Iron Flatline Posted February 11, 2007 Share #1 Posted February 11, 2007 Advertisement (gone after registration) Hi all. I have a 28mm Elmarit ASPH, and a 50mm Noctilux. I'd like a 35mm lens, and was hoping that some of the more knowledgable members on this forum could kick-start my research for me. I would be mounting it on an M8. I shoot in low light, and always rely on available light. What should I be aware of regarding the various lenses? Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Advertisement Posted February 11, 2007 Posted February 11, 2007 Hi Iron Flatline, Take a look here Which 35mm M-Mount lens. I'm sure you'll find what you were looking for!
Shootist Posted February 11, 2007 Share #2 Posted February 11, 2007 The real question is how deep are your pockets. I just got a f/2 and rarely take it off the M8, although the only other lenses I have are longer then the 35 (waiting to get a 24mm). The f/2 is just over 2.2K where the f/1.4 is 3.4K, those are from B&H. If you have the cash and think you will realy need the extra stop then go for the f/1.4. If you want to save $1200 and that extra stop isn't something you think you'll use that much then the f/2 will work. The nice thing with the M8 is you can always bump up the ISO to get that extra stop. Couldn't do that with film for only a few shots. That is where the f/1.4 came into play. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Iron Flatline Posted February 11, 2007 Author Share #3 Posted February 11, 2007 Well, I find myself in a position where I can afford any of the lenses, so I'm trying to do this based on non-financial merits. What about weight and length? Are there substantial differences in the size between diff. 35mm lenses? Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
lambroving Posted February 11, 2007 Share #4 Posted February 11, 2007 Well, I find myself in a position where I can afford any of the lenses, so I'm trying to do this based on non-financial merits. What about weight and length? Are there substantial differences in the size between diff. 35mm lenses? Believe it or not, this is a really thorny topic. Glad you qualified that price was not a factor. The 35/2 blocks the viewfinder frame less than the 35/1.4. Since 35mm is my normal lens on film, I use the 35/2. With the 28/2 I suffer and use a separate viewfinder when I'm in a hurry. You will have to try both on the camera and see what works best for the way you are using the camera. As for the optics, the 35/2 is sharper and has a bit more contrast, but the 35/1.4 has a lovely fingerprint and I would slightly prefer to use this lens if it were not longer and the hood did not block the viewfinder as much as it does. If the 35/2 had the fingerprint of the 28/2, there would be no contest as I prefer it to both. The 1.4 can have a dreamy OOF wide open, but at f2.8 the 35/2 has superior image quality if you are shooting solid objects. We are discussing ASPH lenses naturally. I'm also comparing performance on film, not sensors where the importance of the fingerprint might be less evident. Can't say. Doubt this topic is just about speed and cranking up the ISO. A few photographers I know shoot these lenses nearly or wide open regularly for isolation of subjects, so the OOF becomes more significant than it does for me. Consider what you will be shooting most and what kind of image quality you are after. Hope this helps rather than confuses you. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
enboe Posted February 11, 2007 Share #5 Posted February 11, 2007 I have had the privilege of owning 7 different 35mm solutions. Some comments: 35/2.0/8 element: A cult lens for it's signature bokeh. Not up to modern lens sharpness 35/2.0/ASPH: Very compact with a compact hood too. Very sharp. 35/1.4: Small, but easily flares when pointed to strong light sources. Good value. 35/1.4/Aspherical: Maybe the king of 35's, but you'll have to be more skilled than me to exploit the difference over the ASPH version. The hood is largeish. 35/1.4/ASPH: Lovely lens, sharp, big hood. This would be my recommendation, as an extra half-inch of hood (over the 35/2.0/ASPH) won't break anyone. 35/1.2/Nokton: Not a Leica lens. Big and heavy. Decent image quality, but I can see a difference in the ASPH lenses from Leica. Sold mine, kind of wish I had kept it. 35/4.0/Tri-Elmar: A great utility lens for daylight use. Much larger than Leica's other 35's. Enjoy. Eric Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
