colorflow Posted June 13, 2007 Share #1 Posted June 13, 2007 Advertisement (gone after registration) Would appreciate your advice/experience in selecting a 35mm lens. My candidates are the Cron, the Biogon, and Ultron. I am staying away from the Lux because of the occasional back-focus problem discussed here, and my personal back-focus experience with the Lux 50 which NJ says may have to be sent to Solms. I have the pre-asph Lux 35, but it is prone to flare and is not as sharp as my Cron 28. I would like a 35 comparable to the Cron 28. Obvious choice is the Cron 35 but perhaps the others are just as good? Thanks in advance, Alan Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Advertisement Posted June 13, 2007 Posted June 13, 2007 Hi colorflow, Take a look here Your advice for selecting 35mm lens for M8. I'm sure you'll find what you were looking for!
Joe Mondello Posted June 13, 2007 Share #2 Posted June 13, 2007 I *believe* the 35/1.7 Ultron was recently discontinued (but is an M-mount version coming?) but what about the 35/1.2 Nokton? My only 35 is an old Summaron 3.5 so I can't really comment on your current choices except that I've read good things about the CV 35/1.2 As always I believe a subscription to http://www.reidreviews.com is warranted as part of the buying process for RF lenses on dRF cameras (I'm just a happy subscriber). HTH Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Eoin Posted June 13, 2007 Share #3 Posted June 13, 2007 Alan, I can understand "once bitten twice shy" with back focus but are you really just going to dismiss the 35 Lux Asph forever more?. Then again perhaps the 1 stop advantage is of no real concern. Of the 3 you've listed first choice would be the Summicron Asph. I have the older non coded chrome 35 Lux Asph and I must say it's the best lens I've used to date. Tends to stay glued to the camera and focus issues are in the realm of others here on the board. Super sharp, super accurate focusing, super colour. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
DaveB Posted June 13, 2007 Share #4 Posted June 13, 2007 I played with my camera today between rainshowers taking snaps of my wife's garden. Used my 28mm Ultron, 35mm Summicron asph, 50mm/1.4 and 90mm/2.0 asph. Tried to compare and contrast in terms of image quality, etc. That ugly beat up 35mm Summicron asph always wins hands down. It's my favorite. If I could only own one lens it would be the 35mm/2.0 asph and the CV15. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
colorflow Posted June 13, 2007 Author Share #5 Posted June 13, 2007 As always I believe a subscription to http://www.reidreviews.com is warranted as part of the buying process for RF lenses on dRF cameras (I'm just a happy subscriber). HTH Agreed. I am a subscriber too, but don't think he has published the 35 reviews yet. Has he? Alan Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
colorflow Posted June 13, 2007 Author Share #6 Posted June 13, 2007 Alan, I can understand "once bitten twice shy" with back focus but are you really just going to dismiss the 35 Lux Asph forever more?. Then again perhaps the 1 stop advantage is of no real concern. Of the 3 you've listed first choice would be the Summicron Asph. I have the older non coded chrome 35 Lux Asph and I must say it's the best lens I've used to date. Tends to stay glued to the camera and focus issues are in the realm of others here on the board. Super sharp, super accurate focusing, super colour. I agree I should not dismiss it out of hand. If only I could test a lens out before buying. This lens, if available, is gone quickly and most likely from somewhere far away. Alan Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
scho Posted June 13, 2007 Share #7 Posted June 13, 2007 Advertisement (gone after registration) Some of the characteristics of the Biogon that I like are the uniform sharpness, beautiful color, and smooth OOF transitions. There are several example images on my pbase site taken with the M8 and Biogon, here is one: http://www.pbase.com/scho/image/77015193/original Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
rjrose Posted June 13, 2007 Share #8 Posted June 13, 2007 The 35mm Summicron ASPH for me; but the 28 Summicron is on the camera more often. Bob Rose Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
sean_reid Posted June 14, 2007 Share #9 Posted June 14, 2007 Agreed. I am a subscriber too, but don't think he has published the 35 reviews yet. Has he? Alan Not yet but I'm getting there. I have three articles in draft right now and they each take a lot of work. I'm hoping to finish the article on shift lenses very soon and the 35s by, perhaps, the end of next week. BTW, the 35/1.7 is discontinued but I think CameraQuest has them. I predict that they will be popular once the article comes out. Cheers, Sean Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
hdrmd Posted June 14, 2007 Share #10 Posted June 14, 2007 Go with the 35 ASPH Summicron. Time tested with chrome and digital; hard to beat. DR Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Shootist Posted June 14, 2007 Share #11 Posted June 14, 2007 Although the VC and Zeiss lenses are very good they really don't compare to the Leica lenses. For the cost difference is the Leica lens that much better, probably not. In any case when I had this same decision to make I looked at them all (Not physically) and chose the Leica Summicron 35 f/2 ASPH. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
colorflow Posted June 14, 2007 Author Share #12 Posted June 14, 2007 Although the VC and Zeiss lenses are very good they really don't compare to the Leica lenses. For the cost difference is the Leica lens that much better, probably not. In any case when I had this same decision to make I looked at them all (Not physically) and chose the Leica Summicron 35 f/2 ASPH. Was image quality the main reason? I think the Zeiss should be very close in build quality. Alan Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
