Voigtländer Color Skopar 35mm 2,5 Pancake II vs. 35mm Summicron serie IV vs. 40mm Rokkor-m

[geesbert]

Advertisement (gone after registration)

I own both the Rokkor and the Summicron as my tiny M11-as-a-pocket-camera lenses, I really like both, but often I wish they would render a bit cleaner and sharper wide open. Would the Voigtländer do the trick? Anything out there smaller the the Summicron serie IV with a modern rendering in the 35mm range? High speed is not important, but tiny size is.

 

[Product Details]

Overview all Voigtlander Leica M-Mount lenses

Voigtlander Leica M-Mount lenses available at Amazon and B&H Photo Video

[jimmielx]

Zeiss C-Biogon 35mm f/2.8. Very small. Very modern rendering. 

[28framelines]

I just had this problem and I went with the Voigtlander Color Skopar, and so far couldn’t be happier. I understand the C-Biogon is the “better” lens, but I really love how the Skopar handles and love the “modern, but not too clinical” result

[geesbert]

I really want a 'tiny' lens, the Zeiss is a tad large for my purpose. 

 

I wonder how the color Skopar at 2,8 compares to the two others at 2,8, I presume the difference is not that big anymore, as the summicron tends to clear up quite a bit when stopped down a bit

[cboy]

While your right it not having a clinical look, but do you really want or need it for what purpose? I regret selling mine for the Cron v4 as I felt the rokkor had more character. I never felt attached to my skopar which gave me a flat but sharp images. Horse for courses however as your preference is a modern look. Perhaps the summarit 35mm? But it has less contrast

[geesbert]

I am not selling anything. That's the one thing I learned with Leica lenses: you always lose when you sell. I bought my 35cron about 20 years ago for 500GBP, look for what they are going now...

 

I never understood the problem with 'clinical look'. If I want less of that it is quite easy to achieve in post production. getting rid of glow and unsharpness is much harder!

[rramesh]

Advertisement (gone after registration)

Have you tried the Ultron 35mm f/2 v2? 

[Printmaker]

I used the CV 35/2.5 for a few years. It was a sharp and small lens. But I replaced it with a type 4 Summicron because I liked the smoother rendering of the Summicron. True, the Summicron is larger and the Skopar is quite sharp but it was a matter of the special look of the cron. Now I use the ASPH Ii version of the 35 Summicron.

[otto.f]

5 hours ago, rramesh said:

Have you tried the Ultron 35mm f/2 v2? 

If you want a 2.0, I don’t know what would be better than the Ultron ii indeed. However, the problem of Zeiss and Voigtlander vs. Leica are the separate and too big  hoods. That makes the Ultron not exactly small. For me this is the main reason that I stick with the Summicrom 35 iv. In practical shooting the differences are there, but who will notice except you. Besides, I somehow find the transition from sharp to unsharp so gradual in the Ultron ii that I miss a little surprise in the sharp subject, as I see in the Leica. The lack of identity of the asph 35 is not worth the extra money for me. 

 

Edited March 11, 2023 by otto.f

[lct]

On 3/9/2023 at 9:07 PM, geesbert said:

Anything out there smaller the the Summicron serie IV with a modern rendering in the 35mm range? High speed is not important, but tiny size is.

Among f/2 copies, the Summicron-C 40/2 is slightly shorter but has a similar rendering. Same for the M-Rokkor 40/2 for Minolta CLE. The Summicron-M 35/2 asph v1 has the rendering you're after but is significantly taller. Only f/2 candidate would be the CV Ultron 35/2 asph. My variant with focus stick is about 1mm taller w/o hood but has more or less the same size with vented hood compared to the Summicron-M 35/2 v4 with vented 12585 hood.

Among slower lenses, the Elmarit-C 40/2.8 is the smallest but is a collector lens whereas both Summarit 35/2.5 and Biogon 35/2.8 are taller. I have no experience with the CV 35/2.5.

[geesbert]

My friendly dealer had a Color Skopar in stock, so I bought one.

 

I tested it today against a 35mm Summicron Serie4, a 40mm M-Rokkor, a 3,5cm screw mount Summaron f3.5 (unfortunately marked as Summarit in my test)

 

My conclusion:

 

I shot them stopped down by one stop, Wide open the difference is even greater.  Color Skopar is the cleanest and sharpest of the bunch, second is the 70 year old Summaron, third is the M-Rokkor, fourth is the Summicron, king of bokeh and unsharpness.

