Compact 28mm that renders like 35mm KOB?

[Andrew V]

Advertisement (gone after registration)

Hey all!

 

I have a 35mm KOB.  I really enjoy the rendering (strong character, rich colors, good contrast, sharp).  I want to get a 28mm thats compact and has similar rendering.  I had been considering the Canon 28/2.8 ltm (which seems to have good sharpness and wonderful character) and the Leica 28/2.8 asph (which I imagine has some of that Leica color and contrast but seems to be somewhat reviled on the internet) ad they're both rather small in size.

 

Wondering if you all can help advise?

[Advertisement]

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

[IkarusJohn]

11 minutes ago, Andrew V said:

Hey all!

 

I have a 35mm KOB.  I really enjoy the rendering (strong character, rich colors, good contrast, sharp).  I want to get a 28mm thats compact and has similar rendering.  I had been considering the Canon 28/2.8 ltm (which seems to have good sharpness and wonderful character) and the Leica 28/2.8 asph (which I imagine has some of that Leica color and contrast but seems to be somewhat reviled on the internet) ad they're both rather small in size.

 

Wondering if you all can help advise?

Perhaps the person who came up with the “king of bokeh” tag might help …

[grahamc]

Hello. I tested the 28:2.8 v3 with my KOB and the colours, contrast and overall look matches perfectly.  They were both designed by Walter Mandler and released in 1979 so that makes sense that they work well together. Same for the 50:2 v4 in the 50mm focal length. 
 

the elmarit may not satisfy your size requirements however, it’s not super small .. but it’s not a large lens. 

[Andrew V]

@grahamc & @Al Brown that's very tempting!  That is a pretty chunky lens though, esp with the hood (which I think is needed to hold a UV filter?

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!

Edited January 9, 2024 by Andrew V

[Andrew V]

@Al Brown I agree.  I got to play with the new 35/1.4 and 50/1.4 over the holidays and while they're by no means small or light, I would consider them to be comparatively moderate in size, esp with the integrated, retractable hoods.  They're girthy (not to get to pg13 here) but relatively short (the 50 definitely feels shorter than the old 50/1.4 asph.

Voightlander is doing a great job here.  I did shoot their new 35/2 and found the rendering to be very much like my 35/2 KOB in a package about the same size.  I thought the build was a little dicey though and I really hate the 0.5m mfd (Leica's new offerings have a cleverly executed detent in the focus ring and the coupling disengages under 0.7m).

Anyhooo... back to the original question... any other good alternatives to the 28/2.8 v3?

Edited January 9, 2024 by Andrew V

[pippy]

3 hours ago, Andrew V said:

...I want to get a 28mm thats compact and has similar rendering......the Leica 28/2.8 asph...seems to be somewhat reviled on the internet...

Wondering if you all can help advise?

"Reviled"? Seriously? By whom and why? My advice? Don't believe what you read on the internet and try things out for yourself (you read it here...on the internet).

Philip.

[IkarusJohn]

Advertisement (gone after registration)

31 minutes ago, Al Brown said:

Leica is unfortunately still ignoring everybody’s appeal to produce new tiny lenses …

Everybody’s appeal?

As one of many Noctilux, 21, 28, 50 & 75 Summilux users, size takes a very distant second place to focal length image quality.

[Andrew V]

@pippy I'd love to but unfortunately out of production Leica glass isn't readily available to try when I live.  I think the general criticism is that the modern asph design is clinical and lacking in charcater.  This is a sentiment I have certainly had about other modern lenses in the past so it did scare me off a bit.  Have you used this lens?  Would love your thoughts if so!

 

@IkarusJohn I think that the appeal of RFs in general and Leica specifically has historically been in part because of the compactness of their lenses.  They have historically been compared in size relative to competing SLR bodies and lenses and it's noted that the M series pushed others like Olympus to make smaller SLR bodies like the OM-1.  I think it's very hard to argue that the compactness of these bodies and lenses has not been an integral marking point and appeal since the M3! 

[hansvons]

3 hours ago, Andrew V said:

Leica 28/2.8 asph (which I imagine has some of that Leica color and contrast but seems to be somewhat reviled on the internet) ad they're both rather small in size.

It's en vogue to rail against Leica lenses that are not considered "vintage", citing attributes like "clinical", you name it. Most of that is repeated hearsay and highly subjective. 

Like the 35mm Summicron ASPH, the 28mm Elmarit was the pinnacle of Leica's M primes for film Ms in its respective category. They were not designed with digital sensors in mind but with optimal performance for film. I have the 35mm Summicron ASPH VS1 (the actual Summicron has the same lens formula), and it has as much character as its predecessors, only a bit sharper with more contrast. I'm sure the 28mm Elmarit ASPH will be in the same vein and an excellent choice. I see its small size as a huge advantage. If I were in the market for a 28mm, I'd buy it without further thinking. 

--

I don't collect Leica M lenses; I only own three and use them daily. But I own a set of Leica R primes for filmmaking. I can say with confidence that with age come issues. If I were in the market for a 60/70ies Leica lens that should be a true workhorse, I'd plan for a mint copy and a CLA after the purchase. That won't come cheap. 

Edited January 9, 2024 by hansvons

[Andrew V]

Thanks for your take @hansvons, I do agree there is a lot of mythology out there, and that it has become trendy to rail on the new glass.  That said, I do find that in many cases the older lenses (less corrected lenses) product more character (as a result of their imperfections) than some of their more modern counter parts.  Here for the wisdom of those who've gotten to try these things!

 

100% agree that the small size of the asph is a HUGE advantage!

[hansvons]

45 minutes ago, Andrew V said:

I did shoot their new 35/2 and found the rendering to be very much like my 35/2 KOB in a package about the same size.

