PDA

View Full Version : Why CV doesn't make a 35/2.0?


Jaime M
03-03-2010, 15:26
Why CV doesn't make a 35/2.0?
It will be the really Summicron 35 killer. Most of us will buy one

The Nokton 35/1.4 looks gorgeous, but the shift focus and barrel distorsion downgrades it from superb to regular lens.
Why don't sacrifice an f-stop in favour of quality design and construction?
The Color Skopar 35/2.5 PII ( it will be mine on a few weeks) looks nice to me, it is small, sharp and cheap (this is important, i'm a student!) but 2.5.. I'm sure that if were 2.0 instead of 2.5, users will praise it.
I wouldn't mind pay Color Skopar price +150-200$ for it.

ItsReallyDarren
03-03-2010, 15:31
I sometimes wish for a 35/2 from CV as well. It might take away sales from the 1.4 and 2.5 already in production. Perhaps too many 35's in the lineup. The price difference between the two are relatively small considering all other used/older 35's already in existence. It might be difficult to introduce a new one without discontinuing one in current production.

ferider
03-03-2010, 15:33
I'm sure if CV would make a CV 35/2 it would still be considered by many to be worse than a > 20 year old Leica lens, unless it was priced higher.

The CV 35/2.5 and 1.4 are excellent. And then there is also the very good 35/1.7. Many other highly regarded lenses have similar barrel distortion (for example CV 35/1.2, Nikkor 35/1.8, UC 35/2); others similar focus shift (pre-asph Summilux 35, 50 and 75) and nobody ever talks about it. Half a stop difference will make no practical difference in your photography.

The biggest "issue" of CV lenses is the brand. As a 22 year old student with limited funds, why worry ?

Roland.

Jaime M
03-03-2010, 15:43
I sometimes wish for a 35/2 from CV as well. It might take away sales from the 1.4 and 2.5 already in production. Perhaps too many 35's in the lineup. The price difference between the two are relatively small considering all other used/older 35's already in existence. It might be difficult to introduce a new one without discontinuing one in current production.

I'm sure if CV would make a CV 35/2 it would still be considered by many to be worse than a > 20 year old Leica lens, unless it was priced higher.

The CV 35/2.5 and 1.4 are excellent. And then there is also the very good 35/1.7. Many other lenses have similar barrel distortion (35/1.2) and others similar focus shift (all pre-asph Summilux) and nobody ever talks about it. Half a stop difference will make no practical difference in your photography.

Roland.

I agree&disagree with you both mates; I think in the 35/2 like the 35/2.5 substitute, not a new lens in the line.
And I know, i know that it is only half stop, but i want that half! ;)
And I know too that other top lens has problems like the Nokton, but 35/2.5 doesn't have it! I was talking about a redesign of this lens with that half stop of glory

ferider
03-03-2010, 15:46
Try the 35/1.7, you won't be disappointed. Zero distortion and shift.

Bruin
03-03-2010, 16:06
I thought the ZM Biogon was already the Summicron 35 killer... ;)

rpsawin
03-03-2010, 18:14
Try the 35/1.7, you won't be disappointed. Zero distortion and shift.

I have to agree with ferider on this....it's sweet lens!

Best regards,

Bob

Keith
03-03-2010, 18:18
They do but it's called a Biogon and marketed by Zeiss!

I sometimes wonder if this is the real reason for no CV 35mm f2 ... an agreement of some type between Cosina and Zeiss?

gavinlg
03-03-2010, 18:34
They do but it's called a Biogon and marketed by Zeiss!

I sometimes wonder if this is the real reason for no CV 35mm f2 ... an agreement of some type between Cosina and Zeiss?

Yeah I'd think this is the reason that they don't make one. Though I have to say, the biogon is as zeiss as they come - regardless of who it's made by.

-doomed-
03-03-2010, 18:39
you wont miss that half stop, i love the cv 35/2.5 its on my m4-p most days now.

photogdave
03-03-2010, 18:40
What focus shift? Mine has no focus shift.

ferider
03-03-2010, 18:50
I like my "regular" lens ...

