who makes the best Non-Leica Leica Lens

who makes the best Non-Leica Leica Lens

  • Canon

    Votes: 15 7.4%

  • Carl Zeiss (with Cosina)

    Votes: 111 54.4%

  • Konica

    Votes: 35 17.2%

  • Minolta

    Votes: 5 2.5%

  • Nikon

    Votes: 12 5.9%

  • Voigtlander (Old time)

    Votes: 4 2.0%

  • Voigtlander (with Cosina)

    Votes: 42 20.6%

  • Others (pls indicate)

    Votes: 6 2.9%
  • Total voters
    204
  • Poll closed .
Stuart,

Konica has a rich history in making sharp lenses for their fixed lens RF cameras in the past. Just the past 12 months ago, I discovered their Konica I, II, III, and IIIM cameras. They each sport an excellent lens. I still don't have any Konica lens for my RF bodies with interchangeable lenses.
 
tough poll! i went with konica, but CV lenses are nice too (no disrespect to the other, especially Zeiss [i just don't own them]).
 
I just happened to read an artical in a magazine somewhere of the Japaneese making Nikon lenses back in the 50's that were every bit as good as Leica made lenses made during the same time frame. These lenses were scooped up immediately by servicemen and are very rare today. The cost was very cheap compared to the cost of Leitz lenses. I think some of these lenses were even made in screwmount but don't state me as fact on that. Todays lenses, I think Zeiss makes the best. I think Canon made some good glass in the days of the sm era. For the money factor you cannot beat the quality of voightlander (cosina) made lenses though.
 
For me it's a toss-up between Canon & Zeiss. I went with Canon on this poll because in the end, it's thier lenses I keep coming back to. But I really want a ZI & the new Sonnars to complement those Canon lenses :D

William
 
How many people have enough experience to give an honest answer on this?

I don't, and I've had more experience than most over the last 30+ years. As far as I recall, in Leica fit I've had Leica and Zeiss and Canon and Yashica and Schneider and Voigtländer (old & new) and TTH and Enna and most FSU and Minolta and Steinheil and Wray and British Optical Company and....

But I've never used Konica (Leica-mount) or screw-mount Nikkors or Zunow or most of the Canons (just 50/1,2 and 1.8) or...

And I know full well that one of the most common beginnings to an answer is "I've never had a ___________, but..." Indeed I've done it myself. Likewise I know (again because I've done it) that when many people say "I find it hard to believe that X is better than Y", all they are saying is "I've never tried X but I have a Y."

There's also an enormous difference between build quality and optical design.

Treat anyone's answers with reserve.

Cheers,

R.
 
Most of my lenses go way back to when i purchased my M3, they are all Leica lenses. Recently i purchased a Zeiss 21mm Biogon which has proven to be a big disappointment everyone of my leica lenses, 35mm,50mm,90mm and 135mm have all proved to be sharper in every way and at different aperatures. Were talking about 50 year old lenses, no more Zeiss for me i'll stick with Leica glass!
 
Roger Hicks said:
Treat anyone's answers with reserve.

Cheers,

R.
Click to expand...


If it's easier, just pay attention to my answers...I have less than 30 years experience...also less than 30 years on this earth, but I am always right so it evens out. :D
 
Agreed!!!!!!! Extra exclamation points to bring it to 10 characters...
 
I've been testing my 35s and 50s and it's been a surprise. I have Leica (pre-ASPH), Canon and Voigtlander and I didn't really expect too much from the Voigts, given the lower cost, however at f2.0 the Ultron 35mm blows away the Cron 4th 35mm while the Nokton 35mm blows away the Lux at wider apertures (yes, I know it's twice the size). By 'blow away' I mean 'performs better' in terms of resolution, contrast and lack of vignetting (this was not a comprehensive test). Also, I keep reading about how great the Canons are but my 35mm f1.8 and 50mm f1.8 are really nothing special at wider apertures, where they seem to suffer from low contrast and flare. So I tip my hat (err...crown) to Mr K for producing such wonderful lenses at such great prices.
 
There is no substitute.
Click to expand...

For Leica? Pshaw! This is just ad-speak mumbo jumbo. There are specific Leica lenses that have no equivalent from other makers, but you can't say that about every Leica lens. Many are equaled or out-performed by other brands, particularly when price is factored into the equation.

The IV version of the Summicron 35 comes to mind. It's easily bettered by any number of other 35's. The Hexanon 50 is just as good as the Summicron 50, and less prone to the weird flare some Summicrons have. The notion that every Leica lens is special is just hogwash.
 
The thing that always frustrated me about Konica were their SLR bodies. I wish they had just made a plane-Jane all manual mechanical SLR with none of that auto-exposure B.S. I know that their early auto exposure SLR's are not actually battery dependent, but I find them weird and baggage laden. It frustrates me because I want to use their SLR lenses like the 57mm F1.2

raid said:
Stuart,

Konica has a rich history in making sharp lenses for their fixed lens RF cameras in the past. Just the past 12 months ago, I discovered their Konica I, II, III, and IIIM cameras. They each sport an excellent lens. I still don't have any Konica lens for my RF bodies with interchangeable lenses.
Click to expand...
 
if we are talking strictly about build quality then my answer is another question...how many of the stated brands will survive a fall from chest height?

unless you are really hard on gear i doubt build quality is an issue for most of us. if i bought it new and sold it then it likely will look new to the new owner as i only use my lenses to take photos. how rough on a lens is it to remove one from my bag and fix it to a body? take a lens off and drop it into my padded bag.
i once dropped a canon p with lens attached and it was the metal hood that bent. the lens didn't lock after that and the p needed surgery.
 
I agree with what Roger has said above. I meant to say the same [it is about preferences]f for the same reason that few people have tried out all possible lenses.

Isn't it great that we have so many choices!
 
The best non-Leica M lens(es)? Too loaded a question. I'm not certain that there are any truly bad lenses in M-mount. So-so lenses? Maybe. Almost everyone (yes, including our sainted Leica) has cranked out one or two turkeys.

The bulk of my M-lens experience lies with my trio of Konica M-Hexanons (28/50/90), and a few older Leica designs. The rest of my lens experience has been with SLR optics, and I have to say that the M-Hex lenses have been, from a technical standpoint, the high point of my photographic experience. So tiny (by comparison), but so well-built, and, just as important, optically unimpeachable. I'm not interested in whether I own "the best"; I mainly care about whether something works for me and what I want to do, and feel lucky that i was able to get these while they were still made and easily available. Thankfully, there are still choices, some pretty expensive, some (also thankfully) less-so.


- Barrett
 
For me, my most desired m mount lenses right now are the zm sonnar 50, and the zm biogon 35.

Voigtlander are excellent for the price, as are konica.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top Bottom