Which 35mm???

[peepete77]

I will order my first rangefinder lens ever next week! But I need some help here.

I had almost made up my mind for the 35mm / 1,4 SC, before my previous thread. Due to its compact size and its "personality" or ability to give "different" pictures.
In my last thread I read that if I could afford one, I should not hesitate, but buy a 35mm / 1,2 Nokton.
It is a bit pricey, and it seems VERY bulky, heavy and maybe obtrusive?. But at the same time, everyone owning one, seems to cherish it!

So, what's Your thoughts on my dillemma, and what would You regard as the key points here?
I am somewhat able to stretch my finances this month, so I am just about able to afford a 1,2 Nokton, if I "have" to....

Hope for good help here in my extremely difficult descision making!
Thanks!

[yanidel]

Buying a rangefinder to fit the 35mm 1.2 as single lens does not make a whole lot of sense to me because of size and weight. I did think about it but I already find the 28mm Ultron too big and I believe it weights half of the Nokton 1.2. What about buying a cheap 35mm Skopar to get used to the focal and have light and compact lens system to carry all the time with you. Once you get used to it and the FOV, buy the Nokton.

[Rogier]

What about the Zeiss 35mm f2.0 ?

[oscroft]

I haven't shot with the 1.2, but I've handled one (there was one in the shop when I bought my 1.4), and it's an enormous great thing - I'd really have to be desperate for that extra bit of speed over the 1.4 before I'd consider lugging one of those around.

[thomasw_]

I assume you want/require the speed of f1,4 or 1,2 for low light shooting? If so, those are the two most reasonably priced lenses. I had the cv 35/1,2 and found it way too spatially obtrusive and weighty for a M. In fact, due to its mass and volume, when I sold it to Andrew in Oz, it took over 3 months to get there! (Sorry, that's true but it is more a happy story of being lost and found than about the f1,2 :P ). if i were in your place and only buying one cv 35 with speed, I would go for the nokton 35/1,4 due to the compactness.

[jmkelly]

Save some $$ and buy the CV 40mm Nokton. The framelines on the R-D1 fit it very nicely. Or spend some more money and get the 35mm/2.0 UC Hexanon - tiny and incredible. Or get the 35mm Nokton - a little more barrel distortion then the 40mm, but a little sharper wide-open.

[tbarker13]

I'll just echo the comments about the 35/1.2.
Great lens. But it sure would be a hefty first lens to get. Unless you like bulk.

[Harry S.]

To me, nothing I have used matches the look of my new-to-me pre-asph summicron.

I have the Nokton 1.4, had the Ultron 1.7, tried the 1.2, tried the C-Biogon; and they all were too high contrast for my taste. I always liked the 35mm perspective but I put it on the shelf for a long time because I didnt like the look of the photos I was getting.

I love my Planar 50/2 and considered the ZM 35/2. But I really want small lenses for my rangefinder cameras.

I bit the bullet and bought the summicron IV. Its now the only lens I have used for the last 2 months. Forget about the "bokeh-king" status, its just simply an amazing piece of gear.

[peepete77]

Originally Posted by Harry S.

To me, nothing I have used matches the look of my new-to-me pre-asph summicron.

I have the Nokton 1.4, had the Ultron 1.7, tried the 1.2, tried the C-Biogon; and they all were too high contrast for my taste. I always liked the 35mm perspective but I put it on the shelf for a long time because I didnt like the look of the photos I was getting.

I love my Planar 50/2 and considered the ZM 35/2. But I really want small lenses for my rangefinder cameras.

I bit the bullet and bought the summicron IV. Its now the only lens I have used for the last 2 months. Forget about the "bokeh-king" status, its just simply an amazing piece of gear.

You seem to think that the 35/2 Biogon is too big. I have not seen it in real size, how does it compare to the notorious beasty Nokton 1,2 in size and handling?

[peepete77]

Originally Posted by tbarker13

I'll just echo the comments about the 35/1.2.
Great lens. But it sure would be a hefty first lens to get. Unless you like bulk.

Okay, here is my take at it. The learning curve could be steep, but I feel I should take advantage of the low dollar now, it is already rising fast agian, and if I ever should make a good deal, now is the time I feel.... Probably very much sense in buying a CS 35/2,5, but I am a sucker for optics. I have one SLR lens, the Pentax limited and expensive 31mm/1,9. And I love it soooo much. I rather have one super lens than 4 lenses I am "pretty satisfied" with. But again, these are just my thoughts and my feelings as of today... Thanks for a nice reply though!

