Which 35mm do you recommend?

[kermaier]

Yes, Leica lenses are good. But you need > 1 kUS for the lenses that were mentioned in this thread.

True, for the Summicron v4 in excellent condition it's usually over $1000.

But the v3 is usually around $800 used (there's one in the RFF classifieds right now for $900), and the Zeiss Biogon 35/2 sells for $875 new. Those are in the same price range as the Nokton 35/1.2. There's even the M-Rokkor 40/2 to think about at half that price.

Anyway, all I'm saying is that there are affordable alternatives to consider outside of the CV offerings, FWIW.

::Ari

 

[kermaier]

Vicky, that picture of the cricket players across the pond should be printed at least 11"x14" and hung on the wall -- that's beautiful!

::Ari

 

[ampguy]

I think you're not considering enough

I think you're not considering enough

There are many more 35s out there than you are currently considering, although the ones you are, should be fine lenses.

At the end of the day, you will end up with a Summilux 1.4 for low light, or a Summicron f2 for bright light, and no wobbles or aperture blades collapsing, so you might just want to go straight for one of those.

You what know guys, when I read in this forum how much Tom A. likes the 35 f1.4, and yet some members thrash it, I am kind of worried I end up at the wrong side of the camp if I were to go for this lens. It has a nice wide aperture which would be useful during low light. Price is intermediate among the three.

Next, I have been following Michael's thread on nokton 35mm f1.2 and I really like the way the lens renders i.e. very nice oof areas yet tack sharp when wide open. With Simon's wonderful pics posted in that thread too, it really swayed me towards the nokton. But then again, I always ask myself whether I am good enough to handle the lens well or not. The biggest aperture I ever shot at was f1.8 on a 50mm, that's about it. In addition, I am also aware of the size factor of this lens as brought up by many here.

Next, when I looked at pics taken by the 35mm PII, I also like them very much. The pull factor is the compactness of this lens and price - it is one hell of a lens for its price! Don't you think so too?

To be honest, I hope I can buy every one of them but I cannot afford it. It is really a tough decision for me. Or shall I just bite the bullet and go for the nokton 35mm f1.2 straight away?

Or am I not considering enough alternatives for 35mm, as one forummer said, should I also consider the leica lens as well? Am I missing out a great deal if I leave out leica at this moment? Or is the current range of CV good enough?

 

[ferider]

I picked up the 35/1.2 last month. Haven't shot it enough to form a firm opinion on the results yet. Its size and weight haven't been a problem. Sure, it's noticeable, especially when added to a bag with other equipment. On the other hand, I attach it to a Bessa and carry them for hours in my hand with no worries. I'm 6'4" with large hands, so others might have more of an issue. I do find the weight of the lens makes it easier to steady the camera compared to light-weight lenses.

I'm 6'4" as well, and the lens' bulk doesn't matter to me either. But having 30% of a Leica's viewfinder obstracted makes the lens pretty useless, for me personally.

 

[ernstk]

Summaron 35/2.8

Summaron 35/2.8

Hi

Another lens that I would urge you to consider is the 35/2.8 Summaron. It delivers extremely good image quality, especially wide open (where it performs better than the Summicron, according to Erwin Puts) and is delightfully compact. In fact, it's the perfect accompaniment for your M2 (I use it exclusively as my 35mm lens on my M2 and M4). It doesn't obscure any of the viewfinder without a hood and if you use the 12585 Leica vented lens hood, you hardly notice it.

This lens is really starting to be appreciated and prices are rising but you should still be able to find one on the Bay for around $600.

Regards
Ernst

 

[Lilserenity]

Vicky, that picture of the cricket players across the pond should be printed at least 11"x14" and hung on the wall -- that's beautiful!

::Ari

Thank you, that is very kind!

I have it printed as a 18 x 12 (for the full 3:2 aspect) in a nice black laquer frame, it takes pride of place in my front room!

Vicky

 

[morgan]

The 1.2 is just an amazing lens. It's big, for sure. But worth it for the way it draws. I also have the 1.7, which is good, but I'm not in love with it.

 

[Juan Valdenebro]

Vicky, that picture of the cricket players across the pond should be printed at least 11"x14" and hung on the wall -- that's beautiful!

::Ari

Oh yes, and the previous one is a dream too!

When Kodachrome meets good light and a good eye, that's as good as color gets!

Cheers,

Juan

 

[Vincent.G]

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.

hi ferider

do you own a 35 f1.4? is the distortion of 35 f1.2 and f1.4 similar?

