CV 35mm f1.4 vs MS-Optics Apoqualia-G 35 f1.4 vs 35mm Summilux classic

[rontool]

Advertisement (gone after registration)

I'm in the market for a fast classic rendering 35mm lens. I take minor issue with each of the three, so I could like a comparison of them. I don't like how with the summilux I would only have 1m focus distance. I have heard that the Apoqualia has focus shift and weird ergonomics, and that the CV has lots of distortion. If anyone had all three to compare that would be great.

[pgk]

I do not have all three. I have the Summilux. All three are as far as I am aware, conventional designs. So all will have the characteristics which conventional designs have and will give a more 'classical' look (ie their designs are not up to current 'standards'). The Apoqualia minimum focus is 0.85m and the CV operates to 0.7m. So if you need closest focus the choice is easy. If your choice is to be based on other characteristics you can easily search for them. Personally I would always go for the Summilux because it is the epitome of what Leica lenses should be - small, light, good performance (except wide open) and so on. Comparisons of these three lenses are going to tell you what you might anticipate - all three are reasonable/good performers. Bokeh is too personal to be useful from reviews - you need to see images and remember that its only really relevant if you shoot so that you utilise it.

[lct]

Welcome to the forum . What camera do you expect to use with those lenses? I have both Nokton 35/1.4 "SC" and Summilux 35/1.4 v2. None of them has lots of distortion but if you intend to use them on a digital rangefinder better know that the CV has a lot of focus shift. The Summilux has some focus shift as well but it is less pronounced than that of the CV and it plays mainly at f/1.4 where the lens is soft anyway. Both lenses flare a lot but the Nokton "SC" is the champion here. Now it has smooth bokeh and is well usable at full aperture where focus shift is not an issue. The Summilux is sharp at f/2 and on in the centre of the frame and soft with glow (halos around highlights) at f/1.4, reason why it is a favorite for some photogs and not for others. I have no experience with either Apoqualia or Nokton 35/1.4 "MC" sorry. FWIW.

[rontool]

Thanks for the responses. How bad is the focus shift at f2-f4 on the CV? I'm using a M10 and I'm unsure about having a 1m focus distance because I tend to use the 35mm I have (MS-Optical 35mm f3.5 perar) for up close work, leading me to find the CV and MS lenses more desirable. I had heard the CV has barrel distortion, but it's good to hear its not perceptible.

 

None of them has lots of distortion but if you intend to use them on a digital rangefinder better know that the CV has a lot of focus shift. The Summilux has some focus shift as well but it is less pronounced than that of the CV and it plays mainly at f/1.4 where the lens is soft anyway.

[mls1483]

You may want to consider the Zeiss 35mm f/1.4 ZM. It is very sharp, very well corrected and solidly built. It renders very nicely, has a smooth bokeh and nice colors. It may be the best 35mm lens for the M system presently.

[lct]

Thanks for the responses. How bad is the focus shift at f2-f4 on the CV? I'm using a M10 and I'm unsure about having a 1m focus distance because I tend to use the 35mm I have (MS-Optical 35mm f3.5 perar) for up close work, leading me to find the CV and MS lenses more desirable. I had heard the CV has barrel distortion, but it's good to hear its not perceptible.

 

No idea about MS but re CV 35/1.4 SC i did not say that distortion is not perceptible just that there is not lots of them since you asked about this but it is not difficult to adjust in PP. Problem is focus shift around f/2.8 and f/4 mainly, on my copy at least. Not the best lens to advise a digital RF user unless you shoot mainly at full aperture or use an EVF on your M10.

[pgk]

Advertisement (gone after registration)

I'm using a M10 and I'm unsure about having a 1m focus distance because I tend to use the 35mm I have (MS-Optical 35mm f3.5 perar) for up close work, leading me to find the CV and MS lenses more desirable

 

Don't forget that none of these lenses (as far as I am aware) feature any sort of close range correction (I think that only the whole lens system moves whilst focusing) so performance will drop as you focus closer. Hence the moving rear groups in the latest designs.

[farnz]

You may want to consider the Zeiss 35mm f/1.4 ZM. It is very sharp, very well corrected and solidly built. It renders very nicely, has a smooth bokeh and nice colors. It may be the best 35mm lens for the M system presently.

I think you might need to define "best".   (Smallest? Lightest? Fastest? 'Sharpest'? Least distorting? Degree of focus shift? Most contrasty? Least contrasty? Most faithful colours? Least flare prone? Cheapest? etc etc.)

 

Pete.

[lct]

I think you might need to define "best".   (Smallest? Lightest? Fastest? 'Sharpest'? Least distorting? Degree of focus shift? Most contrasty? Least contrasty? Most faithful colours? Least flare prone? Cheapest? etc etc.)

