40mm f/2 Posted May 19, 2015 Share #41 Posted May 19, 2015 Advertisement (gone after registration) The Summicron 40 does not get mentioned much because cartierbresson has asked for a 35mm suggestion. This lens is a bit of an odd lens because none of the M bodies ever had frame lines for it, only the CL/CLE for which the lens was made. The Summicron will bring up the 50mm framelins on an M body. This is not ideal - 35mm framelines are also not ideal, but closer. In order to make the M show the 35mm lens, people are mechanically manipulating the lens (i.e filing down the mount). Well, what can I say. This is maybe just me, but no thanks. The Voigtländer 35/1.2 II is really not a bad lens. If you need f1.2 you have no other choice. However, the lens is visibly softer at f1.2 and it will also produce some nasty CA all the way down to f2.8. I'd say: you would get this lens, if you you really need to shoot at f1.2 somehow. In my opinion, you get excellent performance from current Leica lenses (the new ASPH designs) with very good sharpness wide open and higher contrast. Older Leica lenses will have less contrast (by design) and will show less than optimal performance wide open due to design limitation - especially in the old Double Gauss designs. When you compare pre-ASPH to ASPH (i.e. a current Summilux 50 to its predecessor), there is just no competition. The newer ASPH model runs circles around any older model. This is a fact. However, a lot of people will prefer (or claim to prefer) the older design because it is not as sharp and thereby creating more flattering portraits, show Leica glow etc. That may all be true and actually a matter of taste, but the fact remains that the older lenses basically perform worse. I have mixed feelings with Voigtländer lenses because for each one I like there is at least two I hate - I mean lenses I actually bought. Apart from production tolerance (and the difficulty to get this fixed in Europe - far far away from Cosina Japan), the old non ASPH designs basically all have some kind of focus shift. They are all softer wide open. Don't get me wrong: they are nice lenses, nice choice of material and I like them better than the average plastic fantastic Canikon. But most of the Voigtländers are not what I call an excellent lens. The 35mm frame lines are (at least with my M9) fitting much better the 40mm lens at infinity than a 35mm lens. The 40mm lens needs a small modification to engage the 35mm frame. Also the Minolta Rokkor 40mm f2.0 is an identical design to the Leitz Summicron but has in its last version a more advanced lens coating and therefore less flare. Also because it is not labelled Leica it should be cheaper. 1 Quote Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Advertisement Posted May 19, 2015 Posted May 19, 2015 Hi 40mm f/2, Take a look here Sharpest 35mm under $1000. I'm sure you'll find what you were looking for!
jmahto Posted May 19, 2015 Share #42 Posted May 19, 2015 (edited) The 35mm frame lines are (at least with my M9) fitting much better the 40mm lens at infinity than a 35mm lens. The 40mm lens needs a small modification to engage the 35mm frame. Also the Minolta Rokkor 40mm f2.0 is an identical design to the Leitz Summicron but has in its last version a more advanced lens coating and therefore less flare. Also because it is not labelled Leica it should be cheaper. I can live with 50mm line (I visualize little bit outside the 50mm frame). I also see Minolta version creeping up in price. I see it as high as $600 in eBay. I got the Leica version for somewhat $400 around a year ago. Edited May 19, 2015 by jmahto Quote Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
pop Posted May 19, 2015 Share #43 Posted May 19, 2015 The 40mm Summicron has a rubber lens hood. I seem to recall that someone here said that it could still be bought from Leica. It's my favorite lens on my Sony Nex. Quote Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Lenshacker Posted May 19, 2015 Share #44 Posted May 19, 2015 I like to use the 40/2 Summicron on the M3, just use the entire viewfinder for framing. 1 Quote Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