[kermaier]

You could also look at getting one of the vintage Canon 35mm lenses.
The 35/2.8 is excellent and extremely compact. (I have one and use it a lot.)
If you want a bit more speed, the 35/2 is supposed to offer resolution on a par with a vintage Summicron, or the 35/1.8 is reputed to provide a bit less resolution but nicer bokeh. (I've never tried either.)

And, as has been suggested, a small, inexpensive, but very good CV 35mm Skopar would be a good way to experiment and save money, while you decide what aspects are most important to you in a lens.

Oh, and I absolutely love my Minolta 40/2 M-Rokkor, which is almost as good as a 35mm Summicron and is 1/4 the cost.

[LCT]

Which 35? For general photography i use the pre-asph Summicron 35/2 IV or the cheaper Summicron-C 40/2 which is very close. Both flare a bit but you cannot go wrong with little gems like that. For portrait, i prefer my late pre-asph Summilux 35/1.4. Flares more but offers roughly the same IQ with more speed and a gorgeous smoothness at f/1.4. The CV 35/1.4 SC flares even more but is sharper than the Lux at f/1.4 so i use it indoor generally. Back focusses more or less severely at f/4 - f/5.6 though. I don't seem to recall the cause but we discussed this some time ago here IINW. Otherwise the CV 35/1.2 is great but huge and i don't like the bokeh of the CV 35/1.4 MC and 35/2.5 at all. Same for the asph Leicas, and ZI lenses are too contrasty for my taste.
Edit: Never tried the CV 35/1.7 in person but i don't like its bokeh either from pics i've viewed on the web. Got focussing problems with the M-Rokkor 40/2 so i don't use it any more unfortunalety but it is very close to the Summicron-C 40/2 otherwise. FWIW

[retow]

It seems you are new to RF photography, in which case I'd recommend to buy a used 35mm Skopar, an inexpensive, small, light, easy to focus, excellent performer. Reselling it later to "upgrade" will not be a problem.
Whilst the Nokton 1.2 is an excellent lens, it is not without challenges, firstly becauses of size and weight as already mentioned, but also because focusing it fully open is not that easy and requires practicing. I'm not sure I would buy it as my first RF lens.

[FifthLeaf]

Retow is right. If you're new to rangefinder photography, I assume you want the smaller cameras and lenses. The color skopar is small and inexpensive and you can always "upgrade" later if you like. Those large lenses, in my opinion, defeat the purpose of using a rangefinder. It's better to buy a cheaper lens, get out and shoot a LOT of film, and then worry about performance or whatnot later.

Originally Posted by retow

It seems you are new to RF photography, in which case I'd recommend to buy a used 35mm Skopar, an inexpensive, small, light, easy to focus, excellent performer. Reselling it later to "upgrade" will not be a problem.
Whilst the Nokton 1.2 is an excellent lens, it is not without challenges, firstly becauses of size and weight as already mentioned, but also because focusing it fully open is not that easy and requires practicing. I'm not sure I would buy it as my first RF lens.

[LCT]

Originally Posted by retow

It seems you are new to RF photography, in which case I'd recommend to buy a used 35mm Skopar, an inexpensive, small, light, easy to focus, excellent performer. Reselling it later to "upgrade" will not be a problem...

Wise advice.

[peepete77]

Originally Posted by LCT

Which 35? For general photography i use the pre-asph Summicron 35/2 IV or the cheaper Summicron-C 40/2 which is very close. Both flare a bit but you cannot go wrong with little gems like that. For portrait, i prefer my late pre-asph Summilux 35/1.4. Flares more but offers roughly the same IQ with more speed and a gorgeous smoothness at f/1.4. The CV 35/1.4 SC flares even more but is sharper than the Lux at f/1.4 so i use it indoor generally. Back focusses more or less severely at f/4 - f/5.6 though. I don't seem to recall the cause but we discussed this some time ago here IINW. Otherwise the CV 35/1.2 is great but huge and i don't like the bokeh of the CV 35/1.4 MC and 35/2.5 at all. Same for the asph Leicas, and ZI lenses are too contrasty for my taste.
Edit: Never tried the CV 35/1.7 in person but i don't like its bokeh either from pics i've viewed on the web. Got focussing problems with the M-Rokkor 40/2 so i don't use it any more unfortunalety but it is very close to the Summicron-C 40/2 otherwise. FWIW

