VC 35/2.5 PII - Distortion compared to 35/1.4?

[CrisR]

I have a good range of VC lenses, and use the 35/1.4 all the time, love it.

However, I've noticed the barrel distortion on photos of buildings, signs, products, etc that isn't acceptable. Great for most things, but not so great for that.

I tried to find a solid review of the 35/2.5 that would allow me to compare, but I simply can't find one.

So, how is the 2.5 for distortion? It's cheap enough that I can pick it up just for such work, but there's no point if it's just a Nokton with 1.75 stops missing.

Many thanks.

 

[jonmanjiro]

The Skopar 35/2.5 has a little barrel distortion, but noticeably less than its faster sibling. Here's some unscientific comparisons.

Skopar at infinity

Nokton at infinity

Skopar at 7 metres

Nokton at 7 metres

Skopar at 3 metres

Nokton at 3 metres

 

[Erik van Straten]

Both have too much distortion to my taste. I always prefer the Ultron.

Erik.

 

[CrisR]

Thank you very much for those shots! I can see that, yes, indeed, they both have similar barrel distortion. I can't see that picking up the Skopar will do much to improve my Nokton's images.

I wonder what the Zeiss Biogon is like...

 

[ndnik]

I wonder what the Zeiss Biogon is like...

The Biogon has no noticable distortion.

-N.

 

[traveler_101]

Why not use the 25/4 Skopar for architecture and such? I use the LTM "snapshot" version--you zone focus the lens,no rangefinder linkage. Works well. It's a sharper lens than the 35/2.5, has little distortion, has less contrast, and is of course wider--good for shooting buildings (35mm is not really wide enough for architecture anyway).

Keep the 35/1.4 for walk around--to capture ambience.

 

[Ronald M]

Who is VC?

 

[Pioneer]

Who is VC?

Voigtlander Cosina