Voigtlander 40mm F2.8 Heliar Aspherical M Vs M Rokkor 40mm F2 lenses

I can't say I've compared them although I've used and owned them both. The Voigtlander is a classic build more in line with LTM lenses with their long throw, while the style of the Summicron C is more modern M. The Leitz Summicron C is a superb lens....although i'm not a big fan of the focal length.
The Voigtlander takes hard to find 34mm filters. Its character is thoroughly modern and sharp....nothing lacking there.
When all is said and done overall I prefer the handling of the Summicron, which i now have (sold the heliar) Here are a couple of prints from the heliar and a photo of the set-up.
 

Attachments

  • IMG_6506.JPG
    IMG_6506.JPG
    285.6 KB · Views: 15
  • IMG_6555.JPG
    IMG_6555.JPG
    253.2 KB · Views: 13
  • IMG_6358.JPG
    IMG_6358.JPG
    259.6 KB · Views: 15
  • IMG_6085 2.jpg
    IMG_6085 2.jpg
    263 KB · Views: 15
Last edited:
This one was done on the 40mm Heliar using Superia 400. Unfortunately, I don't own the Summicron-C. I can tell you that I find the 40 Heliar to be outstanding. I bought it for my CLE, but it sits on my M11 most of the time.

..Avery

2022-11-19, 14_Parrott's Bay_97,06.jpg
 
I had the 40mm Summicron but sold it with great regret because I already had more than one Leica 35mm lenses. Along with the CLA Don Goldberg installed the a finger tab just like for the 35mm Summicron and that improved the handling dramatically. Performance wise it was like the v3 Summicron I had at the time which was excellent.
 
I have the 35mm Summicron v3, sold the Summicron-C and replaced it with a 40/2.8 Heliar in LTM mount because I like the focal length a lot and can use it with my screw mount cameras. Before the Summicron-C I also had the CLE version of the Minolta 40/2.0. I started a thread about that lens somewhere here at RFF. About rendering, the 40/2.8 Heliar has the most modern character, followed by the CLE version of the Minolta 40/2.0. The Summicron-C is somewhat special with its good center sharpness but slightly soft corners. The CLE 40/2.0 takes easily to find E 40.5 filters while the Summicron-C takes almost impossible to find E39 filters with a different thread pitch. I bought some E34 to E37 and E34 to E40.5 step-up rings for the 40/2.8 Heliar that I also can use with my CV 28/2.8, which has a similar E34 filter size.
 
maddoc said:
I have the 35mm Summicron v3, sold the Summicron-C and replaced it with a 40/2.8 Heliar in LTM mount because I like the focal length a lot and can use it with my screw mount cameras. Before the Summicron-C I also had the CLE version of the Minolta 40/2.0. I started a thread about that lens somewhere here at RFF. About rendering, the 40/2.8 Heliar has the most modern character, followed by the CLE version of the Minolta 40/2.0. The Summicron-C is somewhat special with its good center sharpness but slightly soft corners. The CLE 40/2.0 takes easily to find E 40.5 filters while the Summicron-C takes almost impossible to find E39 filters with a different thread pitch. I bought some E34 to E37 and E34 to E40.5 step-up rings for the 40/2.8 Heliar that I also can use with my CV 28/2.8, which has a similar E34 filter size.
Click to expand...
My Summicron C takes Series 5.5 filters. But i have an adapter to use the regular Leitz E39....& just scored a yellow series 5.5 for 5 £ (albeit with a postal charge of 20£)....
 