colorflow Posted June 14, 2007 Author Share #13 Posted June 14, 2007 Not yet but I'm getting there. I have three articles in draft right now and they each take a lot of work. I'm hoping to finish the article on shift lenses very soon and the 35s by, perhaps, the end of next week. BTW, the 35/1.7 is discontinued but I think CameraQuest has them. I predict that they will be popular once the article comes out. Cheers, Sean Thanks Sean for the hint. Any comments about the Zeiss? Alan Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
colorflow Posted June 14, 2007 Author Share #14 Posted June 14, 2007 Go with the 35 ASPH Summicron. Time tested with chrome and digital; hard to beat. DR My sentiments too. Although I am considering trying non-Leica glass. All my others are. Will probably still end up with the Cron. Alan Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
colorflow Posted June 14, 2007 Author Share #15 Posted June 14, 2007 Some of the characteristics of the Biogon that I like are the uniform sharpness, beautiful color, and smooth OOF transitions. There are several example images on my pbase site taken with the M8 and Biogon, here is one:1000448.jpg photo - Carl Schofield photos at pbase.com Thanks for the post. These photos look great. Do you have any taken at larger apertures? Alan Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
fordfanjpn Posted June 14, 2007 Share #16 Posted June 14, 2007 If I could only own one lens it would be the 35mm/2.0 asph and the CV15. Sorry, but that really made me chuckle. Partly because of the statement itself, and partly because it probably echoes the feelings of everyone here. "If I could only have one lens, it would be xxx, and ..." I'm afraid I can't help with choosing a 35, but I know my buying decisions are usually based on how much I can spend without the wife finding out! Bill Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Shootist Posted June 14, 2007 Share #17 Posted June 14, 2007 Was image quality the main reason? I think the Zeiss should be very close in build quality. Alan There was a number of factors. Size, the Leica is smaller. Included items, the Leica comes with caps, front and rear, a hood with cap, Leather case and the Leica Passport warranty. The Zeiss comes with front and rear cap, no hood (the hood is or was something like $100+ and you don't get a cap for the hood so you need to take the hood off and put the cap on everytime you store the lens it the bag), no case and I think it only comes with a 2 year warranty. Coding, the Leica is coded to work with the M8 and hopefully future M models. You have to hand code the Zeiss and I have had hit and miss results with hand coding. Filter size, the Leica takes a 39mm filter, I had ordered a 39 and 55 for my free filter sizes. the Zeiss used something like a 43mm filter. Price, the Leica is 2300 and at the time I was looking I think the Zeiss was 1200 or 1150 (something like that). I think they have come down to below 1000. But for the difference in price at the time I was looking and what included with the Leica that I listed above I thought the Leica was a better deal for me. And for the simple fact is "I" want Leica Lenses to go with my new Leica M8. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
sean_reid Posted June 14, 2007 Share #18 Posted June 14, 2007 Thanks Sean for the hint. Any comments about the Zeiss? Alan Sure...it's an excellent lens. Cheers, Sean Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
sean_reid Posted June 14, 2007 Share #19 Posted June 14, 2007 Although the VC and Zeiss lenses are very good they really don't compare to the Leica lenses. For the cost difference is the Leica lens that much better, probably not. Actually, in some respects, some of the Zeiss lenses outperform their Leica counterparts. The cliches about lenses are not always supported by the results of side by side testing. Some of the CV lenses have aspects in which they do better than their Leica counterparts. It depends on what aspects one is looking at, contrast preferences, center resolution vs. resolution across the frame, etc. It is not true that Leica lenses are always "better" (a vague term at best) than Zeiss or CV lenses, or vice-versa, etc. The differences are specific to specific groups of lenses and even then one must first define what is most important to him or her in a given lens. No ideas but in things. Cheers, Sean Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
sean_reid Posted June 14, 2007 Share #20 Posted June 14, 2007 There was a number of factors.Size, the Leica is smaller. Included items, the Leica comes with caps, front and rear, a hood with cap, Leather case and the Leica Passport warranty. The Zeiss comes with front and rear cap, no hood (the hood is or was something like $100+ and you don't get a cap for the hood so you need to take the hood off and put the cap on everytime you store the lens it the bag) Hi Ed, The Zeiss caps go on and off whether hoods are mounted or not. One certainly does not need to remove the hood to use the cap. But...the Zeiss caps are fiddly for anyone with larger hands. Also, the Zeiss hoods sell for about $65.00 (see Popflash.com) not $100.00 Tony also sells the 35/2.0 for $700 which is much less than the $1100 - $1200 you mentioned. I love Leica lenses too but lets be sure to keep our facts straight. Which of the Zeiss lenses have you used extensively on the M8? Which CV lenses? Each person will have good reasons for his or her personal preferences but I think we should careful with the factual information and with generalizations. I do think that the factory coding is an advantage for the Leica lenses. Next most convenient, in that respect, are LTM lenses with LT-M8 adapters for hand coding. Cheers, Sean Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Archived
This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.