wparsonsgisnet Posted February 11, 2007 Share #6 Posted February 11, 2007 Iron Man, I shoot dance on stage so need fast lenses. I have used both the 35 'lux's, the non-asph and the asph. The ealier lens is extremely flare-prone. The images are ok, just not saturated and contrasty. I got rid of the non and bot the 35mm f1.4 asph. This is the single Leica lens where I have found flare to be such a significant problem. Go for the asph version. I agree, price is not a consideration when the lens will be used for so many years. BTW, I used the 'Nocti for about 10 years and got rid of it because I came not to like the images. To me, the lens is cold and harsh. I replaced it with the 50mm f1.4 asph. I don't know how you feel about the 'Nocti (it'll be an irrational assessment, of course), but if you're not in love with the lens, the 'lux is a highly satisfactory lens. You can get similar image characteristics from the 75 f1.4. G'luck Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
peter_n Posted February 12, 2007 Share #7 Posted February 12, 2007 Advertisement (gone after registration) The 35/1.4 ASPH is a wonderful lens with more of a look of the older Leica lenses than most other ASPH lenses. You don't have to use the huge Leica hood either, a $9 hood from eBay dealer heavystar or American_Eagle will do very nicely. See the attached pic. Welcome, dear visitor! As registered member you'd see an image here… Simply register for free here – We are always happy to welcome new members! Link to post Share on other sites Simply register for free here – We are always happy to welcome new members! ' data-webShareUrl='https://www.l-camera-forum.com/topic/15947-which-35mm-m-mount-lens/?do=findComment&comment=169116'>More sharing options...
Iron Flatline Posted February 13, 2007 Author Share #8 Posted February 13, 2007 35/2.0/8 element: A cult lens for it's signature bokeh. Not up to modern lens sharpness 35/2.0/ASPH: Very compact with a compact hood too. Very sharp. 35/1.4: Small, but easily flares when pointed to strong light sources. Good value. 35/1.4/Aspherical: Maybe the king of 35's, but you'll have to be more skilled than me to exploit the difference over the ASPH version. The hood is largeish. 35/1.4/ASPH: Lovely lens, sharp, big hood. This would be my recommendation, as an extra half-inch of hood (over the 35/2.0/ASPH) won't break anyone. 35/1.2/Nokton: Not a Leica lens. Big and heavy. Decent image quality, but I can see a difference in the ASPH lenses from Leica. Sold mine, kind of wish I had kept it. 35/4.0/Tri-Elmar: A great utility lens for daylight use. Much larger than Leica's other 35's. Eric, you lost me on one issue: Regarding the 35/1.4: what is the difference between Aspherical and ASPH? I thought the latter was just an abbreviation for the former... Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
lambroving Posted February 13, 2007 Share #9 Posted February 13, 2007 Eric, you lost me on one issue: Regarding the 35/1.4: what is the difference between Aspherical and ASPH? I thought the latter was just an abbreviation for the former... The ASPHERICAL is a very rare, almost hand-made version with two hand-ground aspherical surfaces. The ASPH has one aspherical surface and it's moulded with the current technology. The ASPHERICAL may be very slightly better but finding a clean one is next to impossible. 2x to 3x the price too due to collectors. Dan has one. You can see the results on film here. Don't expect identical results with an M8. Read the thread. Dan is a pro who shoots D2X's daily for work. http://www.leica-camera-user.com/sports-leisure-time/9504-steamtown.html?highlight=Steamtown Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Iron Flatline Posted February 13, 2007 Author Share #10 Posted February 13, 2007 Thanks, that helps a lot. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
ron110n Posted February 13, 2007 Share #11 Posted February 13, 2007 Here's a lux 35 1.4 Aspherical. It has a unique signature and contrast. The hood of Aspherical and Asph are not interchangeable. M7, 35 1.4 Asph-cal, Ektachrome 100G -Ron Creature of Habbits or the Caveman within Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
lambroving Posted February 13, 2007 Share #12 Posted February 13, 2007 Thanks, that helps a lot. No problem. What is it they say? "A picture's worth a thousand words..." BTW, I like that shot of the house in the field in Maryland on your site. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Iron Flatline Posted February 14, 2007 Author Share #13 Posted February 14, 2007 No problem. What is it they say? "A picture's worth a thousand words..." BTW, I like that shot of the house in the field in Maryland on your site. Thank you, and thanks for taking the time to visit the site. That would be the new 28mm Elmarit ASPH at work. Nothing like a tiny JPG to destroy any real detail - esp. the color gradiation of a beautiful ice-cold winter sky. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Archived
This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.