Jump to content

Leica lens 35mm


zmcm

Recommended Posts

Advertisement (gone after registration)

hello,

I´m thinking about buying a 35mm lens for my M262, I know that he best is (of course)  the one of F=1.4 but it is really to much expensive.

I´ve read a lot about 35mm lens M mouth in the net, but in fact I don´t have a conclusion.

Can anyone give me feedback of the 35mm M lens  the market?

thanks  

 

 

Link to post
Share on other sites

hello,

I´m thinking about buying a 35mm lens for my M262, I know that he best is (of course)  the one of F=1.4 but it is really to much expensive.

I´ve read a lot about 35mm lens M mouth in the net, but in fact I don´t have a conclusion.

Can anyone give me feedback of the 35mm M lens  the market?

thanks  

There are many good M-mount 35mm lenses to choose from, and you can also look at the 2nd hand market.

 

In addition to the Leica f/1.4 - 2.4 offerings, take a look at Zeiss and Voigtlander. Have a look on B&H filtering for M-Mount / 35mm under Rangefinder Lenses. There are others, too.

Edited by EoinC
  • Like 1
Link to post
Share on other sites

The older Summaron f2.8, some say, is as sharp as the current Summicron Asph. I had both and certainly there wasn't much in it. I also couldn't tell much difference between the Summicron Asph and my Mk4 preasph. In the end I have kept my Mk4 and the Summilux f1.4.

To be honest, you shouldn't be disappointed with any Leica/Leitz 35mm. The modern Summarit looks very impressive and is very compact.

Pete

  • Like 4
Link to post
Share on other sites

My two-bits worth is to buy a 35mm lens you can comfortably afford. Make pictures. None of the lenses are so bad you will be disappointed.

 

With experience you might discern subtle differences in their rendering and learn whether or not they make a difference. It might take years to find the differences which only points to the irrelevance of their rendering.

 

No good photo has ever been rejected due to the lens type or brand.

Edited by pico
  • Like 6
Link to post
Share on other sites

Advertisement (gone after registration)

My two-bits worth is to buy a 35mm lens you can comfortably afford. Make pictures. None of the lenses are so bad you will be disappointed.

 

With experience you might discern subtle differences in their rendering and learn whether or not they make a difference. It might take years to find the differences which only points to the irrelevance of their rendering.

 

No good photo has ever been rejected due to the lens type or brand.

I agree with Pico.

Buy the 35 you can afford.

 

Leicas lenses are all excellent, my 50 f2.5 is one of the best lenses i have ever used.

 

Voigtlander and Zeiss have fast lenses for lower cost then Leica, but it may pay to do your research on them.

 

Second hand is also an option - a cared for lens will last a long time

Link to post
Share on other sites

I agree with Pico.

Buy the 35 you can afford.

 

Leicas lenses are all excellent, my 50 f2.5 is one of the best lenses i have ever used.

 

Voigtlander and Zeiss have fast lenses for lower cost then Leica, but it may pay to do your research on them.

 

Second hand is also an option - a cared for lens will last a long time[/quote

 

Thank you

 

 

Enviado do meu iPhone usando o Tapatalk

Link to post
Share on other sites

You make that sound like a bad thing. One can always dial it down in post.

 

 

 

Have you used the ZM 2.8/35?

I like the ergonomics, excellent resolution, nice colours, too contrasty.

Easier to dial up than dial down contrast.

 

This does not apply to the ZM 2.0/35, around great lens.

  • Like 1
Link to post
Share on other sites

You might also like to consider 40 mm lenses where you have some excellent options quite cheaply: the Leica 40/2 Summicron, the Rollei 40/2.8 Sonnar HFT, and the Voigtlander 40/1.4 Nokton.  

 

The Nokton is not to my taste because its out of focus areas are a little harsh but it might be to your taste and it's small, light, fast, and inexpensive.  The other two are excellent lenses that are also available inexpensively (the Rollie is an Leica screw mount lens so a M to LTM adaptor is needed to use it on your M262).

 

Pete.

  • Like 1
Link to post
Share on other sites

Summicron 35 version IV: lightweight, about 1300€ for a mint one.

For half of that price the astounding Summaron 35/2.8: trade in one stop for at least the same IQ as the above. One tiny disadvantage: colors are a bit oldfashioned so to speak, I prefer it for B&W

Edited by otto.f
  • Like 1
Link to post
Share on other sites

Have you used the ZM 2.8/35?

I like the ergonomics, excellent resolution, nice colours, too contrasty.

Easier to dial up than dial down contrast.

 

This does not apply to the ZM 2.0/35, around great lens.

 

I do, and use it on a Monochrome. Love it, as it's tack sharp from f/2.8. Have dealt with the contrast character without issue.

  • Like 1
Link to post
Share on other sites

I have owned a Cron-ASPH and Lux-ASPH, and an f/2.8 Summaron.  I currently own Summaron f/3.5 LTM, f/3.5 CV Skopar, and V3 and V4 Summicrons.   Those are my favorites in backwards order.  The V4 is a tiny, lightweight lens and is the one I use 99% of the time.  The V3 is almost identical in properites, but slightly heavier.  It's my backup.  The CV is a remarkable performer but the little focus handle I find my finger slips off it too easily unless I use my thumb as well.  The same is true for the LTM Summaron, which despite its lower contrast, is also quite sharp.  I disliked the Summaron f/2.8 because it required pressing a button to unlock it from infinity each time.  The CRON and Lux ASPHS were amazing lenses but I didn't feel the advantages worth the money invested, in practical use. 

Link to post
Share on other sites

[...] Love it, as it's tack sharp from f/2.8. Have dealt with the contrast character without issue.

 

Ditto here. I don't find the C-Biogon 35/2.8 significantly more contrasty than current Summicron or Summilux 35 personally. It flares a bit less and may give the feeling of higher contrast for this reason i suspect but lighting up shadows in PP is not more difficult with it than with current Leica lenses IMHO. Now the Biogon 35/2.8 is not the better lens for soft results needless to say. For soft portraits, i much prefer another little gem, the Summilux 35/1.4 pre-asph, or even the cheaper Nokton 35/1.4 SC which works fine on my A7s mod (less so on M240 or M8.2 due to focus shift). Beware that both Summilux pre-asph and Nokton SC flare a lot though. Summicrons 40/2 or 35/2 v4 (no experience with earlier versions) are another good idea but are sharper at f/2 than Summilux pre-asph or Nokton at f/1.4.

Edited by lct
Link to post
Share on other sites

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.

Guest
Reply to this topic...

×   Pasted as rich text.   Paste as plain text instead

  Only 75 emoji are allowed.

×   Your link has been automatically embedded.   Display as a link instead

×   Your previous content has been restored.   Clear editor

×   You cannot paste images directly. Upload or insert images from URL.

×
×
  • Create New...