m9 First 35mm Lens Advise

[earleygallery]

Advertisement (gone after registration)

Thanks, does the Skopar still allow for a shallow DOF? also how does it compare to the "cheap in leica terms" Summarit 2.4?

 

Shallow DOF isn't going to be a big feature in a wide angle lens but yes of course wide open the DOF will be relatively shallow (it also depends on relationship to you, the main subject and the background).

 

There's a tendency on this forum to consider anything 'cheap' as inferior (although they're not cheap compared to most other camera brands). 

 

I can assure you that from my experience the Skopar if a very fine lens and I'd challenge you to spot the difference between the Skopar and Summarit viewing normal photos in normal size prints or on screen. I shot my side by side with a Summicron and couldn't tell them apart.

[AceVentura1986]

I have the CV Norton 35 f/1.4 and, for me, it’s a perfectly usable lens that usually gives good results, and occasionally great ones too, if you know how to use it.

 

FOCUS SHIFT: focus shift is very noticeable above f/2 and below f/5.6 AND closer than 6 feet (2 meters). In other words, if you set the aperture at f/2 or at f/5.6 you will be fine at all distances. If you set it at f/2 or at f/4 AND focus beyond 6 feet you should be fine. HOWEVER, f/2 or f/4 within 6 feet will result in focus shift. In ordinary shooting, especially street, landscape, and candid photography, this isn’t really an issue as you’ll usually be at f/8 or distances greater than 6 feet.

 

BARREL DISTORTION: Yes, it distorts the image SLIGHTLY. This is especially visible when photographing horizons or horizontal lines near the bottom or top of the image. HOWEVER, Lightroom can completely correct this distortion. A +6 correction in the lens distortion menu flattens the image. Please note, my Canon 24-105 f/4 suffers from the same issue below 40mm and this is a professional lens. As w the Norton, I just correct it in Lightroom as well.

 

LENS FLARE: Yes, it can flare but I view this as a plus not a negative. If I want completely antiseptic images I bring out my Canon gear. Lens flare on the Nokton can look very cool.

 

F/1.4: It’s very soft at this aperture. You should think of this lens as an f/2 lens and not go wider than that. At f/2 though, it’s perfectly usable.

 

SUMMARY: Frankly, I have no issues w the Nokton. Although my regular lens is the 50mm Summicron, I never hesitate to use the Nokton when I want to shoot at 35mm.

 

I’ve included a link to my gallery with photos shot using the Nokton 35mm on the M8. I’ve printed these to 20x30 inches with great results. http://www.ralphventura.com/paris

Edited July 13, 2018 by AceVentura1986

[Advertisement]

The Leica Q3 is available for pre-order at B&H Photo Video and Adorama

[Ko.Fe.]

Shallow DOF isn't going to be a big feature in a wide angle lens but yes of course wide open the DOF will be relatively shallow (it also depends on relationship to you, the main subject and the background).

 

There's a tendency on this forum to consider anything 'cheap' as inferior (although they're not cheap compared to most other camera brands). 

 

I can assure you that from my experience the Skopar if a very fine lens and I'd challenge you to spot the difference between the Skopar and Summarit viewing normal photos in normal size prints or on screen. I shot my side by side with a Summicron and couldn't tell them apart.

This is why I purchased Color Skopar three times.

First time it was huge update from Jupiter-12 lack of ergonomics. But once I started to print in the darkroom, negatives taken with with lens were missing something. I changed from LTM camera to M and updated to PII Skopar. Same optical formula, but flare. Same flat prints. I updated it to Ultron 35 1.7 and it was superior to Skopar on darkroom prints. But Ultron's is no tab lens. I purchased Summarit 35 2.5 and by very first print I knew it is superior to Skopar lens. Difference is huge to my eyes.

Yet, I bought third Skopar, original P and I think it is best build version among all three. I used it on M8, but every time I used Summarit images were better.

Skopar is fine, small, nothing bad lens. But comparing it to Summarit is bad joke . But I can't say anything about Cron, don't need it with Summarit.

This is why it is called Color Skopar. It is fine on color film. Digital pictures are OK, but they lack of something. I don't know how to put it, but basically Scopar is flat in rendering. But with Summarit I quickly became addicted to see images at 1:1. On M9 it gives incredible resolution and something else, which Skopar hasn't. Similar to what I see on darkroom prints. It is how edges are drawn. Summarit does it with micro contrast or details. Skopar draws it more primitive way.

[Ko.Fe.]

Skopar @2.5

[AdamSinger]

Blues in E

 

Woke up this morning and my M9 had no lens

Woke up this morning and my M9 had no lens

My baby said its easy

just get a Zeiss 35 ZM."

 

Seriously the Ziess is a real alternative to Leica, and IMO better than the Voigtlander, (which I also have and sometimes use on My M9 when traveling) To be fair the ZM should be better, as in corporate terms the Voigtlander is to Zeiss what Alfa Romeo is to Ferrari. Or if you really want the ultimate in cool get a 1950s 35mm Contax Zeiss Biogon and a Contax to M adapter this is one of the all time great lenses, and has a fabulous look.