henning Posted May 19, 2015 Share #45 Posted May 19, 2015 Voigtlander is coming out with a new 35/1.7 which is extremely good. Price isn't established yet, I believe but it should be under a 1000. Definitely better than the 1.4 and the 1.2, or the older 2.5. This will be the closest you will get to the Biogon C or Summicron ASPH in performance in that price range. A friend of mine has close connections to the factory and has had this lens for a couple of months, and it is outstanding. 2 Quote Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Lenshacker Posted May 19, 2015 Share #46 Posted May 19, 2015 (edited) I found the July 2000 test report of the 35/1.7 Ultron- best performance at F5.6 with 90lp/mm center, 50lp/mm edge. "Slightly soft" up to F2. 0.3% barrel distortion. The LTM version will focus to 3ft, the M-Mount version will get closer. The new 50/1.5 Nokton has the same optical formula as the 50/1.5 LTM version, has updated coatings. Does anyone know if the new Ultron changed the optical formula? At $350, "this lens was a steal".Same with the black 50/1.5 Asph Nokton- $300, a steal. I also have the 35/1.2 Nokton V1. If you want the fastest, this is it. You don't, it's 3x the price, big, heavy, and the Ultron uses 39mm filters. Edited May 19, 2015 by Lenshacker 1 Quote Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
CheshireCat Posted May 19, 2015 Share #47 Posted May 19, 2015 (edited) Advertisement (gone after registration) Best (performance*max_aperture_mm/cost) ratio: Voigtlander 35/1.2. Edited May 19, 2015 by CheshireCat 1 Quote Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Lenshacker Posted May 20, 2015 Share #48 Posted May 20, 2015 https://www.flickr.com/photos/90768661@N02/sets/72157649848529504 Between paying ~$1000 for the M-Ultron and a few hundred more for the 35/1.2 Nokton, I'd get the Nokton. Bteween a $350 used LTM Ultron and the 35/1.2 Nokton... I bought both. 1 Quote Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
uhoh7 Posted May 20, 2015 Share #49 Posted May 20, 2015 the sharpest M mount 35 you can find under 1K? ZM 35/2. Case Closed. LOL 1 Quote Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
CheshireCat Posted May 20, 2015 Share #50 Posted May 20, 2015 (edited) the sharpest M mount 35 you can find under 1K? ZM 35/2. Case Closed. LOL Actually, the ZM 35/2 costs around $1100. The CV 35/1.2 is a much better lens and can be had for about $1200. A no brainer if you don't mind the size. Edited May 20, 2015 by CheshireCat 1 Quote Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
bernie.lcf Posted May 20, 2015 Share #51 Posted May 20, 2015 Neither is sharp wide open (Biogon f2, Nokton), but the Nokton at least gives you f1.2 1 Quote Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
CheshireCat Posted May 20, 2015 Share #52 Posted May 20, 2015 Neither is sharp wide open (Biogon f2, Nokton), but the Nokton at least gives you f1.2 The Nokton is a low contrast lens wide open, with a very similar character to the Noctilux v1. Not as sharp as the Summilux FLE at f/1.4, but quite sharp after some contrast pp. At f/2, the CV is visibly better than the ZM, and most people will have a hard time telling the difference between it and the FLE. The biggest downside of the ZM is the overcorrection for spherical aberration, causing a disappointing bokeh at f/2 that often looks like soap bubbles. The CV has the best bokeh, so smooth and creamy. Oh, and I forgot to mention that the ZM comes without hood. Add that, and you will pay about as much as the CV for a technically inferior lens, that has the only advantage of size and weight. 2 Quote Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Lenshacker Posted May 20, 2015 Share #53 Posted May 20, 2015 Bokeh? 35/1.7 Ultron wide-open, Pilot's Day 2013 by fiftyonepointsix, on Flickr 35/1.2 Nokton v1 wide-open L1012856 by fiftyonepointsix, on Flickr Nikkor 3.5cm F2.5 wide-open, Udvar Hazy Air and Space by fiftyonepointsix, on Flickr 4 Quote Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
MarkP Posted May 20, 2015 Share #54 Posted May 20, 2015 (edited) Hi Cartierbresson, I agree with the above comments about the 40 Summicron or Rokkor - it may be quite a good compromise for someone with a single lens kit (between 35 & 50), renders beautifully (although moderate vignetting wide open), and one very quickly get's one's head around the framelines. This then also raises the option of the faster CV 40mm lenses which are very good. However, the OP specifically asked about 35mm lenses - the outstanding 2.8/35 ZM would be the sharpest card in the 35 pack (even a pack with a much higher price-point). However it is a relatively high contrast lens. If you're not in a rush it may be worth waiting to get more information for the 1.7/35 CV as you may find a faster lens useful. Can I ask why you specifically ask for the 'sharpest' lens? I hesitate to quote Ken Rockwell but he is right when he states that "sharpness is overrated". Regards, Mark Edited May 20, 2015 by MarkP 1 Quote Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
