Whats the best 35mm lens for shooting film?

[papo]

Right now i am eyeing the Biogon 2.8 that according to reviews and forum opinions seems to have an amazing price/value but I see all of these other 35s so i wonder, what other great or even better alternatives are out there when shooting film?

Thanks in advance!

 

[bayernfan]

Zeiss offers a lot of value/$, no doubt. But you've gotta like the Zeiss look. Very sharp, lotta micro-contrast. Personally, I find it the look too modern. I shoot film because of the classic aesthetic. I also prefer the rendering of a classic lens.

Some of my favorite 35mm LTM/M Mount lenses are: 35/2 Summicron V1/2/3, 35/2.8 Summaron, 35/3.5 Summaron, 35/1.4 Summilux pre-asph V2, 40/2 M-Rokkor, W-Nikkor 35/1.8, W-Nikkor 35/2.5

 

[Chriscrawfordphoto]

I loved my Biogon 35/2.8 when I was still shooting Leica. It was the sharpest 35mm lens I have ever shot, in any camera system. It is, as bayernfan mentions, a very contrasty lens.

 

[sara]

I've used the Voigtlander 35 2.5 pancake lens for a very long time and it has served me well (I've changed to Summicron since then).

A friend of mine told me that the Voigtlander has a little but more contrast.

 

[mcfingon]

I have a 35 f2 Biogon, which I think is excellent. Works nicely with my M6 and Delta 100 film.

 

[Chriscrawfordphoto]

I shot all of these with the 35mm f2.8 Biogon with Tri-X film and Leica M6.

 

[KM-25]

My faves are the ones I have, 35 F2 Summicron V4 and 35mm 1.4 FLE.

 

[mcfingon]

I shot all of these with the 35mm f2.8 Biogon with Tri-X film and Leica M6.

They all look super-punchy Chris. Great stuff.

 

[jamin-b]

I have the Biogon 2.8 and a Summaron 2.8, with goggles, for use with the M3, and the VoigtlanderColor Skopar 2.5 (LTM). The biogon and Summaron are two very different lenses - the Summaron is more organic, sharp but never harsh, and it is hard to imagine anything sharper or more contrasty than the Biogon. For a while I actually disliked the Biogon, especially on digital (in sun I found the contrast overdone) but have come to appreciate it. The Voigtlander is also quite contrasty but without the bite of the Biogon. it often gets taken along because it is so compact but , while it is perfectly good, somehow it leaves the a impression of being neither here nor there.

I like to pair sharper, "cleaner" films like Arcos, Pan F, Ektar with the more "gentle" lenses and the sharper, digital ones with more grainy ones like HP5+, color 400 ISO and up and the Fomapans.

Nice to have so many choices, especially when each is really quite excellent in its own way.

 

[teddy]

Zeiss offers a lot of value/$, no doubt. But you've gotta like the Zeiss look. Very sharp, lotta micro-contrast. Personally, I find it the look too modern. I shoot film because of the classic aesthetic. I also prefer the rendering of a classic lens.

Some of my favorite 35mm LTM/M Mount lenses are: 35/2 Summicron V1/2/3, 35/2.8 Summaron, 35/3.5 Summaron, 35/1.4 Summilux pre-asph V2, 40/2 M-Rokkor, W-Nikkor 35/1.8, W-Nikkor 35/2.5

I also shoot for a certain look and aesthetic - and I also shoot the Leitz Summicron 35/2 V1, Summaron 35/2.8. I consider them in the group of the sharpest lenses in the world. I even find that the Summaron 35/2.8 gives me a balance of both worlds - vintage and modern when it comes to high contrast and that look of the 50's with colour and black and white.

Leica M3, Leitz Summaron 35/2.8, Fuji Provia 100F, 81a Warming Filter, 40 seconds

Leica M3, Leitz Summicron 35/2 V1, Fuji Velvia 50 (1998), 81a Warming Filter

 

[Richard G]

Of course there isn't just one. I like this C Biogon very much, but also enjoy my version 4 Summicron. The latter is tiny. Tinier still is the f3.5 Summaron. I like the results I've had with Ektar and black and white with that 1950 lens.

