Which 35mm do you recommend?

[Vincent.G]

Hi guys!

I have just bought my first RF camera, a leica M2. I love the 35mm focal length and thus I am currently considering the following lens:
1) 35 f/2.5 color skopar PII
2) 35 f/1.4 nokton S.C.
3) 35 f/1.2 aspherical nokton

I hope to get a versatile lens that allows me to shoot outdoors and indoors flexibly. I would love to shoot at night with the lens as the country I am based now comes alive at night.

I understand all the 3 lenses are good. But I just hope to hear what all of you say about the 3 lens and which one should I consider first.

Thank you for your time in advance! I am looking forward to your comments.

 

[Svitantti]

You have to make your own decision based on:
1) Size
2) Prize
3) Lens speed

Its pretty much just that easy. They're all good. 1.4 does some barrel distortion, dunno about others.

 

[kshapero]

1. very sharp, bokeh uninteresting, aperture not enough for low light.
2. Great size if you like tabs (I don't), rings are plastic, great for low light, signature uncharacteristic.
3. My all time great lens - no tabs, bokeh is just awesome, handles like a dream, f 1.2 what else can I say, but are you ready for a lens that weighs as much as your camera body?

What did I do? I own both 1 and 3. But if I had to choose one it would be the CV 35/1.2 a classic.

 

[ferider]

They are all three great. You can pick based on your size vs. speed needs.

2.) and 3.) have similar barrel distortion. 1.) is basically distortion free.

The other great CV 35 is the 35/1.7 which you might consider too.

 

[squinza]

1. very sharp, bokeh uninteresting, aperture not enough for low light.

I fully agree and would add small, light and cheap. Hate the bokeh, though.
If it wasn't for the size I'd buy the 35/1.2. And for sure I will, someday 🙄

 

[elshaneo]

I would say that in terms of size, features, price/value for money and image output qualities, the Voigtlander VM 35 f/1.4 Nokton S.C. is the best buy 🙂

 

[Roger Hicks]

Speed and compactness are a perennial trade-off, and of the three lenses you list, I'd go for the 35/1.4. But then, I've been using a 35/1.4 pre-aspherc for decades...

Cheers,

R.

 

[kywong]

If you don't mind the size, it would have to be the 1.2 for it's rendering. But if size is an issue, the 1.4 if you don't mind the bokeh, 1.7 if you do.

 

[ferider]

I recommend to ignore the bokeh comments. I doubt anybody would be able to differenciate 35/1.4, 35/1.2 and Summicron 35/2 v4 (the "bokeh king") at f2 in a blind test.

The distortion is there though. I would hesitate to shoot architectures with either 1.4 or 1.2, unless you can correct in PS. Have a look at sample photos in the flickr M-mount forum (see my signature).

Best,

Roland.

 

[ferider]

Here is the SC on Superia 1600

Bad bokeh ? I don't think so.

 

[kshapero]

I recommend to ignore the bokeh comments. I doubt anybody would be able to differenciate 35/1.4, 35/1.2 and Summicron 35/2 v4 (the "bokeh king") at f2 in a blind test.

Well, I think the bokeh on the CV 35/1.2 is outstanding.
Witness:

Works nicely for me.

 

[ferider]

This is the SC in conditions about as bad as possible (Arista 100):

Of course, at f1.2 you can do better 🙂 But then again, the 1.2 blocks about 1/3rd of the M2 finder.

 

[kshapero]

This is the SC in conditions about as bad as possible (Arista 100):

Of course, at f1.2 you can do better 🙂

F1.2 or not, that is an awesome shot. Cv35/1.4 SC?

 

[ferider]

Cv35/1.4 SC?

Yep. Thanks ! 🙂

 

[Sparrow]

With colour it’s very hard to fault the 35/2.5 … and such a good price

 

[ferider]

Reg. size

Reg. size

This shows you how big 2.5, 1.7, and 1.4 are:

 

[david.elliott]

Gotta say, I have the 35/2.5 and love it. It is tiny.

I think that the bokeh is great too. Plenty of examples in this thread: http://www.rangefinderforum.com/forums/showthread.php?t=74668

 

[ampguy]

Here is a site with some useful definitions and examples:

http://www.rickdenney.com/bokeh_test.htm

I went on flickr 5 minutes ago, and entered "35/1.4 Nokton" and saw double line bokeh in the 2nd example, and pronounced bright line bokeh in the 5th image.

I would say that if you can go through the flickr Nokton examples of wide open and close up images in all types of lighting, and back lighting, and things look OK, then go with the 35 Nokton. Otherwise go with a Leica lens.

 

[Dave Wilkinson]

I recommend to ignore the bokeh comments. I doubt anybody would be able to differenciate 35/1.4, 35/1.2 and Summicron 35/2 v4 (the "bokeh king") at f2 in a blind test.

The distortion is there though. I would hesitate to shoot architectures with either 1.4 or 1.2, unless you can correct in PS. Have a look at sample photos in the flickr M-mount forum (see my signature).

Best,

Roland.

Thank goodness for a bit of common sense!...even so - it looks like the 'bokeh' nonsense is about to take over yet another thread! 🙄

 

[degruyl]

The pancake lenses also exhibit a bit of falloff at open apertures. This is especially true of the 21 mm, but I think it is there at 35mm.

(Sorry, I am not home, and don't have access to uncorrected scans for comparison).

It is not a major issue in real life, but just consider it.

I personally like small lenses over fast lenses. I often stop down, so the low light capability is not an issue. I have never needed nor really wanted faster than f/2. My two cents. (Yep, I like 'crons).