 

[ferider]

Hi Vincent,

I own both 35/1.4 SC and MC versions (my photos above - post #10, 12 - were taken with the SC version).

From comparison with other people's photos with the 35/1.2, the distortion between 1.4 and 1.2 versions looks similar.

Best,

Roland.

 

[thomasw_]

Hi

Another lens that I would urge you to consider is the 35/2.8 Summaron. It delivers extremely good image quality, especially wide open (where it performs better than the Summicron, according to Erwin Puts) and is delightfully compact. In fact, it's the perfect accompaniment for your M2 (I use it exclusively as my 35mm lens on my M2 and M4). It doesn't obscure any of the viewfinder without a hood and if you use the 12585 Leica vented lens hood, you hardly notice it.

This lens is really starting to be appreciated and prices are rising but you should still be able to find one on the Bay for around $600.

Regards
Ernst

Indeed this is a great lens! As you are willing to consider a f2,5 cv lens, this f2,8 is not much different; for low light you'd be shooting 1600 or even 3200 film in some situations. BTW, hunghang is selling a beautiful specimen in the classifieds right now for 700. If I were in your shoes, OP, I'd take a peek. The build quality of a summaron 35/2,8 is right up there with the best of Leica craftsmanship. There's a reason they still rock. Just make sure it is the M2-version.

 

[Vincent.G]

Ok I will take a peek.

In terms of build quality, image quality and value for money, is the summaron or summicron v3 better? The summicron is a faster lens but that is all I know about it. I am still quite new to leica series lens. When you say M2-version, I suppose you mean the LTM version right?

 

[thomasw_]

Ok I will take a peek.

In terms of build quality, image quality and value for money, is the summaron or summicron v3 better? The summicron is a faster lens but that is all I know about it. I am still quite new to leica series lens. When you say M2-version, I suppose you mean the LTM version right?

No I mean the M-mount version designed for the M2 that brings up the 35 framelines; it has the best coatings which do make a difference in IQ. There is a M3 version which came with goggles to de-magnify and convert the M3s 50 lines to 35lines; you don't need that extra jazz. The only summicron 35 with a build quality to match the summaron 35 is the current ASPH version's black paint or titanium specialty stock and the Version 1 summicron 8 element version: but these summicrons are out of the price range limit.

 

[ferider]

With respect, I disagree, and realize it's subjective. v3 is built as well as v1 and Summaron, and better than the standard v4 and ASPH. Don't know (never held one) about the Titanium ASPH version though. Don't know about the chrome v4 either, that I suspect is very solid, too. Maybe we can agree on the build quality being close on all of them ? 🙂

The 35/1.4 built and feel is very similar to the pre-asph Summicrons, IMO.

 

[kermaier]

With respect, I disagree, and realize it's subjective. v3 is built as well as v1 and Summaron, and better than the standard v4 and ASPH. Don't know (never held one) about the Titanium ASPH version though. Don't know about the chrome v4 either, that I suspect is very solid, too. Maybe we can agree on the build quality being close on all of them ? 🙂

The 35/1.4 built and feel is very similar to the pre-asph Summicrons, IMO.

I own the Summaron 35/2.8 in both M-mount (M2/M4) and LTM, and I've handled the Summicron 35/2 v3. (BTW, the Summaron has the exact same body/barrel/mount as the Summicron v1 -- the only physical difference is 2.8 vs. 2 engraved on the aperture scale.) The Summaron is noticeably better built than the Summicron v4, in terms of solidity of moving parts, particularly the aperture ring.

I also own the Konica UC-Hexanon 35/2, and that's better-built and more beautifully finished than either the Summaron or the Summicron v4.

I've never handled the Summicron v3, but I'm curious about its build, as well as its comparative performance vs. the Summaron, v4 'cron and UC-Hex. (Idle thoughts of a chronic GAS sufferer.)

::Ari

 

[ampguy]

I have the v3

I have the v3

and it's build quality is the same as the black chrome V4, and ASPH that I previously owned. In other words, about 5x better than a typical CV, and 3x better than a Zeiss, in my experiences.

One ASPH 35 I had dropped 5 feet onto cement and ice and bounced about 5 times, still worked perfect, and a little trip to DAG it even looked new still. Don't try that with a non-Leica lens ...

The look between v3 and v4 is very hard to discern, but the v4 may have a bit higher contrast, though bokeh is the same.

The ASPH has a different modern look, and even flares differently - e.g. aperture reflections when shooting into the sun, has a modern cinematic flare behavior.