Edited July 13, 2018 by AdamSinger

[Musotographer]

My 35mm of choice on both my M9P and M10 is my old Canon LTM 35/2. It cost about £300 a couple of years ago, and it's a delight - if you can find a good one somewhere. I've just posted a couple of pics from it in the M9 pics-, and Barnack's Monthly- threads.

[AceVentura1986]

Advertisement (gone after registration)

Blues in EWoke up this morning and my M9 had no lensWoke up this morning and my M9 had no lensMy baby said its easyjust get a Zeiss 35 ZM."Seriously the Ziess is a real alternative to Leica, and IMO better than the Voigtlander, (which I also have and sometimes use on My M9 when traveling) To be fair the ZM should be better, as in corporate terms the Voigtlander is to Zeiss what Alfa Romeo is to Ferrari. Or if you really want the ultimate in cool get a 1950s 35mm Contax Zeiss Biogon and a Contax to M adapter this is one of the all time great lenses, and has a fabulous look.

Love me some blues ...

[AceVentura1986]

FOCUS SHIFT: focus shift is very noticeable above f/2 and below f/5.6 AND closer than 6 feet (2 meters). In other words, if you set the aperture at f/2 or at f/5.6 you will be fine at all distances. If you set it at f/2 or at f/4 AND focus beyond 6 feet you should be fine. HOWEVER, f/2 or f/4 within 6 feet will result in focus shift. In ordinary shooting, especially street, landscape, and candid photography, this isn’t really an issue as you’ll usually be at f/8 or distances greater than 6 feet. http://www.ralphventura.com/paris

CORRECTION: I meant to write “f/2.8 or f/4 within 6 feet will result in focus shift.” The lens is fine at f/2 and all distances. The focus shift is noticeable at f/2.8 and very noticeable at f/4 WITHIN 6 feet (2 meters). Edited July 13, 2018 by AceVentura1986

[leonasj]

received my 7artisans m 35/2cron, 277$ free ship,dont buy leica 35-just wast money,artisans high quality made,i dont see any difference from my other leica lens ,6bit coded,pictures sharp same colors and same as from my other leica lens, what im say- it easy outperformed 35/2.5 in any way-lighter sharper small...equal to summicron m 35/2asph in all way- just lighter ,,, takes 43mm filters ,,,,good job,7Artisans,keep moving

Edited July 14, 2018 by leonasj

[goatsby]

As this is your first Leica rangefinder, I would stay away from legacy glass and stick with a modern Leica / Zeiss / Voigtländer bought from a reputable dealer.  If you buy a second-hand lens in questionable shape paired with the curve of learning a rangefinder system, the results may be poor and you will not be able to differentiate between technique and / or bad glass. You may get discouraged with the results and throw in the towel early as some do, but if you start with a good lens you know that its your technique and that time and practice will strengthen your results. I also like the idea of starting off with a 50mm, but you really can't go wrong with 28 or 35 either.

 

Regardless, enjoy the experience and remember practice makes perfect!

 

Adam        

[Topsy]

I have the CV Norton 35 f/1.4 and, for me, it’s a perfectly usable lens that usually gives good results, and occasionally great ones too, if you know how to use it.

 

FOCUS SHIFT: focus shift is very noticeable above f/2 and below f/5.6 AND closer than 6 feet (2 meters). In other words, if you set the aperture at f/2 or at f/5.6 you will be fine at all distances. If you set it at f/2 or at f/4 AND focus beyond 6 feet you should be fine. HOWEVER, f/2 or f/4 within 6 feet will result in focus shift. In ordinary shooting, especially street, landscape, and candid photography, this isn’t really an issue as you’ll usually be at f/8 or distances greater than 6 feet.

 

 

 

Don't want to hijack this thread but could you explain what Focus Shift is please.

Edited August 2, 2018 by Topsy

[AceVentura1986]

Don't want to hijack this thread but could you explain what Focus Shift is please.

A lens’s focus is calibrated at a given f-stop, usually wide open. So, the Nokton is calibrated at f/1.4. As you stop down the lens two things happen. First, the depth of field increases. Obviously, there is a deeper depth of field at f/2 than at f/1.4 and deeper still at f/4. Second, the actual point of focus will shift relative to the lens’s calibration. The shift is usually backwards.

 

So, if you shoot from a tripod and focus at 1 meter (3 feet for us Yanks) at f/1.4 the image will have a very shallow depth of field but it should be focused on your mark. Next, if you then stop down the aperture to f/2 the focus point will shift slightly backwards even as the depth of field increases. Still, at f/2 the point of actual focus is still within the depth of field.

 

This phenomenon is more pronounced at f/2.8 and most pronounced at f/4 where the actual point of focus will shift backwards to the point where it lies outside the depth of field, on the Nokton several inches behind your intended point of focus. This phenomenon appears to vanish at f/5.6 because the depth of field becomes so deep that it encompasses the actual point of focus.

