v.IV?
The market value is the market value. The value you get when you use it has nothing to do with market value.
Is a german v.IV more usable than a candian v.IV?
starless
Well-known
I had lots of 35's in M-mount, and the 35 Summicron wasn't the "best" in any category except ergonomics. It's just the perfect size with a perfect tab and perfect handling. It's not great wide-open by modern standards, but it's not a special-effects lens like the 35 pre-asph Summilux, either. It's an excellent all-around lens that's perfectly suited to rangefinder photography.
Playing devil's advocate for a moment, I have to point out that a VC 35/1.2 35/2.5 combo can be had for less than a used Summicron V4, and they definitely offer a wider gamut of optical performance.
I've never used a 35mm Sumilux. What's a "special-effects lens"?
venchka
Veteran
After missing a 35mm Summicron v. 3 on this Forum TWICE (same lens-slow to act), I opted for the 35mm UC-Hexanon. For Leitz prices, they should build lenses as Konica did. I couldn't be happier.
Last edited:
dfoo
Well-known
The V3, unlike the V4 apparently, is an extremely well built lens.
inzite
Well-known
yeah 35mm and 200mm are different uses. heres some with 35 f1.4 L which i think have better bokeh.
starless
Well-known
Aren't there some plastic parts in the v4? I believe v3 is all-metal.
V3 should also be less flare-prone due to fewer optical elements.
kevin m
Veteran
IMO, a lens that draws attention to its own optical signature in a way that's distracting. I felt the pre-asph Summilux did that, but the Summicron doesn't.
Renzsu
Well-known
^ People that didn't get my last post.. I didn't compare the nikkor 200 with the 35 summicron.. of course that would be stupid. What I did do was try to explain that the 'bokeh balls' in the 200mm look very uniform, they don't have those very bright edges that are visible in the photos taken with the 35 cron. THAT is what I tried to explain as causing busy busy backgrounds, because those highlights don't blend into eachother nicely.. instead you get a bunch of rings.
And I compared it with the 40 summicron (and m-rokkor btw) because that lens has the same effect, as can be seen in this image (which really pushes that effect):
And I compared it with the 40 summicron (and m-rokkor btw) because that lens has the same effect, as can be seen in this image (which really pushes that effect):
ferider
Veteran
Whoever thinks the v4 Summicron is all about beautiful OOF balls at close focus wide open should read Mike Johnston's original article on the subject
http://theonlinephotographer.typepad.com/files/bokehrankings5.pdf
He gives the Summicron a 10/10, but closed down (f5.6?) and at longer focus distances, and says "Worsens considerably as focus gets closer and apertures get wider".
In my experience, there are many other 35s with better bokeh wide open, for example the CV 35/2.5, the UC Hexanon, etc.
But like Kevin said, the v4 is the perfect size, and nice to handle. The v3 just as much, IMO. And I wouldn't buy a v4 for a used price that is very close to the used price of a 35/2 ASPH these days.
Roland.
http://theonlinephotographer.typepad.com/files/bokehrankings5.pdf
He gives the Summicron a 10/10, but closed down (f5.6?) and at longer focus distances, and says "Worsens considerably as focus gets closer and apertures get wider".
In my experience, there are many other 35s with better bokeh wide open, for example the CV 35/2.5, the UC Hexanon, etc.
But like Kevin said, the v4 is the perfect size, and nice to handle. The v3 just as much, IMO. And I wouldn't buy a v4 for a used price that is very close to the used price of a 35/2 ASPH these days.
Roland.
f16sunshine
Moderator
Fully agree with this statement. I've recently switch from the cron to. ZM c Biogon. That extra stop that was never quite sharp enough is not missed. The lens is fantastic and IMHO has equal ergonomics, better build and better overall IQ for less money NEW.
dfoo
Well-known
Ironic to post a shot that misses focus when discussing sharp
I much prefer my V3 summicron to the Biogon-C. Its smaller, faster and the ergonomics are awesome (I hate the focusing nipple and the 1/3 stops!). Also in my testing although the Biogon-C is slightly sharper at 2.8, by F4 the differences are all gone. And, of course, the Summicron wins in both bokeh and sharpness @ F2.
I much prefer my V3 summicron to the Biogon-C. Its smaller, faster and the ergonomics are awesome (I hate the focusing nipple and the 1/3 stops!). Also in my testing although the Biogon-C is slightly sharper at 2.8, by F4 the differences are all gone. And, of course, the Summicron wins in both bokeh and sharpness @ F2.
ferider
Veteran
Then, why are you selling it ?
dfoo
Well-known
Because I want to buy a 35 ASPH.
ferider
Veteran
Best possible answer
peter_n
Veteran
If you're asked to pay that kind of money for a lens with known construction problems add a couple hundred bucks and get yourself the 35 ASPH which is also not bad in the OOF areas. The ASPH is good at f2 as well.
J. Borger
Well-known
I never liked my 35mm asph cron and prefer the type IV.
I love the unpredictable, sometimes Noctilux like bokeh of the type IV wide open.
Yes... the asph is probably sharper wide open but I can only laugh when people state the type IV is not sharp enough at f2.0.
This whole discussion comes dow to wether you prefer the drawing of classical Mandler designed Leica lenses or the modern Zeiss/ Leica lenses.
I love the unpredictable, sometimes Noctilux like bokeh of the type IV wide open.
Yes... the asph is probably sharper wide open but I can only laugh when people state the type IV is not sharp enough at f2.0.
This whole discussion comes dow to wether you prefer the drawing of classical Mandler designed Leica lenses or the modern Zeiss/ Leica lenses.
sper
Well-known
An over priced Leica product? Unheard of...