lct Posted May 20, 2015 Share #55 Posted May 20, 2015 +1 provided the OP likes the Ultron's bokeh... Might be less disputable on film though, i don't know. 1 Quote Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
cp995 Posted May 20, 2015 Share #56 Posted May 20, 2015 Voigtlander is coming out with a new 35/1.7 which is extremely good. Price isn't established yet, I believe but it should be under a 1000... Really a great lens! I'm waiting for it since Photokina last year, and waiting, waiting ... 1 Quote Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
cp995 Posted May 20, 2015 Share #57 Posted May 20, 2015 ...If you're not in a rush it may be worth waiting to get more information for the 1.7/35 CV as you may find a faster lens useful... Some nice examples on film: https://www.flickr.com/groups/2741869@N21/pool/ 2 Quote Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
pgk Posted May 20, 2015 Share #58 Posted May 20, 2015 Can I ask why you specifically ask for the 'sharpest' lens? I hesitate to quote Ken Rockwell but he is right when he states that "sharpness is overrated". I actually think that the problem is that sharpness is under-defined. Its a word which is used to describe an amalgam of lens characteristics and probably means resolution, freedom from aberration, lack of veiling flare, focus shift, high contrast of fine detail, and more. But it also needs to be defined in terms of its effect at specific apertures, distances and so on. You could say, in general terms, that the 'sharpest' lenses are also those which have the narrowest operating parameters (copy lenses for example) as these will be optimised for a specific set of constraints rather than being for generalist use as in 'normal' photography. So overrated, no, but poorly defined and ill-considered, yes, and all too often. 3 Quote Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
james.liam Posted May 20, 2015 Share #59 Posted May 20, 2015 Again, at ƒ/5.6-11, they will all be great; focus shift at those apertures are overcome by DOF. Contrast up/down, bokeh smooth/busy, color rendering (probably not as satisfying with the older glass); micro contrast...these are the questions that should be asked instead, and many of the answers are personal preference. Like size; the 1,2/35 CV is wonderful but big and blocks the VF. OK for many, not so much for me (why I fled a DSLRs in the first place). 1 Quote Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
cartierbresson Posted May 20, 2015 Author Share #60 Posted May 20, 2015 (edited) Can I ask why you specifically ask for the 'sharpest' lens? I hesitate to quote Ken Rockwell but he is right when he states that "sharpness is overrated". I'm glad you (and others) have asked. To be honest, I came into this discussion with the wrong assumption that a sharper lens is simply a better one for me. Since then I've looked at photos taken with the lenses that have been suggested and think that I actually don't mind something that's a little soft, has vignetting, or is "flawed" in other ways. In fact, I don't even mind a 40mm lens -- the pictures I've seen of the 40 Summicron personally speak to me more than those I've seen taken from a Biogon C (too contrasty). I could probably live with eye-balling my frame. I also liked the classic feel of the Voigtlander Color-Skopar 2.5. Again, I made the wrong assumption that throwing more money will make me happier. That's not true -- I really don't need something fast. At least not right now. As an aside, I was blown away by the sharpness of the ZM 1,4/35. If I ever decide to switch to a more modern lens, this would probably be it. Thank you @james.liam for putting it on my radar. Edited May 20, 2015 by cartierbresson 4 Quote Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Join the conversation
You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.
Note: Your post will require moderator approval before it will be visible.