 

Focus shift is present in many lenses, if not most to one degree or another including DSLR lenses too. It is ameliorated considerably by lenses with floating elements, but these are well outside my price range. However, it is more of a theoretical issue than a practical issue because of the uses 35mm lenses are put to.

 

As a moderately wide focal length, a 35mm lens will ordinarily be used to photograph things or scenes lying beyond 6 feet. At this distance the depth of field has expanded to encompass the actual focus point at all f-stops. In other words, while the depth of field at f/2.8 and and 3 feet might be only a few inches at six feet it is now deep enough that you likely will not notice the focus shift. Further, photographing scenes such as street photography and landscape photography is usually done at smaller f-stops such as f/8. At this aperture, the depth of field is sufficient to compensate for focus shift at all distances.

 

Hope this helps.

Edited August 3, 2018 by AceVentura1986

[bussta]

OK, so i've been using the 50mm which is great, especially for portraits, but I do think i'll get a 35 too, I miss the wider view point,

 

I've seen a 35mm Summicron V4 and the 35mm Summicron ASPH for roughly the same price, any thoughts on either? both are expensive but I think i'll always want at least one Leica lens for my outfit. I know it's probably been debated to death somewhere on this forum.

 

heard conflicting things about both lenses, some saying the V4 has messy bokeh but a nice character, or the ASPH is characterless yet sharp

 

Any knowledge/thoughts on what would be best fit for the M9 sensor? i'm not overly keen on ultra sharpness & the overly clinical digital look, i'm more interested in something that gives almost an organic/analogue character but is still sharp and not too dreamy/swirly, which is why i'm liking the 50mm Nokton i've got, as through the M9 it almost renders in a filmic way.

[a.noctilux]

Please see my "history" in this thread, post # 4 :

https://www.l-camera-forum.com/topic/287340-no-love-for-the-35mm-summicron-asph/

 

In your shoes, I'd go for the Summicron IV...

 

Even if some ten years ago, I'd go for the Asph. (bigger, heavier and more "modern rendering" than IV)

 

Don't forget that each "good enough lens" can be tuned to your need with something called aperture .

When closed to f/4 or 5.6, almost every lens can give its best but mainly at wide open or second f Stop, they are different.

 

Here what I used with M9, and I'm not be able to point which picture was taken with which lens (at my most used say f/5.6),

at F/2, or 2.8 I can see that the asph. was "better corrected" than the other and IV was "lovely" and pleasing:

 

 

 

 

Summicron IV, ... Asph. , ... 35mm non asph. Summilux (front) , ... M-Hexanon 35mm

Edited August 8, 2018 by a.noctilux

[bussta]

thanks

[Ko.Fe.]

I liked Nokton on M-E except ergonomics and I liked LTM Ultron on M4-2. VM is made for digital, I would love to have it, but again it just me and its focus ring same as on Nokton.

If you are OK with Nokton as 50 lens, why not to get Ultron 35 1.7 VM? It does all Nokton does. Sharp, but not clinical, smooth rendering and neutral bokeh.

Even LTM 35 1.7 could be just fine if you don't need clinical sharpness. I have Ultron 28 1.9 LTM on M-E and it is very fine lens. Just huge .

[otto.f]

I can only agree with a.noctilux; after 28 years of Leica the Summicron 35 iv didn’t ever bore me. I also own the Summaron 35/2.8 which is incredibly sharp for its age, it has a very good bo-keh with the many aperture blades that ensure an always round pupil. It can be obtained cheaper than the Summicron 35 iv and in practice, how important is that one stop for you? If I see people here advocating the Zeiss 35/2.8, I wonder how can they forget this Summaron? I also own the FLE, but in practice I much more often pick the Summicron 35 iv because it’s so handy, light and small.

[JSU]

I made my choice in 1994 when I got my 35 Summicron IV which pairs quite well with the 90 Tele-Elmarit I got a year later. They were most satisfying prior to digital and now with the M9-P they are still sufficient to my needs. 

 

I have other focal lengths for different looks, but these two live on my pair of M9-P bodies.

[AdamSinger]

Bussta,

 

Dunno if you are still reading this Lot of good advice on brand , look and sharpness. Let me give a different view , lenes especially those bought used from a reputable dealer are often good buys, you can check them and they often come with a short guarantee. You wont loose much money if and when you trade in what you buy now at some future date for something else. So you can get just about any lens recommended here and try it , but if you get a new one you will have more deprecation than on a used one. The great thing about lenses is looked after they don't wear out.

[Advertisement]

Hallo,

Look here: Leica M

[Myvalko]

Hi there. For me, get a Zeiss Biogon ZM. I have the F2.8 and it is a terrific lens. Very nice to use, very compact, smooth ring, third click aperture ring... The only draw back, no coding. But you can do it manually or select the profile in the camera.

 

And no bag... Who cares. The lens is to be used, not to keep in box.

So, for me, I would rather take a lens which is very good at its maximum aperture than brighter lens which you have to close for a better pict quality...

 

Finally only one law, buy what you can. Use the lens as much as possible

 

Just my 2 cents

D