Last edited:
maddoc said:
I have the 35mm Summicron v3, sold the Summicron-C and replaced it with a 40/2.8 Heliar in LTM mount because I like the focal length a lot and can use it with my screw mount cameras. Before the Summicron-C I also had the CLE version of the Minolta 40/2.0. I started a thread about that lens somewhere here at RFF. About rendering, the 40/2.8 Heliar has the most modern character, followed by the CLE version of the Minolta 40/2.0. The Summicron-C is somewhat special with its good center sharpness but slightly soft corners. The CLE 40/2.0 takes easily to find E 40.5 filters while the Summicron-C takes almost impossible to find E39 filters with a different thread pitch. I bought some E34 to E37 and E34 to E40.5 step-up rings for the 40/2.8 Heliar that I also can use with my CV 28/2.8, which has a similar E34 filter size.
Click to expand...

Series 5.5 is a Leica invention. The filters are 35.9mm in diameter.

There is a Leica Series 5.5 to 39mm adapter. It is like an 11251 with a 39mm thread at the front. It is almost impossible to find. Copies, fortunately, are not hard to find, but they tend to be in grippy aluminium not slick brass.
 
Freakscene said:
Series 5.5 is a Leica invention. The filters are 35.9mm in diameter.

There is a Leica Series 5.5 to 39mm adapter. It is like an 11251 with a 39mm thread at the front. It is almost impossible to find. Copies, fortunately, are not hard to find, but they tend to be in grippy aluminium not slick brass.
Click to expand...
I just checked again, series 5.5 is ES39 but not E39. Both are 39mm diameter but ES39 (series 5.5) is 39mm x 0.75mm while the common E39 is 39mm x 0.5 mm. That's why I wrote "E39 filters with a different thread pitch".
 
maddoc said:
I just checked again, series 5.5 is ES39 but not E39. Both are 39mm diameter but ES39 (series 5.5) is 39mm x 0.75mm while the common E39 is 39mm x 0.5 mm. That's why I wrote "E39 filters with a different thread pitch".
Click to expand...
40mm Summicron C and 90mm Elmar C.... originally used Series 5.5 (non-threaded) drop-in filters that fit behind the screw-in rubber lenshoods.
"Series filters" have always been, by definition unthreaded.
At the same time, it's not unreasonable to ask why Leitz didn't just use their standard E39 filter threads on those lenses intended for the CL?
Lens hoods (especially for the 40) tore easily. Currently both the hoods & caps sell for crazy prices.
 
Last edited:
Wasn‘t the thread actually about the Rokkor, not the Summicron? Because there are differences: The later M Rokkor has multi coating and a 40,5mm filter thread. An excellent lens!
 
santino said:
Wasn‘t the thread actually about the Rokkor, not the Summicron? Because there are differences: The later M Rokkor has multi coating and a 40,5mm filter thread. An excellent lens!
Click to expand...
Ah, my bad..... though i responded because i had used/owned both 40mm lenses (& at one time the CLE with its lens though i don't recall its superiority)....though the 1st version of the Rokkor 40 is optically identical to the Summicron C, and produced for the Leica (or Leitz/Minolta) CL. There were apparently 20,000 produced. The CLE version was issued in 1980. It wasn't clear that the OP was referring specifically to the latter version....even so, despite the newer coatings...it is still the German-designed lens.
If it makes you feel better, I humbly don the hair shirt.....
 
Last edited:
I own and use both on a M10-P. The Heliar is a modern rendering in a vintage barrel, the Rokkor is a vintage-ish rendering in a modern barrel. It’s kind of like the 35 Summicron v3. I struggle to pick one over the other. I would probably lean towards the Voigtlander but the ergonomics are a little wonky for most people.
 
Agree^^^. I have both the Voigtlander and the Minolta M-Rokkor in the CLE (i.e. multi-coated) version. They render differently, but both are excellent. The Voigtlander Heliar is tiny. It does well with both color and black and white film. The M-Rokkor is terrific with bw film. Here are some samples:

Heliar 40mm f2.8, shot on a Leica IIIc using TMax 400:

Shades of grey by Steve Macfarlane, on Flickr

M-Rokkor 40mm f2.0, shot on a Leica M2 using TMax 100:

A new year... by Steve Macfarlane, on Flickr
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top Bottom