Joe Mondello
Resu Deretsiger
Given the often wonderful reviews that the new Cosina Voigtlander RF lenses get from Sean and others, plus the relatively low prices (especially compared to Leitz and Zeiss glass) why WOULDN'T you purchase some?
I have 5 CV lenses for my M8 and think they are terrific. BTW, they are not cheap, they may seem inexpensive by comparison, but Nikon and Canon MF primes (at least for SLRs) are usually in a similar ballpark price-wise.
I have 5 CV lenses for my M8 and think they are terrific. BTW, they are not cheap, they may seem inexpensive by comparison, but Nikon and Canon MF primes (at least for SLRs) are usually in a similar ballpark price-wise.
Last edited:
Hmmm, funny, I don't have a CV 50, don't know why not.
sherm
Well-known
rover said:
And Mr. Putts had such wonderful praise for the Nokton. Better call Stephen
Keith
The best camera is one that still works!
In the three weeks I have had my M8 no Leica lens has graced it's lines. I have a 28mm Ultron a 50mm Nokton and a 90mm Lanthar. How the hell anyone can justify $5000.00 for a Noctilux amazes me ... hang on ... I just paid $6500.00 Aust for a digital camera body without autofocus and a history of itinerant behaviour. Please disregard my last comment!
Sparrow
Veteran
Itinerant? It wanders around shooting kangaroos?
clintock
Galleryless Gearhead
I love CV lenses, the only thing I wish they did different would be to come up with some sort of thing like Zeiss does with their *T business. I think Rollei hft and the Schneider delta are similar..
That is, ensure, or at least sell me on the idea like Zeiss has, that the color balance through one CV lens is the same as the next.
It could be that all the multicoated CV glass already have a uniform color transmission as Zeiss T* claims to have- I don't know..
That is, ensure, or at least sell me on the idea like Zeiss has, that the color balance through one CV lens is the same as the next.
It could be that all the multicoated CV glass already have a uniform color transmission as Zeiss T* claims to have- I don't know..
nightfly
Well-known
I have the CV 28mm 3.5. I bought it because I like how small it is and the build quality is pretty good. However it's a bit more contrasty than I would like for black and white and a little slow. The faster 28 with less contrast is too big. The Leica Elmarit or Summicron are just about right. They are also about 5 and 10 times more expensive respectively. However since I use 28mm a lot I will probably get the Elmarit sometime.
I find the same thing in other CV lenses. The faster ones are too big and the smaller ones are a little slow and contrasty. So I bought a used 20 or 30 year old 35mm Summicron instead of a new CV 35/2.5 at twice the price. However I'm very pleased with the images.
They are really nice lenses and represent a great value but there are places at least in the focal lengths I like where CV are almost there and Leica nails it. If you aren't concerned about size or speed and shoot mostly color, I don't see any reason not to buy the CV but Leica still has the edge at least in fast, wide lenses but the price is crazy.
I find the same thing in other CV lenses. The faster ones are too big and the smaller ones are a little slow and contrasty. So I bought a used 20 or 30 year old 35mm Summicron instead of a new CV 35/2.5 at twice the price. However I'm very pleased with the images.
They are really nice lenses and represent a great value but there are places at least in the focal lengths I like where CV are almost there and Leica nails it. If you aren't concerned about size or speed and shoot mostly color, I don't see any reason not to buy the CV but Leica still has the edge at least in fast, wide lenses but the price is crazy.
usccharles
Well-known
i love my 40 nokton. its tack sharp. the only difference between my nokton and 35 summilux is that my lux has a much smoother and pleasing bokeh. but actually, even bokeh pleasing-ness is only based on user preference.
but compared to the $300 range i paid for the nokton and the $1,600+ i paid for my used summilux. the nokton is MUCH better worth the money. and its much smaller than the summilux.
i keep thinking, are VC lenses really cheap or are Leica glass really over priced??
i also love my 15mm Heliar
but compared to the $300 range i paid for the nokton and the $1,600+ i paid for my used summilux. the nokton is MUCH better worth the money. and its much smaller than the summilux.
i keep thinking, are VC lenses really cheap or are Leica glass really over priced??
i also love my 15mm Heliar
scho
Well-known
I use ONLY CV and Zeiss lenses on my M8. I see no reason to spend 10x more for Leica lenses that don't produce 10x better image quality. The only Leica lens I might consider at this time is the new 28mm 2.8 asph, which altough reasonably priced is essentially un-available and I'm not convinced that it would give me "better" images compared to my 28mm Ultron.
