Voightlander 35 2.5 Skopar Question

[JeffGreene]

I'm looking to replace my old 35mm Serenar with a new lens that is a little sharper and less dated-looking image-wise. I've noticed the Color Skopar 35 2.5 "C" and the Color Skopar 35 2.5 "P" on Gandy's site. Other than the hundred dollar difference between the "P" and the "C" are there any advantages of one over the other. Feedback on the "C" lens seems uniformly positive, and I've noticed that many folks on the forum have the "C", leading me to believe that any advantages of the "P" are negligible at best. Am I incorrect in my conclusion? "C" ($209) vs "P" ($319) plus a $45 hood. A hood is included with the "C". Thanks in advance.

 

[nrb]

I'm very happy with my C 35 skopar. I guess both these lenses are optically equivalent from what I've been reading here and elsewhere. From these same sources I gather that the main P advantage is its smaller size.

 

[kbg32]

I have the older 35 2.5 Pancake Skopar. I find it a very good performer.

 

[nightfly]

Isn't the P an M-Mount?

 

[Jason Sprenger]

The pancake "P" lens is an M-mount only lens. That can be a trouble if you have LTM cameras that you want to use with it.

I find the "C" contrasty, flare resistent, nicely compact and pretty sharp.

About the only advantage to the "P" might be the bayonet hood. The accessory square shade for the CV 35/2.5 "C" and the CV 50/2.5 screws on so wouldn't be as fast to mount. I have the square shade but don't find myself using it very much so for me it's a non-issue.

 

[pesphoto]

I have a C and am happy with the results.

 

[JeffGreene]

Thanks guys, appreciate the input. I do mostly b&w, and since both lenses use the same design I'm sure there isn't any particular advantage on that score. Whatever, thanks again.

 

[John Robertson]

The P is NOT an M mount only, that is a later lens!! I have the original P (pancake) 35mm lens which is most definitely 39mm screw. The main differences between the C and the P are, 1. filter size P = 43mm;C = 39mm: The P has a shorter "throw" for focussing, thus probably faster to focus. It does not come with a built in hood, although one is available for it. The hood supplied with the C is vestigal, and not very effective especially once you have fitted a filter. The lens cap fits over the hood so it can be left on. optically the two lenses are identical so there is no difference in performance. Oh and finally the P is in black finish only. you can see it on Camera Quest site!!

 

[nightfly]

It's the PII that's M-mount, I believe.

How do these compare in their rendition/fingerprint to the pre-asph Summicrons (besides the obvious half stop)? Are there noticably harsher or more contrasty?

 

[KoNickon]

The original Pancake has been discontinued for some time -- the PII is the lens that's on the CameraQuest.

 

[back alley]

i believe the c is the first and then the p screwmount.
that's why there are more c lenses round.

it's a very sharp and contrasty lens, almost too contrasty.

joe

 

[sockeyed]

I have the 35/2.5 PII (the new model). It's M-mount only and has a bayonet hood. Build quality is noticably better than the older Classic model. It's very similar in that regard to the CV 40/1.4. Ergonics are great for such a small lens, IMO. I believe that the optical formula is identical, or at least very similar, to the earlier versions. It is tack-sharp, contrasty and has nice bokeh. I am pretty sure that it takes 39mm filters. Some people have talked about light fall-off at apertures wider than f/4, but I haven't noticed it yet.

I haven't had it for that long, but here are a few samples:
http://www.flickr.com/photos/sockeyed/tags/cv3525pii/

And here is what it looks like on a Leica M4-P:
http://www.flickr.com/photos/sockeyed/144913432/

 

[nightfly]

And here is what it looks like on a Leica M4-P:
http://www.flickr.com/photos/sockeyed/144913432/[/QUOTE]

Wow. Totally off topic but what lens did you take the picture of that camera with?

 

[DougK]

I have the C in LTM and love it. It handles color and B&W equally well, very sharp and contrasty, which I like. I'm not sure I'd want to go much smaller with a lens.

 

[BrianPhotog]

I have the older 35 2.5 Pancake Skopar. I find it a very good performer.

The P1 is the same optical design as the "C" version. 🙂

 

[BrianPhotog]

i believe the c is the first and then the p screwmount.
that's why there are more c lenses round.

it's a very sharp and contrasty lens, almost too contrasty.

joe

That's actually one of my thoughts on my "C". I don't use it to shoot B&W anymore (I use the Ultron) because it is just has too much contrast and on the contrast vs. tonality seesaw, it's too far on the side of contrast for my taste. It's almost like taking another lens and putting a deep yellow filter on it.

It is very sharp and I do use it to shoot color, where I prefer contrast over tonality.

 

[Jonathan_100]

Jeff,

I just picked up the original pancake version of the 35. I'm waiting for my film to get back from the lab, but I can say that it's a joy to shoot. It's slim and adds a nice feel to the Bessa R. My only problem swith the skopar is that it's only a 2.5 (I miss the extra stop when I'm inside) and it's not as heavy as my Nokton 1.5 so the R's balance is a little off when on my shoulder. No big deal though.

Jonathan

 

[sockeyed]

Hey Nightfly - the image of the M4-P was taken with the CV 40/1.4 S.C. I originally posted it in this thread:
http://www.rangefinderforum.com/forums/showthread.php?t=23158
about the Nokton-40.