FrankS
Registered User
I had a CV50f2.5, Summaron f2.8, and Summaron f3.5.
I "downgraded" and freed up some cash by selling the CV50 and buying a Canon 50f1.8.
I sold my 3.5 Summaron, added the spare cash, and bought a Canon 35f2.
Would you have done the same?
I "downgraded" and freed up some cash by selling the CV50 and buying a Canon 50f1.8.
I sold my 3.5 Summaron, added the spare cash, and bought a Canon 35f2.
Would you have done the same?
dcsang
Canadian & Not A Dentist
I'm confused - are you asking if I would have sold slower lenses for faster ones? Or are you asking if I would have sold 3 lenses to end up with 2 lenses?
Cheers,
Dave
Cheers,
Dave
FrankS
Registered User
Started with 3 lenses, ended with 3 lenses. The 2.8 Summaron is a constant and not leaving, ever.
Mackinaw
Think Different
Yep. Personally, I prefer a faster lens to a slower one. Besides giving you more options (low-light shooting with fim) I like the shallow DOF you get with a faster lens.
Jim B.
Jim B.
nobbylon
Veteran
Although dof issues are there I don't think there's that much between 1.4, 2 and 2.8 lenses at the wide angle end. On Slr's then maybe as the faster the lens the better the view. My preference is for f2 lenses as a good balance between dof limitation and getting what you want in focus! I tend to use my Nikon 85 at f2 up and only at 1.4 IF I have time to concentrate on focus. I used to use my summilux 35 and 50's rarely at 1.4 and even then only because it was there. The pics would have been pretty much the same at 2 and 2.8. In the case of the 35 then much better as that dreamy for want of a better word, fog bound look of the pics is IMO awfull!
I think a lot of shooters think that faster lenses magically transform their pics into masterpieces. After seeing a lot of oof portraits and obvious close focus wide open shots on the net it seems that a lot of users think that because it's usable wide open then it's a must to do so. JMO.
I think a lot of shooters think that faster lenses magically transform their pics into masterpieces. After seeing a lot of oof portraits and obvious close focus wide open shots on the net it seems that a lot of users think that because it's usable wide open then it's a must to do so. JMO.
FrankS
Registered User
Shooting indoors at night with 400 speed film, I need 1/30@f2. I didn't have that capability in 35mm with my slower Summarons or CV50.
I don't feel the need for 'Lux lenses, thank goodness.
I don't feel the need for 'Lux lenses, thank goodness.
nobbylon
Veteran
paradoxbox
Well-known
if you're an indoor and night shooter, faster lenses make sense.
if most of your shots are in the day and outdoors then the tradeoff is the extra bulk that most f1.5/f2 lenses have over their 2.8 or slower equivalents, plus the expense.
i had the same kind of need for speed but settled on a ricoh grd-3 for my fast wide down to f1.9 @ 21mm, and a jupiter-3 for the token f1.5 50mm. those two get me through even the dimly lit bars. i guess around 70% of my photos are taken long after the sun has set. i have other slower lenses that get used during the day time or when i need a particular look.
if most of your shots are in the day and outdoors then the tradeoff is the extra bulk that most f1.5/f2 lenses have over their 2.8 or slower equivalents, plus the expense.
i had the same kind of need for speed but settled on a ricoh grd-3 for my fast wide down to f1.9 @ 21mm, and a jupiter-3 for the token f1.5 50mm. those two get me through even the dimly lit bars. i guess around 70% of my photos are taken long after the sun has set. i have other slower lenses that get used during the day time or when i need a particular look.
Bill Clark
Veteran
When I buy another lens it goes into the place where I keep them.
I realize some have a budget that makes for sometimes selling something to get another. I very well remember those days! I'm now at a stage in life where I can enjoy the fruits of working hard for 45 plus years.
Speed of the lens doesn't make much of a difference to me either since I use a tripod and will provide controlled light when needed. I hardly ever shoot wide open so having a fast lens doesn't matter to me.
For Leica I have a 50mm f2.5, 50mm f2.0 (first lens bought used) and a 90mm f2.0 lens.
My wife and I took a 35th Anniversary vacation to Hawaii last November and the only film camera I brought was a M4-2 body and a 50mm Summarit lens. Only B&W film as color was made with my Canon 5D Mark something with a 24-70 f2.8 lens.
Works for me.
I tend to keep the equipment I buy.
Hope this helps you.
I realize some have a budget that makes for sometimes selling something to get another. I very well remember those days! I'm now at a stage in life where I can enjoy the fruits of working hard for 45 plus years.
Speed of the lens doesn't make much of a difference to me either since I use a tripod and will provide controlled light when needed. I hardly ever shoot wide open so having a fast lens doesn't matter to me.
For Leica I have a 50mm f2.5, 50mm f2.0 (first lens bought used) and a 90mm f2.0 lens.
My wife and I took a 35th Anniversary vacation to Hawaii last November and the only film camera I brought was a M4-2 body and a 50mm Summarit lens. Only B&W film as color was made with my Canon 5D Mark something with a 24-70 f2.8 lens.
Works for me.
I tend to keep the equipment I buy.
Hope this helps you.
Bingley
Veteran
As a way of gaining speed w/out breaking the bank, you did well. In addition, replacing the slower Summaron with the Canon 35/2 gets you a more modern look in 35, and you still have the Summaron 35/2.8 for its more vintage look in that focal length.
I have the CV 50/2.5 and the Canon 50/1.8, and can't imagine giving either up. I like the form factor and handling of the CV 50, particularly on a Barnack body. The Canon 50 rocks on an M body. But then I have a thing for 50s...
I have the CV 50/2.5 and the Canon 50/1.8, and can't imagine giving either up. I like the form factor and handling of the CV 50, particularly on a Barnack body. The Canon 50 rocks on an M body. But then I have a thing for 50s...