Thanks for a really interesting reply! I have now received an offer of an Summicrom 35/2 version IV pre-asph, for 400 £, but it seems to have a history of hard wear... A minor scratch in front element that seller says not affect IQ... Could this be "it"? In fact, I now have two offers on the "bokeh king".... But the other one has some issues with mechanic and handling... That one goes for 890 US $... Are these good offers?
Thanks

[dacaccia]

I would look for a Konica M-Hexanon 2/35. It has a quality as Leica's pendant, both in optics and construction.

Cheers, dacaccia

[peepete77]

Originally Posted by dacaccia

I would look for a Konica M-Hexanon 2/35. It has a quality as Leica's pendant, both in optics and construction.

Cheers, dacaccia

Thanks, is it a M or a UC? And where can I find such?
Thanks again

[dacaccia]

Originally Posted by peepete77

Thanks, is it a M or a UC? And where can I find such?
Thanks again

of course M.
Since Konica unfortunately does not produce its Hexar RF and lenses M-Hexanon any more, you should have a look e.g. at eBay or at local dealers with used cameras.

A friend of mine just bought a Dual Hexanon 21-35 ... what a quality ...



Only a snapshot with Hexar RF and Dual Hexanon on 21mm (Leicashop Vienna) ...

[peepete77]

Originally Posted by dacaccia

of course M.
Since Konica unfortunately does not produce its Hexar RF and lenses M-Hexanon any more, you should have a look e.g. at eBay or at local dealers with used cameras.

A friend of mine just bought a Dual Hexanon 21-35 ... what a quality ...



Only a snapshot with Hexar RF and Dual Hexanon on 21mm (Leicashop Vienna) ...

NICE! Thanks. But is the M better than the UC? Is it therefore you write "off course"----? Thanks again.

[tbarker13]

Bokeh King? Well that comes from the opinion of some that the out of focus area of the 4th version of the pre-asph summicron is the best ever.
It is a topic of endless debate, as some will argue that bokeh is quite subjective.

If it were me (and this is exactly what I did), I'd pick the 3rd version of the 35 summicron and save $300-$400 to use on something else.

[dacaccia]

Originally Posted by peepete77

NICE! Thanks. But is the M better than the UC? Is it therefore you write "of course"----? Thanks again.

well, I looked it up - the M-Hexanon 2/35 and the UC-Hexanon 2/35 seem to be identical. (I first thought the UC version is a SLR lens with adapter for M - but obviously this is not the case.)
I do have the M-Hexanon 2/35 which is really good - as I said.

Cheers,
dacaccia

[peepete77]

Originally Posted by dacaccia

I would look for a Konica M-Hexanon 2/35. It has a quality as Leica's pendant, both in optics and construction.

Cheers, dacaccia

I agree, I am SOOOOO looking and searching for this lens, even in UC! And I have spent hours last night, this morning, and even at work (don't tell my employee) finding it.... But no, so far no luck.... Yours is not up for sale, I reckon....?

[peepete77]

Ok, I am both open for Leica, Zeiss, Canon and Hexanon, but how much will I have to pay for a Leica 35 pre-asph summicron, and where can I find such? Ebay?
This is very interesting, but instead of narrowing the choices, I have the opposit problem now, I feel there is MORE to choose and select from...

If anyone wants to sell some of their 35mm lenses, please send me a privat message. All is of interest.
If you have a 35mm from Leica, Konica, Canon, Voitglander, Zeiss I will be interested!

By the way, with the size and weight of the Nokton 35/ 1,2, it MUST be a superb lens in terms of IQ....

[kxl]

The 35/1.2 IS a superb lens, if you can deal with the size, weight and bulk. If you come from an SLR/ DSLR background, it really isn't "that" big. Folks who don't like its bulk typically have been long time RF shooters, and have certain expectations about an RF lens' size.

My 35/1.2 is a permanent fixture on my R-D1S, and the rig is well-balanced, and because sometimes, you just need f1.2 (see attached), in which case, it's the only game in town.

Havnig stated the above, if you're considering other 35s, I sent you a PM re: 35/1.4 SC (like new) that I'm thinking of selling.