One or two lenses for 35mm?

[jhonzatkl]

Advertisement (gone after registration)

Hi!

I'd like to ask your advice. I am looking for the best way to deal with the 35mm focal length. I have tried many 35mm lenses, but I still can't find the ideal solution. Currently I have 3 CV lenses (Nokton 35/1.2 III, Ultron 35/1.7 and Ultron 35/2 II) and I can't decide how to solve my 35mm focal length problem. One option is to have 2 lenses (a large fast aperture lens and a small lens) and use the one that fits best at the moment. The other way is to use only one lens and here I would like to ask if that single lens can be this new Nokton 35/1.5?
What is the better option according to your experience? Do you think the Nokton 35/1.5 makes sense as a universal replacement for the Nokton 35/1.2 + Ultron 35/2?
Unfortunately Summilux or Summicron are beyond my current financial means.
Thank you very much for your advice and recommendations!

[jankap]

1 hour ago, jhonzatkl said:

Hi!

I'd like to ask your advice. I am looking for the best way to deal with the 35mm focal length. I have tried many 35mm lenses, but I still can't find the ideal solution. Currently I have 3 CV lenses (Nokton 35/1.2 III, Ultron 35/1.7 and Ultron 35/2 II) and I can't decide how to solve my 35mm focal length problem. One option is to have 2 lenses (a large fast aperture lens and a small lens) and use the one that fits best at the moment. The other way is to use only one lens and here I would like to ask if that single lens can be this new Nokton 35/1.5?
What is the better option according to your experience? Do you think the Nokton 35/1.5 makes sense as a universal replacement for the Nokton 35/1.2 + Ultron 35/2?
Unfortunately Summilux or Summicron are beyond my current financial means.
Thank you very much for your advice and recommendations!

Sorry, I don´t understand your problem. 

You could take a 28mm and crop off the not-ideal sides. That would be the 

[Advertisement]

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

[Hans-Dieter Gülicher]

As I mentioned before I`m only using the M 10-R together with my APO-Summicron 35 mm as I prefer small luggage and don`t like to switch over from lens to lens on my trips. The Summicron fulfills in every relationship my requirements. I anderstand the financial situation very well but it is my hobby and that counts out of my sight.

[M11 for me]

Is it about weight? Do you not want to carry a "big" and heavy lens all the time even though not needed? 

I have such a situation with 50mm. My Summilux (the heavy silver version) stays normally at home and I use the 50mm Summarit 1.5. But when I know in advance that I will have poor light or inside shots then from the beginning I take the faster lens. But I do not want to have the heavy lens as the only 50mm focal length.

Edited May 31 by M11 for me

[jaeger]

Have you tried the VM 35mm 1.4ii?  You have both (fast and compact) in one small package.

[M11 for me]

vor 57 Minuten schrieb Hans-Dieter Gülicher:

As I mentioned before I`m only using the M 10-R together with my APO-Summicron 35 mm as I prefer small luggage and don`t like to switch over from lens to lens on my trips. The Summicron fulfills in every relationship my requirements. I anderstand the financial situation very well but it is my hobby and that counts out of my sight.

I was in Ireland 2 weeks ago and I took only the new Q3. Its the first time that I decided to go with a single focal length. And it was a great success in my eyes.

Going back to the problem of @jhonzatkl: For a longer trip you better have the faster lens on your camera from the beginning when you want to travel light. One heavier lens is still lighter than 2 lenses.

Edited May 31 by M11 for me

[jhonzatkl]

Advertisement (gone after registration)

3 minutes ago, jaeger said:

Have you tried the VM 35mm 1.4ii?  You have both (fast and compact) in one small package.

Yes, i tried it. Really nice small package, but image quality is too vintage for me. Anyway, thanks for the recommendation!

[jaeger]

1 minute ago, jhonzatkl said:

Yes, i tried it. Really nice small package, but image quality is too vintage for me. Anyway, thanks for the recommendation!

Did you try the MC or SC version?  The MC version should be modern, yet SC version is vintage.

[jhonzatkl]

Tried both of them. Really like size and ergo, but i'm definitely looking for better image quality on small apertures.

[JoshuaRothman]

I know where you're coming from. After trying many 35s, I eventually settled on the CV Ultron II as the best all-round 35mm lens for my M10. It could be that the 35 f/1.5 is even better, but the extraordinarily small size of the Ultron makes it special. And on digital a single stop of light is not (often) a big deal.

After using the Ultron for a while, I upgraded to the 35 FLE. I'm still not sure how I feel about it. The image quality is excellent, but the size and weight are a bit much. At the end of the day, I think a small 35 is a perfect fit for an M, and any compromises one must make involving aperture are probably worth it. I may go back to the Ultron or try a Summicron.

If I were you I'd probably sell the non-Ultron 35s, buy a 35 f/1.5, and then decide to keep just one—either the Ultron or the new f/1.5 Nokton.

[Kwesi]

Hi jhonzatkl,

welcome to the forum!.

I have the 35 FLE, v1 as my only 35 and I have to say I rarely shoot it wide open. I'm not sure which M body you are using so I can't say how critical it is for you to shoot faster than f2 but have you considered the Zeiss Biogon 35/2?

[jhonzatkl]

2 minutes ago, JoshuaRothman said:

I know where you're coming from. After trying many 35s, I eventually settled on the CV Ultron II as the best all-round 35mm lens for my M10. It could be that the 35 f/1.5 is even better, but the extraordinarily small size of the Ultron makes it special. And on digital a single stop of light is not (often) a big deal.