The 35mm Ultron f2 is Voigtländer's answer/counterpart to Leica's 35mm Summicron ASPH. If you like its rendering, you will also like Leica's ASPH from the film era. I own the 35mm Nokton f 1.4 SC VS2, as it's practically a Steel Rim copy with all the quirks of these old designs, and I can't find anything dicey about it. It's built to the highest standards of today's lens manufacturing. 

[pippy]

53 minutes ago, hansvons said:

It's en vogue to rail against Leica lenses that are not considered "vintage", citing attributes like "clinical", you name it. Most of that is repeated hearsay and highly subjective. 

Like the 35mm Summicron ASPH, the 28mm Elmarit was the pinnacle of Leica's M primes for film Ms in its respective category. They were not designed with digital sensors in mind but with optimal performance for film. I have the 35mm Summicron ASPH VS1 (the actual Summicron has the same lens formula), and it has as much character as its predecessors, only a bit sharper with more contrast. I'm sure the 28mm Elmarit ASPH will be in the same vein and an excellent choice. I see its small size as a huge advantage. If I were in the market for a 28mm, I'd buy it without further thinking...

I was in the middle of writing a reply but hansvisions has already said pretty much exactly what I was typing myself - only better!

I have both faster & slower & older & newer 28s from which I can make my choice but my Elmarit v1 ASPH is almost always (95%+) the one I take. It is a superb lens in every way. FWIW my current #1 50mm is a 1953 f1.5 Summarit and ever since I acquired it my #1 35mm has been a '74 v2 Summilux so I do completely understand and value 'character'.

Philip.

Edited January 10, 2024 by pippy

[hansvons]

27 minutes ago, Andrew V said:

I think that the appeal of RFs in general and Leica specifically has historically been in part because of the compactness of their lenses.

Yes, the compactness is an advantage. Historically, they were there before SLRs came along. Then came the SLR cameras, and Leica Ms would have almost gone the way of the Dodo if the ability to critically focus wide-angle lenses had not been the superpower of rangefinders and the Achilles heel of SLR cameras. And that is still true today.

[hansvons]

2 minutes ago, pippy said:

hansvisions

Hi Philip, I should change my avatar name to hansvisons. Cool.

Hans

[pippy]

Just now, hansvons said:

Hi Philip, I should change my avatar name to hansvisons. Cool.

Hans

😸

Apologies for the Typo hansvons! Just between ourselves I blame the wee dram of Islay malt whisky lying beside me for tipping my elbow at the wrong time...................

Philip.

[hansvons]

3 minutes ago, pippy said:

Islay malt whisky

Laphroaig? 😊

 

 

[pippy]

2 minutes ago, hansvons said:

Laphroaig? 😊

😸

Tonight it happens to be a Lagavulin, hansvons, but I am very partial to a Laphroaig as well! I'll bid a hearty Slàinte Mhath to yourself!.....🍷......

Philip.

[Andrew V]

27 minutes ago, pippy said:

I was in the middle of writing a reply but hansvisions has already said pretty much exactly what I was typing myself.

I have both faster & slower & older & newer 28s from which I can make my choice but my Elmarit v1 ASPH is almost always (95%+) the one I take. It is a superb lens in every way. FWIW my current #1 50mm is a 1953 f1.5 Summarit and ever since I acquired it my #1 35mm has been a '74 v2 Summilux so I do completely understand and value 'character'.

Philip.

Thanks Philip!  Really appreciate the response!  

[Advertisement]

Hallo,

Look here: Leica M

[IkarusJohn]

1 hour ago, Andrew V said:

 

@IkarusJohn I think that the appeal of RFs in general and Leica specifically has historically been in part because of the compactness of their lenses …

Unquestionably, the unique selling point when the first Leitz camera was developed by Oscar Barnack in 1913 was its size and convenience using 135 film when compared to the Box Brownie using 120 film (developed by Eastman Kodak in 1900) and field cameras, but a lot of water has gone under the bridge since then.  There are many cameras smaller than the Leica M (eg, M3/4).

I don’t see size as a virtue in itself.  I was responding to Al Brown’s comment that “everybody” is appealing for tiny lenses.  I’m not.

But to answer your implied question, the appeal of the M system to me is not (just) its rangefinder or the size of its lenses.  The rangefinder has its benefits, particularly in speed once you’re used to it and its accuracy for wider lenses.  It isn’t so flash for lenses longer than, say, 75mm without a magnifier or EVF.  Do I prefer it to my X2D?  They both have benefits, I guess.

As to size, yes the M lenses are a relief coming from Nikons, the X1D II and the SL lenses (try carrying around a 90-280 SL zoom on a multi-day tramp); even the 50 Noctilux 0.95 is smaller and lighter than any equivalent lens for full frame of the same aperture range and, I guess, quality.

My point was that there is an inclination to attribute minimising size, balance, viewfinder blockage and weight as a universal goals.  They are not, for me anyway.  For me, it starts with focal length, then image quality and speed.  It just about ends there 0 would I prefer it if my Noctilux was smaller and lighter, all else being equal?  Of course, but it isn’t and I don’t really mind.  

As for the camera, I have been using my M-A and loving the limited controls - ISO set by the film, aperture on the lens and shutter speed on the topdeck.  In the ways that count, my Monochrom and M10-D are just the same, though with difference attributes.  The best camera to hold isn’t an M camera, but the X2D, despite its size and weight.

I do not understand why someone would prefer a pancake lens over a Summicron or Summilux of the same focal length.  I use my two small lenses, a 28 Summaron-M and a 35 Summilux-M pre-asph, for their rendering, not for their size.  

Others will disagree, I’m sure; I don’t speak for everyone.

[grahamc]

I was pleasantly surprised by the size of the 28:2.8 III, I don't think it's a particularly large lens.