Including its distortion:

http://ferider.smugmug.com/Picture-a-Week/One-Year-Two-Lenses-Keepers/bridge/766514202_2r9j2-O.jpg

and bad bokeh:

http://ferider.smugmug.com/Picture-a-Week/One-Year-Two-Lenses/July-09-C/Arista100-07/620173326_ezTk9-X2.jpg

Downright big and ugly looking, too:

http://ferider.smugmug.com/Picture-a-Week/One-Year-Two-Lenses-Keepers/P1010157/431266254_4ctdy-XL-3.jpg

:) ...

Rob-F
03-03-2010, 19:53
Felt like adding my 2 cents: from f/2 to f/2.5 is not 1/2 stop. It's 2/3 stop. Just FWIW; you know.

Keith
03-03-2010, 19:59
Downright big and ugly looking, too:

http://ferider.smugmug.com/Picture-a-Week/One-Year-Two-Lenses-Keepers/P1010157/431266254_4ctdy-XL-3.jpg

:) ...


I would't say it was that big ... but I can't disagree with the ugly part! :angel:

f16sunshine
03-03-2010, 20:01
Three 35mm lenses currently offered seems enough. The 2.5 is my favorite for size and performance. Can't think of one time I needed that 2/3rd stop. I can think of quite a few times that I needed 2 stops though LOL :)

Bingley
03-03-2010, 20:07
you wont miss that half stop, i love the cv 35/2.5 its on my m4-p most days now.

I agree. I didn't really warm to the Ultron 35/1.7 (maybe I had a "bad" sample) although I've seen lots of good photos taken w/ it. But the little skopar 35/2.5 is one sweet lens, and you can make up the half stop w/ slightly faster film. If you're into shallow dof shots, you'll probably be using a 1.4 lens instead.

-doomed-
03-03-2010, 20:42
The price of the 35/2.5 is nice too.

aizan
03-03-2010, 21:02
i think voigtlander should make a 35/2, too. they've been cranking out fast lenses based on cult classics lately. the only one that i would not mind coughing up the dough for is the 28/2 ultron, whose physical design is a copy of the original 28mm elmarit. afaik, that lens isn't a cult classic. i would prefer a 28/2.8 pancake modeled after the 28/2.8 canon ltm, only with modern optical performance.

while people who are attracted to the 35mm pre-asph summilux or 50mm noctilux now have affordable alternatives, i'm sure they'd rather get the real thing if it weren't for price and the trouble of finding ones in good condition. maybe the market for this kind of lens is bigger than the one who want more reasonable lens speeds that are cheaper and can be more easily corrected, like 35/2 and 50/1.4.

Bingley
03-03-2010, 22:28
Of course, in a way, CV already does make an f.2 Summicron-killer. Only it's called the Zeiss Biogon 35. I doubt CV would make a direct competitor under to the Biogon under the Voigtlander brand.

payasam
03-03-2010, 22:40
I have the CV 35/1.7 of which Roland speaks. It is close enough to f/2 and I'm happy with it.

Mablo
03-03-2010, 23:10
you wont miss that half stop, i love the cv 35/2.5 its on my m4-p most days now.

M4-P and cv 35/2.5 are indeed like made for each other. An enjoyable set up to use.

gerikson
03-03-2010, 23:43
How much of Cosina's output is original design, and how much is simply remakes of classic designs for the nostalgia market?

Matus
03-04-2010, 00:06
40/2.0 or 40/2.5 would be nice too ...

Ezzie
03-04-2010, 00:44
I have the f1.4 and am very happy with it. Possible my picture taking MO negates the possibilty of focus shift, as I've never experienced it. I've the f1.2 on loan as well, which is nice, but too big to lug around IMO. If you really want a f2.0 (and not a f1.7 or 2.5) made by CV, buy the Zeiss, but I can't quite understand why one would need it. But who said need have anything to do with GAS.

elshaneo
03-04-2010, 00:50
Cosina makes the Zeiss ZM 35mm Biogon f/2, maybe there is be a partner agreement between Zeiss and Cosina that Cosina should not make a 35mm f/2...

