PDA

View Full Version : Minolta 40 vs. CV 40


sherm
08-31-2006, 06:49
Been contemplating the purchase of a new 40 to do strictly B&W work. I've researched the 40mm SC from Voigtlander and it appears to have received good reviews on performance. The original Minolta CL lenses.... Rokkor I believe? were also single coated. Can anyone confirm this for me? The lenses for the later CLE model were reported to have been multi-coated and I was looking for clarification.

Secondly, does anyone have an opinion one way or the other for SC versions for black and white? Do they really make that much difference? My choice of films are slower ones primarily Efke 25 & 50 ISO.

Thanks in advance...

Scott

Flyfisher Tom
08-31-2006, 07:10
Scott,

That is the rumor, that the CL version is single coated, and the CLE version is multi-coated. But I've not seen any definitive proof confirming that rumor. Both versions of the rokkor-m are excellent.

Flyfisher Tom
08-31-2006, 07:13
Joel Matherson (Paleoboy) of RFF might be able to confirm whether the CLE is multi-coated. He has collected virtually every 40 known to man :) Might want to shoot him a PM if he doesn't see this thread.

sherm
08-31-2006, 07:14
Thanks for your help Tom

kbg32
08-31-2006, 08:30
The 40mm Rokkor for the CLE is definitely multicoated. Not sure about the earlier version for the Leitz/Minolta CL.

sockeyed
08-31-2006, 08:49
I can't speak to the coatings of the CL Rokkors, but I had a CLE Rokkor. It was a good lens, but I didn't feel it was as good as my CV 40/1.4 SC, so I decided to keep the CV and sold the Rokkor. The Rokkor was very nice and very compact, but he CV is sharper and has a nicer signature, I feel. Just my $0.02.