"Low cost" 35mm lens for M9: your suggestions and opinions

[elvispreasley]

Advertisement (gone after registration)

Because 35mm - is my favorite focal length for the street photo, my 35mm Skopar PII almost glued to my M9 for last half of year) Anyway, I have a desire to move further and get some more "serious" lens for affordable budget. So...here is basically the options, that I personally have according to my budget:

1. Biogon ZM 35mm 2.0

2. Biogon ZM 35mm 2.8

3. Summaron-m 35mm 2.8

4. Elmarit-m 35mm 2.5

or...

5. Summicron-m 35mm 2.0 ASPH

The last one is obviously the best option, but its kind on the real edge of my budget and I will be happy to find out, that I can get some very similar "quality" lens, but for more "kind" price)

I also have only 2 requirements for the 35mm lens, what I wanna buy:

1. Perfect flare resistance

2. Good sharpness from center to corner starting from f4 (preferably from wide open)

I have owned before Biogon ZM 35mm 2.0 (it was the sweet time of shooting with Epson R-D1s) and that was really good lens. You probably also know the reputation of this lens like "as good, or even better, than Summicron 35mm ASPH". However, according to my experience, I can not say that it could be true for a few reasons. First of all my sample of Biogon had some small build quality issue: when I turned my camera in vertical orientation - the focusing ring of the Biogon starting to move kind of tough, so I have to use a little force to move it front and back. In horizontal orientation focusing ring moved flawless and without any issue. Another concern was about overall sharpness of the lens. Basically Biogon was sharp enough for all of the cases, but if we reviewing it like the lens, which is so good as 35mm Summicron ASPH, it will be good to say that the overall sharpness of the lens is beyond this reputation. My sample of Biogon have some visible softness in the corners starting from f2.0 and up to f4.0 (you can see the attached picture, which is showing the sharpness of the lens on f4.0). From f5.6 lens was sharp enough from centre to corners. I can not say that it was a big issue, but after lots of feedbacks that this lens is really producing the "cron ASPH" IQ, I was a little disappointed. In defeat of that lens I can say, that the rendering, resolution and the famous "Zeiss 3D look" of the pictures were up to really high standards. 

Now I'm shooting with Skopar 35mm PII and its really good, but the softness in the corners (up to f8.0) and his well known flare resistance making me thinking all the time to get something better. 

After I bought some time ago old used Summicron-M 50mm 2.0 type III and found out his OUTSTANDING performance in all of the directions (resolution, overall sharpness, flare resistance, bokeh, etc.) I made a conclusion that if you really wanna get "Leica quality" of your pictures - buy Leica lens! Well, sometimes you need to pass through few "situations" - to realize an obvious things)

So! For now I'm mostly curious about Summaron 35mm 2.8 and Summarit 35mm 2.5 (I also add 2 lenses from Zeiss, just in case if my Biogon 35mm was not really good sample and the rumors, that goes around ZM 35mm lenses are really true).

Summaron is old and have some lack of contrast (according to the some feedbacks, that I read about it), but it have 0.7m minimal focusing distance, solid metal build quality and really good optical performance.

Summarit is a good modern Leica lens, but it have some softness in the corners (I never seen samples personally, but read lots of feedbacks about it), 0.8m minimal focusing distance, some distortion and little worse build quality, than 35mm cron ASPH.

So I will be really glad for your suggestions and thoughts about my searching. Also I'll be even more than happy, if someone of you will be so kind - to attach few samples of your summaron and summarit pictures, where I can see the sharpness from center to corner on wide open aperture.

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!

[earleygallery]

i have the Skopar too. I used to have a Summaron but sold it. It's a nice lens but definitely no improvement on the Skopar - rather it gives a less contrasty more 'vintage' look. 

 

I also took some photos with a Summicron ASPH and to be honest, I couldn't tell them apart from the Skopar photos. I'm sure it's probably a bit better at the corners at larger apertures but I don't think it's a night and day difference.

 

I think you need to make your own comparisons and decide on the basis of what you find you prefer. 

[bocaburger]

I have the Skopar (in LTM), had a Summaron once.  The Summaron was clean as a whistle but still not flare-resistant. The others you mention I have not tried.  If by Elmarit-m f/2.5 you meant Summarit, that or the new f/2.4 would probably be my choice, but only if I had a compulsion to own a genuine Leica lens.  Otherwise frankly I would stick with the Skopar.  I also own and use (mainly, in fact) a V3 and V4 Summicron.  Both can flare if not careful, but I like how they perform and the extra stop is helpful to me. 

[Loren]

I got the Zeiss Biogon ZM 35mm 2.0 for Christmas. I use it on my M8 and really like it. How it performs on full-frame I don't know - yet.

 

Mine performs flawlessly as do my other two Zeiss lenses (28/2.8 and 50/2.0).

[BerndReini]

http://www.l-camera-forum.com/topic/245219-sharpest-35mm-under-1000/

[TomB_tx]

I have the Biogon f2 and like it a lot, except for the size. I also have the Summarit 35 f2.5, find it at least as good, and love the small size and handling. With the 2.4 version out now the used prices on the 2.5 may drop a bit. I prefer the smaller size and 39mm filters of the 2.5.

I also have v1 & v2 35 Summicrons, but prefer the Summarit.