Marc-A.
I Shoot Film
I've had a Nokton 50/1.5. Great lens, but it was too bulky for my Leica III(F) so I resold it. Now, I ordered last week a 35/2.5 Skopar Classic from Stephen Gandy, it's on its way and I'm eager to shoot with it. I wanted a small 35 lens, but with modern coated glasses: the Skopar seemed a better choice than the Summaron 3.5, and for the price, it's kinda bargain.
Paul T.
Veteran
I love the idea of VC lenses, but was disappointed by the 25/4, despite the fantastic price -ultimately the look was nowhere near as nice as my Summicron C, or Elmar C for that matter - too high contrast, with the mid tones kind of milky and undefined.
ferider
Veteran
nightfly said:
I don't understand why you would think that the 28/1.9 is too
big but the Summicron 28/2 is just about right ...
nightfly said:
Exceptions to this are the 28/1.9, 40/1.4, 75/2.5 (and 50/2).
There is no Leica equivalent to the 35/1.2.
Roland.
Leicabug
Established
Not onley are the Leica lenses expensive, they are hard to get. Voigtlander lenses are capable substitutes.
T
tedwhite
Guest
Marc A:
I think you will be favorably impressed by the 35/2.5. A small, excellent lens. The only time I take it off my Bessa R is when I want to use a 50mm lens which, in my case, is the Canon 50/1.8.
I think you will be favorably impressed by the 35/2.5. A small, excellent lens. The only time I take it off my Bessa R is when I want to use a 50mm lens which, in my case, is the Canon 50/1.8.
S
Scarpia
Guest
In NYC Leica lenses are easy enough to find. Finding a parking spot for the armored car carrying the required cash is the difficult part.
Kurt M.
Kurt M.
I agree Brian, that my be why I don't have a CV 50. Actually, I don't have a 50mm lens under 40 years old.
Last edited:
raid
Dad Photographer
me too ..
me too ..
Brian: You and I are from the "vintage group" of people who see something more pleasing in the vintage lenses. It is great that different people can enjoy different lenses.
Raid
me too ..
Brian Sweeney said:
Brian: You and I are from the "vintage group" of people who see something more pleasing in the vintage lenses. It is great that different people can enjoy different lenses.
Raid
nightfly
Well-known
ferider said:
Well the 28mm Summicron is 1.6" long and the CV 28 is 2.5" long (stats from B and H). The Elmarit is 1.2" long.
That's a significant difference.
peter_n
Veteran
LOL. I have never seen a print comparison but I have read (and I emphasize readScarpia said:In NYC Leica lenses are easy enough to find. Finding a parking spot for the armored car carrying the required cash is the difficult part.
Kurt M.
) that if you are in the business of making very large prints for exhibit purposes then Leica lenses really do well.gareth
Established
I have a Bessa R2a and an Ultron 35mmf1.7
I can't say I've used them much, but every time I do I'm impressed by the results I get from this lens. I'm not 100% convinced by the colour rendition but I am by the sharpness and punch of this little lens.
The only thing I don't like about the lens is the apeture ring, it's far too smooth and loose. And of course I hope that the CV lenses prove to be more reliable than the cameras.
The reason I don't use it much, is I often default to my Canon auto-focus gear, but I should try to get out more with just the Bessa.
One thing I wonder is that if I had another lens for the Bessa, say a 25mm, I might use her more. Is the 25mm f4 skopar any good, it seems very reasonably priced.
I have two Canon lenses that cover that focal length, a 24L, and the 24-70L. I used to use a 24mmf2.8 but I was never happy at all with the image quality of that lens.
I can't say I've used them much, but every time I do I'm impressed by the results I get from this lens. I'm not 100% convinced by the colour rendition but I am by the sharpness and punch of this little lens.
The only thing I don't like about the lens is the apeture ring, it's far too smooth and loose. And of course I hope that the CV lenses prove to be more reliable than the cameras.
The reason I don't use it much, is I often default to my Canon auto-focus gear, but I should try to get out more with just the Bessa.
One thing I wonder is that if I had another lens for the Bessa, say a 25mm, I might use her more. Is the 25mm f4 skopar any good, it seems very reasonably priced.
I have two Canon lenses that cover that focal length, a 24L, and the 24-70L. I used to use a 24mmf2.8 but I was never happy at all with the image quality of that lens.