Austerby
03-04-2010, 01:18
I don't get the point - why not use the 35mm Nokton at f2 if you want a CV 35/2 ? As I understand it (and I don't have this lens) that stopping down mitigates the special effects that occur when the lens is wide open. It's a small lens and nicely made (assuming its made to the same standards as my 40/1.4). I'd settle for that quite happily.

gavinlg
03-04-2010, 02:52
I don't get the point - why not use the 35mm Nokton at f2 if you want a CV 35/2 ? As I understand it (and I don't have this lens) that stopping down mitigates the special effects that occur when the lens is wide open. It's a small lens and nicely made (assuming its made to the same standards as my 40/1.4). I'd settle for that quite happily.

I was thinking that too. It's a compact lens for sure, and apparently from internet law, the much talked about bokeh "characteristics" disappear at f2.

Maybe someone can post some f2 shots?

wallace
03-04-2010, 03:06
Buy a Canon 35/2.0 instead! It was called the "Japanese Summicron", tiny, sharp, light weight and very well built.

wallace

Jaime M
03-04-2010, 05:38
Yeah, the Canon 35/2 looks nice too, last week I was tempted to buy it, but finaly I will get the 35/2.5 PII. I can't live with the 2.5, i can afford a Summicron.

About the biogon, I've never handle one, it is as big as it looks?

shadowfox
03-04-2010, 07:40
I think an upgrade for the Ultron 35/1.7 in M-mount should be a 35/2 but please, make one that is much smaller than the Biogon, ugh.

I am another 35/1.7 user btw, and it's a darling of a lens, if only it's the size of the 35/1.4, then it would be perfect.

http://farm3.static.flickr.com/2221/4031910719_20d1594ffc_o.jpg

nobbylon
03-04-2010, 07:48
I'd really like to try a 35 Nokton and compare it to my '69 Lux. I would like sharp wide open and not glowing!!!!!!
I sold my 35 asph summicron a few weeks ago and would like something close to it without spending a fortune! The lux came my way with some other gear and I just don't think it suits me. I just don't get the €1000 euro plus price tag for a walk around lens. My 28mm AIS nikkor makes a mockery of leica prices. I paid 46 for it. Here's a sample. This is the look i'm after without having to pay over a grand for the privilege of using an M camera.

http://farm5.static.flickr.com/4067/4405973967_1b6a725fc7_o.jpg

jsrockit
03-04-2010, 13:55
I don't get the point - why not use the 35mm Nokton at f2 if you want a CV 35/2 ?

Focus shift...

pmu
03-05-2010, 09:36
Keep the size and build quality of 35/1.4 Nokton, but fix the distortion and I would buy a f2 version immediately...

ashrafazlan
03-05-2010, 09:44
I recently tried out a friend's 35/1.4, we tested it out for focus shift and found little to non :D I've now seen enough proof to confirm that newer noktons don't suffer from focus shift as severe as the older ones, and I've already placed an order for one myself..can't wait :)

jsrockit
03-05-2010, 10:13
ashrafazlan, that's the problem... not all of them do suffer from focus shift... However, I bought one in November 2009 that did.

Jaime M
03-05-2010, 15:21
Keep the size and build quality of 35/1.4 Nokton, but fix the distortion and I would buy a f2 version immediately...

That's exactly why I want, not the Biogon.

rover
03-05-2010, 15:53
Yeah, the Canon 35/2 looks nice too, last week I was tempted to buy it, but finaly I will get the 35/2.5 PII. I can live with the 2.5, i can afford a Summicron.

About the biogon, I've never handle one, it is as big as it looks?

The Skopar is a better lens than the old Canon f2. Just a touch slower.

ampguy
03-05-2010, 16:12
40 is about the limit that CV can design to. Wider than that, and all kinds of compromises get tossed in the mix.