If the ASPH were the size of the V3/V4 I'd probably go for one again. Otherwise V3 and V4 are great and equal.

As folks realize the "King of Bokeh" hype for the V4 is just that - hype, the prices of the V3 and V4 should level out. The ASPH versions (of most any Leica lens) will always be touted as "best" because it is what dealers can sell new now ... plus, it's not a bad lens ...

Oh- and about filters, the V3 takes 39mm filters, but to use the 12524/6 rect. hood, the centering prongs on those hoods would need about 1mm filing for it to work, but I imagine it works better than the round 12504 vented hood. Also, the 12504 hood probably won't work over 39mm filters on the v3, unless ultra-slim, so plan on using VII/49mm filters in the 12504 rather than 39mm filters, unles like me, you just don't use a hood as it rarely flares from side lights like the lux 35.


The best 35 ever? the late pre-asph Summilux 35.

I own the Summaron 35/2.8 in both M-mount (M2/M4) and LTM, and I've handled the Summicron 35/2 v3. (BTW, the Summaron has the exact same body/barrel/mount as the Summicron v1 -- the only physical difference is 2.8 vs. 2 engraved on the aperture scale.) The Summaron is noticeably better built than the Summicron v4, in terms of solidity of moving parts, particularly the aperture ring.

I also own the Konica UC-Hexanon 35/2, and that's better-built and more beautifully finished than either the Summaron or the Summicron v4.

I've never handled the Summicron v3, but I'm curious about its build, as well as its comparative performance vs. the Summaron, v4 'cron and UC-Hex. (Idle thoughts of a chronic GAS sufferer.)


::Ari

 

[Bingley]

Indeed this is a great lens! As you are willing to consider a f2,5 cv lens, this f2,8 is not much different; for low light you'd be shooting 1600 or even 3200 film in some situations. BTW, hunghang is selling a beautiful specimen in the classifieds right now for 700. If I were in your shoes, OP, I'd take a peek. The build quality of a summaron 35/2,8 is right up there with the best of Leica craftsmanship. There's a reason they still rock. Just make sure it is the M2-version.

How does this version of the summaron compare w/ the 40 summicron-C/Rokkor -M in terms of IQ, rendition, and contrast?

 

[kermaier]

How does this version of the summaron compare w/ the 40 summicron-C/Rokkor -M in terms of IQ, rendition, and contrast?

Hmm, I have both the Summaron 35/2.8 and the M-Rokkor 40/2 (CLE version), but I've never consciously compared results from the two. They're both among the best lenses I've ever used in terms of (subjective, non-scientific) image quality. Off the top of my head, I think the Summaron images have more of a particular character, and maybe nicer rendering of b&w tones than the M-Rokkor. But it's hard to fault the M-Rokkor anywhere, and I think it's a bit higher in contrast than the Summaron. I'll try to shoot a comparison tomorrow on my R-D1.

::Ari

 

[Makten]

How does this version of the summaron compare w/ the 40 summicron-C/Rokkor -M in terms of IQ, rendition, and contrast?

A little warning: The Summicron-C 40/2 doesn't focus correctly on M-cameras. I just got mine that has been in for service, and with my M8 it focuses too close at every distance setting. It isn't much, but enough to spoil sharpness in every shot when wide open.
You'll probably not have any problems if you're gonna shoot at f/4 or smaller apertures, at a few meters distance.

The same goes for the other Leica CL lens, namely the 90/4 Elmar-C. Obviously the slope on the inner barrel of the C-lenses doesn't do well with the cam on M-cameras.

Edit: This might not apply to the Rokkors though! The CLE has a wider rangefinder base, so perhaps it's more like the M's.

 

[kermaier]

A little warning: The Summicron-C 40/2 doesn't focus correctly on M-cameras. I just got mine that has been in for service, and with my M8 it focuses too close at every distance setting. It isn't much, but enough to spoil sharpness in every shot when wide open.
You'll probably not have any problems if you're gonna shoot at f/4 or smaller apertures, at a few meters distance.

The same goes for the other Leica CL lens, namely the 90/4 Elmar-C. Obviously the slope on the inner barrel of the C-lenses doesn't do well with the cam on M-cameras.

That's definitely not the case with the Minolta CLE versions of these lenses, which have a more typical M-mount slope.

Edit: Oops, my post crossed with your edit. BTW, I don't know whether the M-Rokkor 40/2 that was issued with the CL focuses like the Summicron-C or the M-Rokkor 40/2 for the CLE.