richdirector
Member
Just got a Bessa R with 21mm and looking to get a 35mm to go with it. Choice is down to 2.5 Skopar or 35mm ultron. Anyone used both?
Not a cost issue.
Most my work will be B&W and generally 100-400 film. Extra stops useful for lower light but is Ultron much bigger / heavier?
Saw one review that said Ultron wasn't sharp (reviewed against Nokton) and another that said Ultron had less contrast compared to Skopar. (I will be scanning neg and using photoshop)
Any opinions (or people selling SH in UK) gratefully appreciated.
Not a cost issue.
Most my work will be B&W and generally 100-400 film. Extra stops useful for lower light but is Ultron much bigger / heavier?
Saw one review that said Ultron wasn't sharp (reviewed against Nokton) and another that said Ultron had less contrast compared to Skopar. (I will be scanning neg and using photoshop)
Any opinions (or people selling SH in UK) gratefully appreciated.
pvdhaar
Peter
The LTM 35/2.5 Skopar Classic is built in the same housing as the 21.. Should give you an idea about its size (or lack thereof)..
ferider
Veteran
They are both great lenses, and the Ultron is sharp and contrasty - just not as much as the Color Skopar in the contrast department.
It really comes down to speed, handling, size and prize (the Ultron is sign. more expensive). Note that the Ultron is not big, just the Skopar very small. So I guess the best would be to look at pics of camera and lens, or maybe even better hold them.
Also, the Ultron has .9m min. focus, the Skopar .7m, that matters to me, sometimes.
Sorry I cann't help better, they are both great lenses.
Welcome to the forum.
Roland.
It really comes down to speed, handling, size and prize (the Ultron is sign. more expensive). Note that the Ultron is not big, just the Skopar very small. So I guess the best would be to look at pics of camera and lens, or maybe even better hold them.
Also, the Ultron has .9m min. focus, the Skopar .7m, that matters to me, sometimes.
Sorry I cann't help better, they are both great lenses.
Welcome to the forum.
Roland.
Last edited:
I think Roland hit all the points I would make.
My first real adult RF camera was an R with 35 Ultron. It always seemed to me, everytime I picked that camera up the lens was already in perfect focus and ready to go. I like the Ultron quite a bit, yes size wise it is not tiny, but it is very well handling and gives you everything you may need in your kit (other than that tiny size).
My first real adult RF camera was an R with 35 Ultron. It always seemed to me, everytime I picked that camera up the lens was already in perfect focus and ready to go. I like the Ultron quite a bit, yes size wise it is not tiny, but it is very well handling and gives you everything you may need in your kit (other than that tiny size).
mr_phillip
Well-known
The 35mm Color-Skopar Classic is one of my favourite lenses of that length ever. It keeps some very exhaulted company in my lens collection, but has found a special little place in my heart for its tiny size, quick focusing, sharp (and I mean SHARP) optics and great contrast and character.
I had a loaner Ultron a few years back, with a view to buying it if I liked it, but the handling annoyed me a bit. As people have said, it's a chunky thing but not huge. But what got to me was the way that the aperture ring is mounted ahead of the focusing ring, but has a smaller diameter. I found that my fingers kept having to search for it when I wanted to stop down with the camera raised to my eye. Image-wise though, there's not much between them. The Skopar is maybe marginally sharper (though I found the Ultron quite respectable in that regard) and it certainly has better contrast at wider apertures.
I had a loaner Ultron a few years back, with a view to buying it if I liked it, but the handling annoyed me a bit. As people have said, it's a chunky thing but not huge. But what got to me was the way that the aperture ring is mounted ahead of the focusing ring, but has a smaller diameter. I found that my fingers kept having to search for it when I wanted to stop down with the camera raised to my eye. Image-wise though, there's not much between them. The Skopar is maybe marginally sharper (though I found the Ultron quite respectable in that regard) and it certainly has better contrast at wider apertures.
richdirector
Member
Thanks for all the replies. Size I guess is important ..... I have a BIG Horseman SW612 and a huge digital schmigital setup so the Bessa R idea was really to go minimal ....
Unless I can find a SH one will just order one from Robert White .... (I have the 58mm 1.4 voigtlander on my Nikon Digital and that is a great lens.)
Back in the UK in 2 weeks so will try get it then, unless eB*y has one going cheap.
Rich
Unless I can find a SH one will just order one from Robert White .... (I have the 58mm 1.4 voigtlander on my Nikon Digital and that is a great lens.)
Back in the UK in 2 weeks so will try get it then, unless eB*y has one going cheap.
Rich
richdirector
Member
sorry meant to say the 35mm 2.5 Skopar will prob win the day.