The 40/1.4 has virtually no focus shift, does have harsh bokeh that starts to get tamer @ f2.

If they made could make a 43/2 based on the existing 40/1.4, that would be a killer lens.

ampguy
03-05-2010, 16:27
My understanding is pretty much the same, but independent of rf calib., and even independent (somewhat of DOF).

If you have old Nikon SLR gear, like the first 43-86 zoom, you can actually focus on something at f3.5 and without changing the focus, see the focus move as you change the aperture. No RF involvement at all here.

With an RF system, you can notice a focus shifting lens by focusing in the RF, and seeing where in the DOF window that focus is at different apertures. It's a tedious setup, but can be setup in an hour or two with electronic distance measuring laser and ultrasonic devices, and a digital M body.

Here's where I measured no discernible focus shift with a 40/1.4 CV, great lens: CV 40/1.4 1m 1.50cm steps Focus Shift Test (http://matsumura.smugmug.com/Photography/cv-4014-focus-shift-test-min/10730331_uQJtP#747626153_ngAeH)




Focus shift, as I have read it defined, is due to the optical properties of the lens.

If a lens with such optics appears to or does not appear to 'focus shift' when testing, that is due to the calibration between the lens and rangefinder, and whether the focus shift that occurs due to the optics is within the depth of field and/or acceptable to how big someone is going to enlarge something.

I doubt they changed the optics on the later ones, but they may have improved the tolerance, or the couple that were tried happened to have the right calibration for your rangefinder setting.

Edit: Someone should make a focus shift sticky so that people understand what is occurring, and not starting myths like the chrome 35mm summilux asph or other lenses don't focus shift. For example, I had a chrome one and black one at the same time. They both shifted focus. Luckily, both were calibrated such that at f1.4, the object of focus was at one edge of depth of field, and as the aperture was closed the focus shift occurred within the expanding depth of field. Also, if one looks at how much shift occurs (rather small) with a 35mm, once your subject is more than a meter away it is all moot.

If you really care, and get a lens that is not focusing correctly, put a ground glass on the film rail, focus on an object at the distance where you are seeing the problem, change the aperture, and watch what happens with a loupe.

ampguy
03-05-2010, 16:35
I haven't noticed focus shift with my pre-asph 35 lux or 75 lux, but as I always mention, it doesn't mean it's not there.

If you provide parameters for where you think the shifts are greatest, I'll use your distance, and steps and measure the shift.

I agree with you on distortion, the HAF has it, maybe more of it than the CV 35/1.4.

I'm sure if CV would make a CV 35/2 it would still be considered by many to be worse than a > 20 year old Leica lens, unless it was priced higher.

The CV 35/2.5 and 1.4 are excellent. And then there is also the very good 35/1.7. Many other highly regarded lenses have similar barrel distortion (for example CV 35/1.2, Nikkor 35/1.8, UC 35/2); others similar focus shift (pre-asph Summilux 35, 50 and 75) and nobody ever talks about it. Half a stop difference will make no practical difference in your photography.

The biggest "issue" of CV lenses is the brand. As a 22 year old student with limited funds, why worry ?

Roland.

ampguy
03-05-2010, 16:41
but to be fair, other great lenses have it like the Hexar AF's lens, probably the UC 35/2, the 35/1.4 asph, most point and shoots, many cheap zooms, especially at extremities.

For no distortion, a 35 or 50 Summicron or 35 or 50 pre asph Summilux is the way to go.

Focus shift...

ampguy
03-05-2010, 16:49
perhaps I had a bad sample, but I directly compared my CV 35/1.7 on brick walls with the 35/2 v4 pre asph cron, and 35/2 asph cron and it did have distortion. Had the best bokeh of any CV 35 or 40 I've seen < f2, but did have distortion and more flare than my Summicrons. I didn't test it for shift.

I might be able to find the images.