 

Best barbel or best blocking of the VF perhaps . Just kidding i would certainly buy this great lens if it were less bulky than a 90mm Leica.

[mls1483]

Unfortunately there is an unpleasant truth: The better corrected, the bulkier. This is definitely no good news for the M system. Looking at the SL lenses or at the Zeiss Otus line (the incarnation of the "no compromise" IQ lenses), I get a little frightened... 

 

Fortunately, the APO Summicron 50mm is not such a monster (...) like the Summilux SL 50mm or the Planar 50mm f/1.4 for Sony E mount. So, top IQ is possible with the M system. However, the APO Summicron is also a whole stop slower, and it has no AF. The Summilux M 50mm on the other hand is definitely not as sharp and has a lot more field curvature than the Summilux SL. 

 

At present I still feel quite comfortable. The M delivers a superb IQ, it is a full frame system and it is very portable. Let's see what will come in the future.

[farnz]

Why have you moved the discussion onto 50 mm lenses when the OP enquired about 35 mm lenses?

 

I suspect that most of us here understand that levels of correction inevitably adding size and weight but there are plenty of members here, not least the OP, for whom a perfectly corrected lens (should such a thing ever exist) is not necessarily the ultimate goal.  Some of us prefer to be able to use lenses with 'character' as well, and since the OP mentioned the deliberately poorly corrected Apoquaria lens, it sounds like perfect correction is not the over-riding feature for him either although ultimately it's all a matter of compromise whichever way it's viewed.

 

Pete.

[lct]

[...] Some of us prefer to be able to use lenses with 'character' [...]

 

Indeed and some of us prefer paying more to get smaller lenses, hence the success of M lenses i guess. Not so sure about the success of SL lenses but i have no info about that

[rontool]

I really do enjoy the 35mm f1.4 ZM but its far too large for me. I want to be able to carry a 50mm 28mm 35mm and 15mm in one bag so I need a small 35mm. I could get the nokton SC and the ZM later however if I really like the 35mm focal length later on, as right now I'm more in love with 50mm (thanks in no small part to my M3 and 50mm f1.1 sonnetar)

[steveBK]

If it helps, I have had the MS Optics Apoqualia for a year and shot it on M240 / SL and film (M5).

Photos here - https://www.flickr.com/photos/xx573v3xx/tags/msopticsapoqualia35mmf14/

 

I had the CV 35/1.4 many years ago. I don’t recall liking it very much. It wasn’t as soft as a classic lens, but also had weirder/busier bokeh as I recall. I recall some focus shift too.

 

MS Optics lens has somewhat unique mechanics, in that the aperture does not click, and it is a very very small lens, so the ergonomics are a bit different.

 

Some shots..

S1050666

by Steve, on Flickr

 

S1030071

by Steve, on Flickr

 

portra400_20170630

by Steve, on Flickr

 

portra400_20170630_12

by Steve, on Flickr

[2wk]

I have the 35mm Nokton 1.4 S.C. No noticeable focus shift on my copy. 

Flares easily with a strong light source @ 1.4. Does not at 1.8. The hood helps at 1.4 as well. 

[steveBK]

So I double checked.. I had the VC 35/1.4 Nokton MC in 2010 on the old M8.. and don't think I kept it even a year.

 

Example of the crazy bokeh, which was easily provoked by the specifics of the scene -  due to the sun-thru-trees distant background.

 

Crazy bokeh

by Steve, on Flickr

 

This image was probably more typical of the bokeh 

 

Chit chat

by Steve, on Flickr

[steveBK]

MS Optics bokeh

 

Trying to find some examples.. I think it's more painterly/soft than "crazy"

 

L1008991

by Steve, on Flickr

 

L1009050

by Steve, on Flickr

 

L1008978

by Steve, on Flickr

[michaelwj]

To the OP. For a fast, classic, 35mm for an M, there is no perfect lens. I'd choose the 35 Summilux, in my opinion it is the pinnacle of the fast, classic, Leica 35.

Unfortunately, it is not perfect, and if you want to go closer, look for a v1 35 Summicron or get a second 35 in addition to the Summilux.

[Ko.Fe.]

I almost purchased one legendary copy of Lux 35 1.4. But it was too beaten. And every copy of old Leitz lens is questionable for haze and separation.

I almost purchased Nokton 35 1.4, but too many people I know were frustrated with focus shift and I'm not fan of this and some other Cosina lenses purple fringing on digital M.

I looked at Apoqualia-G 35 f1.4 pictures few times and it is not any different from other MS-Optics lenses. Tiny in size, so-so on pictures. 

[Advertisement]

Hallo,

Look here: Leica M