batey_1020
Well-known
Im after a new lens for my M4. Im on a very limited budget at the moment and inherriated the M4 with a 50mm f2 and a 50mm f3.5. I have sold of my Canon 60D that i would commonly use with a 17-40 F4. The sale of the gear has left me with enough money to Get a CLA on both the M4 and lenses and leaving me with about $750.
So with the remaining $750 i was considering one of the following lenses as a fill in for 12 months or so until i can afford something better.
Voigtlander 21mm F4 with the 21-25 finder
Voigtlander 35mm f1.4
Voigtlander 40mm f1.4 with the 40mm viewfinder
So if you were on a limited budget like myself what would you go for?
So with the remaining $750 i was considering one of the following lenses as a fill in for 12 months or so until i can afford something better.
Voigtlander 21mm F4 with the 21-25 finder
Voigtlander 35mm f1.4
Voigtlander 40mm f1.4 with the 40mm viewfinder
So if you were on a limited budget like myself what would you go for?
Vics
Veteran
Leica Summaron 35mm either 2.8 or 3.5. I have the 2.8 and love it. SOMEONE around here said it beats the first 3 versions of the Summicron. It wasn't me, though. I've never had a 'cron in 35.
sleepyhead
Well-known
Hi, alot depends on your taste in "wides". If it were me, I would find 40mm too close to 50mm, and 21mm too wide for general use.
So I would consider the voigtlander 35/2.5, 35/1.4, or 28/2 Ultron.
Enjoy!
So I would consider the voigtlander 35/2.5, 35/1.4, or 28/2 Ultron.
Enjoy!
back alley
IMAGES
i would sell one of the 50s right off.
think about the cv 25...great lens, pretty wide and easy to use...easier than a 21.
and i like 25/50 as a combo.
think about the cv 25...great lens, pretty wide and easy to use...easier than a 21.
and i like 25/50 as a combo.
Chris101
summicronia
If you can find a Voigtlander 35mm f/1.7, it is a very unique and beautiful lens. The additive relationship between it's bokey and the contrast of the oof areas is unlike any other lens.
Bingley
Veteran
I generally agree with this. The Voigtlander 28 lenses are all very good, and can be had within your budget. With two 50mm lenses already in your kit, I'd look for something in the 28 or 25 range.
batey_1020
Well-known
Couldn't bring myself to sell off the 50's since they were my grandfathers and thats the only thing that is stopping me doing so.
Im interested in what you mean by easier to use? Do you mean that in a sense of focussing and dof? I tend to have trouble focussing because of poor eyesite but im getting better since im not changing cameras as much and learning how each lens works for me.
Im enjoying all this feedback as well. Going to be doing a little more research it think.
GaryLH
Veteran
If u are doing b&w or like lower contrast lens, check out the canon rf ltm's. Their 28's and 35's are very good. Check out Dante Stella website he has a writeup on them...
In terms of cv lens I have the 21 and 40 u mentioned. I agree with others that 21 is too big of a jump..from your 50. As u get wider, even small changes can have dramatic effects depending on what u want to accomplish.
One of my favorite two lens combo is 21/40, but then again I am mainly a wide angle person.
Both the 21 and 40 are good lenses that will not disappoint u.. But other lenses to consider would be the cv 28 or the slower 35 since out of the cv u mentioned, is the biggest.. I never had a m4 or the 35f1.4, so not sure if w/ hood it may partially block vf.
Gary
Ps here is Dante's comments
http://www.dantestella.com/technical/canoleic.html
In terms of cv lens I have the 21 and 40 u mentioned. I agree with others that 21 is too big of a jump..from your 50. As u get wider, even small changes can have dramatic effects depending on what u want to accomplish.
One of my favorite two lens combo is 21/40, but then again I am mainly a wide angle person.
Both the 21 and 40 are good lenses that will not disappoint u.. But other lenses to consider would be the cv 28 or the slower 35 since out of the cv u mentioned, is the biggest.. I never had a m4 or the 35f1.4, so not sure if w/ hood it may partially block vf.
Gary
Ps here is Dante's comments
http://www.dantestella.com/technical/canoleic.html
venchka
Veteran
Don't rule out the Canon LTM 35's.
That said, 25mm is very nearly the perfect wide angle lens if you can only have one. The C/V LTM 25 should fit your budget with ease.
Wayne
That said, 25mm is very nearly the perfect wide angle lens if you can only have one. The C/V LTM 25 should fit your budget with ease.
Wayne
back alley
IMAGES
on a film camera the 21 is pretty wide...wides are more demanding in order to get a well composed and impactful image. the 25 is a touch wider than 28 (which i find visually more bland) and therefore offers a bit more drama right off...a 25 is easier to compose with than a 21...all this is from my experience...your experience may differ.
tuanvinh2000
Well-known
an used zeiss biogon c 35mm would fit well under your budget and it's one hell of a lens. for the need for speed a 35mm nokton cv + 21cv would work beautifully on film. 35mm gives up much more room for focusing error. have fun.
Messsucherkamera
Established
This will cost a bit more than your budget of $750, but if you can come up with around another $200, you could get a "9" condition used Leica 28mm f/2.8 Elmarit M. This is an excellent lens, given its price.
If you are interested in the 28mm Elmarit, take a look at this website on the M lenses page: www.sherrykrauter.com
haempe
Well-known
Get a used ColorSkopar 35/2.5 and buy film for the rest.
Maybe a faster or better (well, more expensive) lens would be more sexy, but without enough film it's just the half of the fun.
I conclude you are new to film, what means: practice, practice, practice.
The Skopar is a very good lens, no reason to give more money for a theoretical better lens.
Later is enough time for GAS.
Maybe a faster or better (well, more expensive) lens would be more sexy, but without enough film it's just the half of the fun.
I conclude you are new to film, what means: practice, practice, practice.
The Skopar is a very good lens, no reason to give more money for a theoretical better lens.
Later is enough time for GAS.
Marc G.
film loving student
Zeiss ZM C-Biogon 35mm 2.8... compact, beautiful, sharp, lightweight and a good bang for the buck...
I'd try to get it used and buy chemicals & film for the leftover money..
I'd try to get it used and buy chemicals & film for the leftover money..
peterm1
Veteran
You may wish to consider the voigtlander 28mm f2. Its a very nicely made and performing lens and while noticeably wider than a 35mm is not too wide.
thegman
Veteran
Agree with Peter, 28mm is worth a look, wide, but not ultra wide. I believe the M4 does not have 28mm frame lines, but using the whole finder might be OK. The other lenses you mention are great, I had the 35mm Nokton 1.4, excellent lens.
I've also had the 21mm, it's a good lens, I thought the 15mm was sharper, but that is so extreme wide angle, you may not find yourself using it much.
I've also had the 21mm, it's a good lens, I thought the 15mm was sharper, but that is so extreme wide angle, you may not find yourself using it much.
rizraz
Established
As a 21 and 35 mm user, I would also recommend you the 28mm as you are familiar with that 'wide' range with your old Canon (17mm = approx 28mm).
grandallj
Grainy
If I were you, I would try to preserve as much of the $750 as possible -- that's your seed money for "something better." To that end, a used CV 35/2.5 (or Canon LTM or maybe even a Leitz Summaron if you got a good deal) would be the way to go.
Yes, this... and you won't have to upgrade later... it's that good.
kzphoto
Well-known
If you can swing it, look for a ZM 21mm f/4.5 C-Biogon. Critically sharp at all apertures and it is really tiny! A jewel of a lens. I snagged mine for about $750.