Krosya
Konicaze
A couple more from the M-Hex 35/2 taken with Bessa R2:
Joe AC
Well-known
I was wondering the same thing but I also had the Canon 35 / 2.0 in the mix.
tim_c
Established
The Summicron 35 is the definitely the best value for money used. You can buy one, use it for five, ten years then sell it for what you paid for it originally.
MikeL
Go Fish
I have the 35mm asph summilux, and I'd disagree. Not better, just different.
ferider
Veteran
The M-Hex is an original design from the 90s, Ted, very different from everything else. For example, the M-Hex 35/2 has a concave front element surface. When you look at the diagram, the only lens coming close to it is the 35/1.7 Ultron where 2 element surfaces of the M-Hex are substituted with an aspheric surface - or so it seems, from my naiive judgement.
Roland.
Last edited:
Joerg
Dilettant
Hi
I owned the summicron asph and while it is a fine performer, it flared up very strongly with sun hitting it from side angles. This happened rather often and was unfortunately to spectacular to serve as a all purpose 35mm lens.
The biogon on the other side is very flare resistant and constantly draws positive comments for it's rendition, particularly wide open.
Ciao
Joerg
I owned the summicron asph and while it is a fine performer, it flared up very strongly with sun hitting it from side angles. This happened rather often and was unfortunately to spectacular to serve as a all purpose 35mm lens.
The biogon on the other side is very flare resistant and constantly draws positive comments for it's rendition, particularly wide open.
Ciao
Joerg
Nokton48
Veteran
Best 35mm F2 lens I've ever used was the 35mm F2 Canon. Better than my 35mm F2 Summicron IMO. Also less than half/one-third the price. Killer lens.
semilog
curmudgeonly optimist
You might want to take a look at Lloyd Chambers's comparison (subscription required for preceding link). He discovered real-world and not uncommonly-encountered situations in which the Biogon substantially outperforms the ASPH, due to the ASPH's more severe curvature of field. It is also the case that, while the ASPH has very little distortion, the Biogon has essentially none.
This is not to say that the Biogon is a better lens. But it is not the case that the ASPH is faultless, or even better than the Biogon, in every respect.
Personally, I prefer the Biogon-C to either one. But the Biogon-C, as an f/2.8 lens, was not an option in the poll
.
Last edited:
semilog
curmudgeonly optimist
^--- Agreed.
Travis L.
Registered Userino
A couple more from the M-Hex 35/2 taken with Bessa R2:
This has nothing to do with the lens discussion but I had to chime in here.
The gentleman towards the back of the first picture is a friend of mine. He is a professional stone carver (believe it or not).
The second shot was taken in my best friends hat shop and the subject is one of their employees, Tim.
Nice shots from the Ohio Renaissance Festival.
Continue the shootout.......
umcelinho
Marcelo
none of the above
leicashot
Well-known
The very best 35mm f/2 lens ever made is the ZE/ZF Zeiss 35mm f/2 for SLR's. It wins this battle easily over it's M counterparts.
magicianhisoka
Well-known
Hard to make it an ultimate shootout poll unless someone has shot with all 3 of the lenses listed Personally, I like the 35mm Hex but never tried the other 2!
Personally, I like the 35mm Hex but never tried the other 2!
gavinlg
Veteran
If I could afford it, I'd be using the 35mm asph in M mount.
x-ray
Veteran
Had both the Asph Summicron and the Biogon and sold the Asph Summicron. Also have owned and used for may years the V1 and V4 Summicron and the pre asph Summilux. Again the Biogon is the choice hands down. As far as I'm concerned there's no competition between the Asph Summicron adn the Biogon. the Biogon is much more resistant to flare and much smoother in tonality. Sharpness is about equal but I found the Summicron to be harsh.
akitadog
Established
Lenses
Lenses
Excellent Article.
I will also add a few things from my own experience with 50mm lenses, for both Leica M and also Nikon SLR.
I have used the Leica Summicron F/2 collapsable, Summicron F/2 Version 4
35mm Summicron F2 V4, and Summilux 50mm f/1.4Ver2, as well as the Nikon 50mm f/1.4, and the Zeiss ZF 50mm f/1.4
You can make excellent images with all of the above lenses.
Out of all of the above lenses. I prefer the Leica 35mm f/2.0 Summincon ver4. For color film, this lens has amazing contrast and saturation.
It is my goto lens when I am travelling, along with the Leica 50 Summilux and the Elmarit-M 90mm. I love the way these lenses put an Image on film. Can't speak to digital as I only have a Leica M4-P body.
The Nikon lenses are OK, but do not have the same level of contrast and saturation. The Leica lenses have more punch.
The Zeiss lens, although excellent, is not really any better than the Nikon lenses.
That said, I have made many wonderful Images with all of the above lenses. They are all a different, but that won't be a limit in your photography.
Stick to what you can afford, and learn to use that lens to it's maximum performance.
All the best,
akitadog
Lenses
Excellent Article.
I will also add a few things from my own experience with 50mm lenses, for both Leica M and also Nikon SLR.
I have used the Leica Summicron F/2 collapsable, Summicron F/2 Version 4
35mm Summicron F2 V4, and Summilux 50mm f/1.4Ver2, as well as the Nikon 50mm f/1.4, and the Zeiss ZF 50mm f/1.4
You can make excellent images with all of the above lenses.
Out of all of the above lenses. I prefer the Leica 35mm f/2.0 Summincon ver4. For color film, this lens has amazing contrast and saturation.
It is my goto lens when I am travelling, along with the Leica 50 Summilux and the Elmarit-M 90mm. I love the way these lenses put an Image on film. Can't speak to digital as I only have a Leica M4-P body.
The Nikon lenses are OK, but do not have the same level of contrast and saturation. The Leica lenses have more punch.
The Zeiss lens, although excellent, is not really any better than the Nikon lenses.
That said, I have made many wonderful Images with all of the above lenses. They are all a different, but that won't be a limit in your photography.
Stick to what you can afford, and learn to use that lens to it's maximum performance.
All the best,
akitadog
barnwulf
Well-known
What is the BEST lens? I have no idea. It would depend some on personal preference. I would love to have the Leica lens but for the money I think the Zeiss is fantastic and I have one. I guess that I don't really care that much about best since it depends a lot on what one means by best. I would rather go take photographs that to spend too much time thinking about this. Leica .... Zeiss, both are great. Jim
canetsbe
Well-known
Nokton 35 1.2? amazing lens, I like it more than my ex 35 summicron non-asph. very versatile and amazing in black and white.
thirtyfivefifty
Noctilust survivor
Hmmm... it's a question of which one I like (Summicron) versus which would I pay for (Biogon).
Dguebey
Amateur
I am among M-Hexanon fans.
I never used the two others. For me the only (if important) argument for Summicron ASPH would be its tiny size. But I paid my M-Hexanon 1/4th of the price, and full open it may be better than the Biogon (I know : this is laboratory assumption)
We are speaking here of modern and simply efficient lenses.
I never used the two others. For me the only (if important) argument for Summicron ASPH would be its tiny size. But I paid my M-Hexanon 1/4th of the price, and full open it may be better than the Biogon (I know : this is laboratory assumption)
We are speaking here of modern and simply efficient lenses.