Try the 35/1.7, you won't be disappointed. Zero distortion and shift.

robklurfield
03-05-2010, 16:52
great, great, great lens!
Buy a Canon 35/2.0 instead! It was called the "Japanese Summicron", tiny, sharp, light weight and very well built.

wallace

back alley
03-05-2010, 16:56
i am SO GLAD that i don't see any of this distorsion or focus shift (even if it is there) and NEVER ONCE has anyone commented on it while viewing my images.

people seem to react at a more emotional level when viewing images.

ampguy
03-05-2010, 17:00
A forum member did a review on his blog on this lens, with some examples:

http://hudsongardner.tumblr.com/post/428474270/day-7-end-voigtlander-35-m8-review

If these images are to your liking, and the bokeh is ok with you (see 3rd from last), then perhaps this is a good choice for you.

Sharp, no discernable shift or distortion *in this particular image*

The Bokeh is not my cup of tea, but that doesn't mean it's not great for others.

I'd really like to try a 35 Nokton and compare it to my '69 Lux. I would like sharp wide open and not glowing!!!!!!
I sold my 35 asph summicron a few weeks ago and would like something close to it without spending a fortune! The lux came my way with some other gear and I just don't think it suits me. I just don't get the €1000 euro plus price tag for a walk around lens. My 28mm AIS nikkor makes a mockery of leica prices. I paid 46 for it. Here's a sample. This is the look i'm after without having to pay over a grand for the privilege of using an M camera.

chris00nj
03-05-2010, 18:44
you wont miss that half stop, i love the cv 35/2.5 its on my m4-p most days now.

I did.

With a 35/2, I can safely shoot normal indoor lighting with 400 speed film, 1/30 and f/2. Just can't do it with f/2.5

Tom A
03-05-2010, 21:06
How much of Cosina's output is original design, and how much is simply remakes of classic designs for the nostalgia market?

Most of Cosina's design are original designs - 12f5.6/15f4.5/21f4/25f4/35f1.2/ 50f1.5,/ 75f2.5,/ 90f3.5. The rest of the lenses are variations of common designs from Voigtlander/ Leica/ Zeiss etc.
There are only so many ways of routing light through a lens and be able to make it at an affordable price. At the moment Leica has a couple of unique designs, 21f1.4/24f1.4/50 f0.95 and the 50f1.4 Asph/75f2 Apo Asph. Problem is that those lenses are very expensive and also heavy.
There tends to be a habit of looking down on Cosina as a "wannabe" - trust me. Leica would love to have the knowledge that Cosina has in optics and manufacturing as well as their designers.
Lenses like the Heliar 50f2 and 50f3.5 are upgraded, modern versions of classic designs - as are several of the "standard" designs from Leica - many of which started with Zeiss.
There are few truly original designs out there - again it is a way of balancing performance and price - and that is a race that Cosina leads right now!
I have VC, Leica and Zeiss lenses. I tend to shoot with them all, pick out favorites and use those for most of my stuff. It is about 1/3 VC,1/3 Leica and 1/3 Zeiss.

ashrafazlan
03-06-2010, 11:18
Thanks for the explanation Tom :) I wish Cosina would design something like the 24/1.4, now that would be something..

wallace
03-06-2010, 11:48
Click HERE (http://www.ashrafazlan.wordpress.com/) to view my pathetic attempts at photography.

??? no way.


wallace

ampguy
03-06-2010, 12:49
I get a wordpress login prompt??

??? no way.


wallace

newsgrunt
03-06-2010, 13:42
Thanks for the explanation Tom :) I wish Cosino would design something like the 24/1.4, now that would be something..

+1 and if it focussed closer than the 50 1.1 I'd be all over it. hell I'd be happy with a 24/2

ashrafazlan
03-06-2010, 14:01
??? no way.


wallace

I get a wordpress login prompt??

Sorry guys, I set it to private while I was updating it with a new post, should be public now :P

taffy
04-19-2010, 10:51
M4-P and cv 35/2.5 are indeed like made for each other. An enjoyable set up to use.

I only have the M4-2 paired up with the cv 35/2.5 and I think they make a great pair too.