 

I cannot say which rendering I prefer, the handling is best with the Summicron, then Skopar, then Rokkor, then Summaron.

 

Here are some pictures:

 

Test of tiny 35s on a Leica M11

 

My conclusion? No Idea, nothing really matters! I will chose which lens I am using according to the shirt I am wearing. I'll keep them all.

 

 

 

 

 

 

[lct]

You may wish to compare those lenses at the same aperture. You could feel that your 35/2 v4 is no slouch this way. Here my German-made copy at f/2 on M11:

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!

[geesbert]

To clarify:

The Skopar, the Rokkor and the Summicron were shot at f2,8, the Summaron at f4

[28framelines]

4 hours ago, geesbert said:

My friendly dealer had a Color Skopar in stock, so I bought one.

 

I tested it today against a 35mm Summicron Serie4, a 40mm M-Rokkor, a 3,5cm screw mount Summaron f3.5 (unfortunately marked as Summarit in my test)

 

My conclusion:

 

I shot them stopped down by one stop, Wide open the difference is even greater.  Color Skopar is the cleanest and sharpest of the bunch, second is the 70 year old Summaron, third is the M-Rokkor, fourth is the Summicron, king of bokeh and unsharpness.

 

I cannot say which rendering I prefer, the handling is best with the Summicron, then Skopar, then Rokkor, then Summaron.

 

Here are some pictures:

 

Test of tiny 35s on a Leica M11

 

My conclusion? No Idea, nothing really matters! I will chose which lens I am using according to the shirt I am wearing. I'll keep them all.

 

 

 

 

 

 

I’m not gonna lie, they all look _pretty much_ the same in terms of in focus elements to out of focus rendering. Which, as someone who cannot afford the v4 Summicron, makes me incredibly happy! I’d love to see more comparisons, but the rendering between all of them are pretty fantastic. It also makes me think maybe it would be worth picking up a 40mm M-Rokkor at some point in case I want the same look, but a little longer focal length 

[geoffreyg]

Have a 'cron ASPH, and the Skopar. Got the Zeiss 2.8, sent it back due to weak edges. Prefer the Skopar to all the others, after it was shimmed to fix some focus offset. 

[RexGig0]

My Skopar just favorably impressed me, with its first few images. Very clean images, and low distortion. With no lens profile selected, the vignetting is not bothersome. I shall need to compare it with my Zeiss Distagon 35mm f/1.4 ZM, and, especially, my Leica Summaron 3.5cm f/3.5 lens.

I actually bought my Skopar several years ago, but then misplaced it, before I had a chance to try it. I had thought that a family member might have tossed the box into the recycle bin, thinking that it was empty. Well, I found it during some recent re-organizing.

[Greenhilltony]

I have Ultron II and M-Rokkor 40. The Ultron is sharper a little bit, only noticeable when pixel-peeping, but it vignettes heavier when wide-open, and has much larger barrel distortion than the Rokkor at all distance. Another personal opinion is the Ultron has a stronger contrast than the Rokkor, and it usually renders people's black hair in a mess and dirty-look because it pushes the dark part darker. And the transition from in-focus to out-of-focus is not as smooth as the Rokkor. The major problem for Rokkor now is to find a copy in good conditions meanwhile at a bargain price...but it is already fractions of price of any other cron/lux.

[lct]

5 hours ago, Greenhilltony said:

I have Ultron II and M-Rokkor 40. The Ultron is sharper a little bit, only noticeable when pixel-peeping, but it vignettes heavier when wide-open, and has much larger barrel distortion than the Rokkor at all distance. Another personal opinion is the Ultron has a stronger contrast than the Rokkor, and it usually renders people's black hair in a mess and dirty-look because it pushes the dark part darker. And the transition from in-focus to out-of-focus is not as smooth as the Rokkor. The major problem for Rokkor now is to find a copy in good conditions meanwhile at a bargain price...but it is already fractions of price of any other cron/lux.

I'm not good at comparing lenses of different focal lengths but compared to the Rokkor 28/2.8 for Minolta CLE, which has a Mandler-like rendition, the Ultron 28/2 asph has a more modern look with more contrast indeed hence a trend of darkening shadows. As for the Rokkor 40/2, its s/h prices are similar to those of the Summicron 40/2 AFAIK.

[Advertisement]

Hallo,

Look here: Leica M