LarsAC
Established
I love it on film with a .58 finder. Never used it digital. if you need absolute sharpness into the corners look elsewhere I would say. Not a limitation for me though.
Lars
Lars
ferider
Veteran
The CS is easily Cornerfix'ed in post.
If you dont want to use Cfix, i suggest a 28 Leica lens with code. Ive tried Canon 28/3.5 and Nikkor 28/3.5, but they vignette much more on digital than film. The 28/2.8 Rokkor is great, BTW.
Note that i had several Color Skopar samples. They were not all the same. My current copy is super sharp and nicely symmetric, ill never sell it. I love the built and the tones the lens produces.
Roland.
If you dont want to use Cfix, i suggest a 28 Leica lens with code. Ive tried Canon 28/3.5 and Nikkor 28/3.5, but they vignette much more on digital than film. The 28/2.8 Rokkor is great, BTW.
Note that i had several Color Skopar samples. They were not all the same. My current copy is super sharp and nicely symmetric, ill never sell it. I love the built and the tones the lens produces.
Roland.
CVickery
Established
No noticeable color shift on my M10
Hi Erik, that's of course true, but some lenses are indeed more suited to digital than others. You can think of a digital sensor as millions of little buckets or wells lined up on a glass surface. If the incoming light from the lens is perpendicular to the sensor and directly hits the bottom of the wells, the light is recorded accurately. But if the incoming light is at an angle where it hits the sides of the wells instead of the bottoms, the light isn't recorded accurately resulting in color shifts. The steeper the angle of the incoming light, the worse it gets. That's why there's been a shift to telecentric "designed for digital" lens designs in recent years, and also why some digital cameras use micro lenses on the sensors. Film is not as sensitive to the angle of the incoming light. Any lens "designed for digital" will work equally as well on film.
Is that the copy I used to own, Roland? Damn good lens, that one. I compared it with an Elmarit 28/2.8 ASPH and it held its own very well. Sharpness was on par except in the far corners at wider apertures.
Bingley
Veteran
IMO, the Skopar 28/3.5 is a wonderful lens. Like Roland, I will never sell my copy.
Granite Pillows by bingley0522, on Flickr
Granite Pillows by bingley0522, on Flickr
Bingley
Veteran
And I have no issues with how it performs with color film (never tried it w/ digital):
The Look by bingley0522, on Flickr
The Look by bingley0522, on Flickr
David Murphy
Veteran
It's a nice lens, but too expensive for what it is IMO. It was an economy lens of sorts when it came out years ago -- before Voigtlander moved to the high-end market. Lamentably, there are no inexpensive 28mm lenses in either Leica M or LTM. What is available is either expensive or very expensive, at least by the budget standards of working people. Too bad!
ferider
Veteran
Yes, Sir
Thanks again !Today, on the 240:
Always loved that lens, in a way the CS 28/3.5 on a IIIc got me into RF photography.
This is now 10 years ago with a different sample of the lens on film:
and here at 100 km/h on my commute (my avatar):
Cheers,
Roland.
vnm
Newbie
Like others have said, this lens is a true gem and the more I shoot it the more it impresses me. If you go on my instagram @streetpatter all my wide angle shots were taken with the 28 CS
I've never shot it on a digital M, and I'm not sure I ever will, but if the day comes I'm sure it has enough character to warrant keeping it even if it's not as perfect as a modern Leica.
I've never shot it on a digital M, and I'm not sure I ever will, but if the day comes I'm sure it has enough character to warrant keeping it even if it's not as perfect as a modern Leica.
Godfrey
somewhat colored
... Do note that, although it has some issues on the digital sensor when it comes to color work (per my posts previously in this thread), it's the only 28mm lens I've kept.
I think I bought the last new black one that Photo Village in NYC had, somewhere around 2011.
G
I think I bought the last new black one that Photo Village in NYC had, somewhere around 2011.
G
SaveKodak
Well-known
Also look at the cost of a 2nd hand Zeiss 28mm 2.8 Biogon. SC's are inflated in price IMO, where as the Biogon is sold too cheaply considering it's overall quality. You'll still spend more on the Zeiss, but less than you might think.
Huh? Care to expand, because there is nothing wrong with the output from this lens in any way, shape, or form.
Erik van Straten
Veteran
Hi Jon, thank you for this very clear explanation, but I thought all this was passé since the M9 technology.
Erik.
David Murphy
Veteran
Yes, sure, I'm happy to expand. The Skopar 28/3.5 was easily purchased for around $200 or so used perhaps 15 or so years ago, and then at some point Voigtlander stopped making it (and most LTM lenses). I can't remember what the new price was back then, but I'm sure it was a lot less than the $500-600 it sells for used now.
Over time its price has inflated, not because it is such a great lens, but because it is now uncommon. Wide angle 28mm lenses in LTM are all expensive, and there are very few modern ones at any price. In my view the CV 28/3.5 is a very decent, but slow 28mm lens, but still very expensive for what it is: a slow 28mm lens. In the era when CV made LTM lenses, the CV 28mm F1.9 Ultron was considered the premier 28mm rangefinder lens in the CV line-up and more expensive. The CV 28/3.5 was a cheaper alternative. The only other competing modern 28mm LTM (that I know of) at that time was the Kobalux/Avenon 28/3.5, expensive and slow (but also a nice lens), and it also went out of production about the time the CV lenses appeared.
All modern Voigtlander lenses are excellent optically. Other factors primarily drive their monetary value (mostly availability, but also the availability of any competing products, lens speed, size, etc.).
Erik van Straten
Veteran
Also because it is the only modern lens, besides the 50mm f/2.5 Color-Skopar and some other extremely expensive Leica lenses, that is made in black paint on brass, in fact to match the Leica MP when that camera appeared in about 2002.
Erik.
besk
Well-known
The lens has acquired a reputation on this forum for its rendering in B&W. Our late Tom Abrahamsson remarked about it.
I have one and I am not selling it. It is a nice, compact lens for traveling.
I have one and I am not selling it. It is a nice, compact lens for traveling.
raid
Dad Photographer
I am very happy with the performance of the Rokkor 28/2.8. It is my main 28mm lens now. I do have a Kobalux 28/3.5 for occasional use. It is also a fine lens. Someone mentioned the Zeiss G 28/2.8. I have it for the G1. I do have the Zeiss G 45/2 in M mount but not the 28/2.8.
Sure, I used to buy them anywhere from $275-450 even 8 years ago. That doesn't make them too expensive. There just aren't any LTM / M lenses that are better for the money really. What alternatives does someone have at $500?
Hi Erik, passé as in pre-digital lenses no longer have color shift problems on digital Leicas? Leica has certainly made improvements with each subsequent model, but I don't think they've quite reached that stage yet.
ferider
Veteran
I remember well that - for example - clean 2.8 Summaron lenses or rigid 5cm Summicrons were available for < US 300 at the same time. Yes, you might call the CS' price now inflated, but so are many other Leica lenses today. There really is no alternative for a modern compact 28, with exception of the Kobalux/Avenon lens maybe. But that carries a similar price today.
Roland.