 

[ChrisPlatt]

A: The one I like best that fits the lens mount on the camera I am using! 😉

So many answers; none of them are wrong.
There are many unsung heroes in this category.

Many in this forum praise the humble CV 35/2.5 Color Skopar.
Mine is the only LTM lens I have kept.

When I'm out in a downpour I can continue to shoot away happily
with the modest 35/2.5 Nikkor lens on my Nikonos camera.

To SLR users I suggest you try the superb Pentax 35/3.5 lens,
available in both M42, ES screw and PK bayonet versions.

Chris

 

[Ko.Fe.]

Right now i am eyeing the Biogon 2.8 that according to reviews and forum opinions seems to have an amazing price/value but I see all of these other 35s so i wonder, what other great or even better alternatives are out there when shooting film?

Thanks in advance!

Forum opinions also glorifying Color Skopar, which is slightly faster, lighter, much easier to handle (IMO) and not expensive as Biogon.

"Film" consist of two very different ventures. Where is color film and for it Color Skopar is "an amazing value/price" for negatives scans reviewed on the screen and inkjet prints.

And then where is BW film where it is still relatively easy to get it done right by DIY and print from the negative in the darkroom.... I never printed from modern 35 2.8 Zeiss. But I printed from illusive, rare and flaring like crazy "Russian Biogon"... I prefer it to Color Skopar 35 2.5 on the darkroom prints or even scans.

But my best color, bw film and digital lens is the Summarit-M 35 2.5. It was worth to pay twice than slightly slower Zeiss and it is not time bitten lottery as Canadian Crons, which I also like for their build, handling and even images, but see no practical reason to pay current speculative price.

 

[Roger Hicks]

Doesn't matter a lot. I've one of the cheapest (Color Skopar) and one of the astonishingly valuable cult classics (pre-aspheric Summilux, the first Leica lens I ever bought new) and I use the Summilux more 'cos it's faster and I like the handling slightly better. I sold my 35/1.7 Ultron because someone REALLY wanted it and it was sort of between the other two: superb performance, indifferent handling.

Cheers,

R.

 

[Erik van Straten]

I have collected quite a lot of 35mm lenses over the years: Elmar f/3.5 thick cam, Elmar f/3.5 nickel, Summaron f/3.5 LTM, Summaron F/3.5 M, Summaron f/2.8 M (fits also screw mount), Summaron f/2.8 goggles, Summicron f/2 (8 elements), Summicron f/2 (8 elements) goggles, Summilux f/1.4 goggles v1, Summilux f/1.4 v1, Summilux f/1.4 v2 infinity lock, Ultron f/1.7 LTM and Ultron f/1.7 M, not to forget the Nikkors 35mm f/2.5 and f/1.8. I like the Summilux f/1.4 v1 the best, but the others are nice too, so I keep them all.

Leica I model C, Elmar 35mm f/3.5 thick cam, 400-2TMY.

Erik.

 

[SaveKodak]

The Zeiss lenses are the best bang for the buck, and in the case of the 35/1.4, the best period. I personally love the 35/2 Biogon for it's speed, performance, and handling. Some people said that this lens is softer wide open, but I have 25mp images from my A7, shot at F2, that are ridiculously sharp. I had the 35/1.4 and it's the best 35 I've ever shot, but it's IMO too big for a film sized M.

 

[ferider]

I have quite a few 35s. My favorites are the Summicron v1 and the chrome VM Ultron 35/1.7.

Both are truly amazing lenses. Technically, the Ultron runs circles around both ZM Biogons. And, did I mention that I like my lenses well built ?

Roland.

 

[Chubberino]

I haven't been able to dabble much because budget restricts it, lol, but I adore my Summaron 35mm 2.8 for film and digital. If I had my druthers, I'd probably get the 8-element Summicron, but it's very expensive.

 

[narsuitus]

Here is another vote for the Zeiss 35mm f/1.4

 

[DwF]

35 Summicron v4 ...but those Biogon-C pics sure look good!