After using the Ultron for a while, I upgraded to the 35 FLE. I'm still not sure how I feel about it. The image quality is excellent, but the size and weight are a bit much. At the end of the day, I think a small 35 is a perfect fit for an M, and any compromises one must make involving aperture are probably worth it. I may go back to the Ultron or try a Summicron.

If I were you I'd probably sell the non-Ultron 35s, buy a 35 f/1.5, and then decide to keep just one—either the Ultron or the new f/1.5 Nokton.

This is exactly my situation! On the one hand, I really like the outputs of the CV35/1.2 III, but I usually don't need so fast apertures and the weight and dimensions are an unnecessary complication. From my point of view the Leica as a system excels especially in combination with small lenses. But sometimes I need a fast apertures (I'm from Central Europe, we have only a few sunny days a year), so the option of only f2 or f2.8 lens is unfortunately not ideal for me.
Thanks for the recommendation, the only option is probably to buy Nokton 35/1.5, try it personally and decide after my own experience.

[jhonzatkl]

10 minutes ago, Kwesi said:

Hi jhonzatkl,

welcome to the forum!.

I have the 35 FLE, v1 as my only 35 and I have to say I rarely shoot it wide open. I'm not sure which M body you are using so I can't say how critical it is for you to shoot faster than f2 but have you considered the Zeiss Biogon 35/2?

I have not tried it personally, but according to many reviews and opinions it is not an ideal solution with regard to the ratio of luminosity and size/weight and price.
However, I used the C-Biogon 35/2.8 for a short time and it was a great lens and I regret a bit that I sold it ... 

[Kwesi]

Thanks for the explanation. I am a bit surprised as many regard the Zeiss Planar 50/2 and Zeiss Biogon 35/2 as excellent alternates for their Leica Summicron counterparts. My guess is they've fallen out of fashion as the CV lenses seem to be doing a excellent job of keeping up with current trends in lens designs.

[dpitt]

1 hour ago, jhonzatkl said:

This is exactly my situation! On the one hand, I really like the outputs of the CV35/1.2 III, but I usually don't need so fast apertures and the weight and dimensions are an unnecessary complication. From my point of view the Leica as a system excels especially in combination with small lenses. But sometimes I need a fast apertures (I'm from Central Europe, we have only a few sunny days a year), so the option of only f2 or f2.8 lens is unfortunately not ideal for me.
Thanks for the recommendation, the only option is probably to buy Nokton 35/1.5, try it personally and decide after my own experience.

Size is very important to me too. I do not mind vintage lenses like the Summicrons from the 80s, and I actually prefer the vintage Summicron 35 versions IQ to any of the voigtlanders you mentioned. I even think finding one within your budget should be possible if you sell the 3 lenses you have now.

If your budget does not allow for a 35 mm Summicron, I can highly recommend the Summicron 40 C. It is slightly tighter than a 35 mm, but I use it with the 35 mm frames without much trouble if I stay inside the frame. It still beats the CV lenses IMO, certainly if you add some contrast in PP. The 40 Summicron is one of my favorites on the digital Ms.

If you could stretch your budget and buy a used 35 mm Summilux M ASPH (black version) that would be the ideal 35mm IMO, F1.4 and still smaller and lighter than the VCs mentioned. And all that in a smaller package than the FLE version mentioned above. And of course it comes with superb, modern Leica IQ, only beaten a bit by its larger, heavier and more expensive Leica M siblings.

[Jeff S]

1 hour ago, jhonzatkl said:

 try it personally and decide after my own experience.

My recommendation for the majority of posts on this forum.

Jeff

[Olaf_ZG]

2 hours ago, Kwesi said:

Thanks for the explanation. I am a bit surprised as many regard the Zeiss Planar 50/2 and Zeiss Biogon 35/2 as excellent alternates for their Leica Summicron counterparts. My guess is they've fallen out of fashion as the CV lenses seem to be doing a excellent job of keeping up with current trends in lens designs.

Which might not be a bad thing if one wants to buy a nice set of cz lenses 😍

[Kwesi]

8 minutes ago, Olaf_ZG said:

Which might not be a bad thing if one wants to buy a nice set of cz lenses 😍

absolutely!!

[Ko.Fe.]

35 1.5 is fine by all means, here is no point to have f2 and f1.7 at least. 

To be honest, I used all bunch of 35s. From 3.5 to 1.4. It doesn't need to be fast and only lens.

My all time favorite is Summarit-M 35 2.5. It is not too expensive. The build is superior to any CV lens I have tried. To me problem with CV lenses, they have too much of resistance on focus and aperture rings.

And on bw film it was superior. It is less noticeable with digital M, but still shows it micro-contrast. 

[Advertisement]

Hallo,

Look here: Leica M

[Al Brown]

I get where you are coming from.
Let me describe my experience:
I currently carry only two 35mm M lenses. One is the ultra sharp and awesome 35 FLE and the other is the ultra tiny, slow 35mm Old Delft.
Thus I have both worlds covered all the time - the "clinical" look and the "character" look, as we have been calling them here. Now of course you would need an in-between lens to join both worlds when you will want to travel light. One of the best 35mm lenses to do so is the new compact Steel RIm - dreamy wide open yet super sharp stopped down.
There. Your problem is solved.

Edited May 31 by Al Brown