For lower light I still like the VC Nokton 35 f1.4, although not as sharp, I still get nice images from it. It's cheap enough to be a special purpose lens, and small enough to carry for occasional use.

[dpitt]

Advertisement (gone after registration)

Did you consider the Summicron 40 C? This Leica lens is a real bargain IMO, often overlooked.

It is a little bit tighter than the 35mm of course, but it has the Summicron quality. I even like it better than the Summicron 50 III version. Little bit less contrast than the modern Summicron's but that can easily be corrected in PP.

[DigitalHeMan]

I have and use the Summarit 35/2.5, and am always very impressed with the results, including wide open. It performs well on both film and digital, and has a very nice focus throw. My only complaint is the lens hood detaches rather easily, but I fixed that with some black electricians tape on the underside of the lens to keep it from moving

[elvispreasley]

Thank you for everyone, who replied, for sharing your thoughts and experience!

After checking some similar discussions, I decide to chose between Biogon-C 35mm 2.8 and Summarit-m 35mm 2.5. Would you be so kind to share some of the samples of your photo with these lenses, where the overall sharpness on wide open-f5.6 is really visible? Better something like "brick test")

[BerndReini]

Just buy the 35cron and be done with it. It is a classic lens and you won't regret it. I am always thinking of selling mine because I have a 35mm summilux aspherical, but then I keep changing my mind.

[Printmaker]

Just buy the 35cron and be done with it. It is a classic lens and you won't regret it. I am always thinking of selling mine because I have a 35mm summilux aspherical, but then I keep changing my mind.

I have to agree. I bought a CV 35/2.5 after loosing my 35 Summicron and liked the lens well enough but I missed the feel and look of the lost Summicron. I bought another 35 Summicron IV and used both lenses (CV on my M4 and Cron on my M8) for a year or so, eventually selling the CV when I got my M9. The little Skopar was a nice enough lens but few lenses are as satisfying to use as a Summicron.

As for the others, well I experienced similar mechanical issues as you with a Zeiss lens and now do not trust that brand. I also had a 35 Summaron back in the 1960s and it was nice for the time but I'm not sure I would go with one today. There's a 70 Summarit on my S2 and it is an astounding lens so I would assume that the 35/2.5 is every bit as good. But if you have a Leica, it deserves a Summicron.

[earleygallery]

I'd agree the Summicron is the lens to get if you want the 'best' 35, my older style Summicron 35 R is one of my favourite lenses. But, and it is a but, you  may not notice any difference to your current Skopar, apart from the larger aperture when you use it. 

 

Search Flickr for lots of photos of any lens you like. 

[Geoffrey James]

I wouldn't obsess about corners too much unless you are going to spend your life photographing bricks. Here is one from a couple of weeks ago with the 35 2.8 Biogon, which I hardly ever use. It may be too sharp for me.

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!

[peterjcb]

Just buy the 35cron and be done with it. It is a classic lens and you won't regret it. I am always thinking of selling mine because I have a 35mm summilux aspherical, but then I keep changing my mind.

...+1

 

[Guest )-(]

Summicron 35 R is one of my favourite lenses. 

 

I had and subsequently sold one of these (a late E55 version), I miss its' absolutely wild field curvature and the unique results it brought. I found it lousy for landscapes but just a joy for close to mid-distance subjects. I would love to know what is the M-mount equivalent of this lens. I have M9 so couldn't use the R on a rangefinder (only on Sony E mount.)

[BerndReini]

Life is too short to shoot non-Leica glass.

[jim0266]

I have too many 35's. The first step is admitting you have a problem. When I got my M-E last year I foolishly rented the 35/2.8 C Biogon. I wanted a modern lens as small and light as my 35 2.8 Summaron. My ASHP 35/2 just didn't feel as svelte on the M-E. I was blown away by the Biogon. Incredibly resistant to flare. Below from left is, Summaron, Biogon and ASHP. As sharp, possibly sharper than my ASPH, even at 2.8. 

 

[indergaard]

Of all those options I would definitely choose the Carl Zeiss Biogon ZM 35mm 2.0. It's the most versatile and best performing lens of the bunch. Reasonably priced too.

[Mornnb]

I would recommend the Distagon 35mm 1.4. It's one of the best if not the best 35mm lens anyone makes, and can be had for less cost than the Summicron.

 

Check out these reviews:

http://www.dearsusan.net/2015/01/26/317-zeiss-distagon-t-1-435-zm-full-review/

http://www.raylarose.com/2015/01/review-of-the-carl-zeiss-distagon-t-1-435-zm/

[Advertisement]

Hallo,

Look here: Leica M

[stephen.w]

First of all my sample of Biogon had some small build quality issue: when I turned my camera in vertical orientation - the focusing ring of the Biogon starting to move kind of tough, so I have to use a little force to move it front and back. In horizontal orientation focusing ring moved flawless and without any issue. 

Strange - my copy of the Biogon f2 (which last year I swapped towards a new 35 Summilux FLE) also did this. I got the FLE thinking it would be the last 35mm lens I ever bought, but I've often found myself wanting something smaller. Only yesterday I tested the f2.8 Biogon, and the first thing I tried was to focus it in portrait orientation, and there was absolutely no stiffness in the focussing mechanism. I'm not sure whether I will go back for the lens, but I would say it is the clear frontrunner in your shortlist. Some people say it is too sharp and contrasty -- those are defects I can live with.