Talk to me about CV screw mount lenses (show me pics too!)

[jmooney]

Hi All,

I've been reading my eye out on Leicas and RFs and have come to the conclusion that my best bet is the Bessa/VC system. I love the Leica "mystique" but I'm not willing to pay the premium for it, especially with a built in meter. I've been intrigued by the reviews of the screw mount VC lenses that I've read and would love to hear of other experiences and see some shots if you have some to share from these lenses. I'm most interested in the 15mm, 21mm, 35mm, 50mm, and 75mm lengths.

Thanks in advance for any info and Happy New Year!

Jim

[peterc]

Kitchen sink.

Bessa R, CV 35/1.7, Silvertone 400, Ilfotec DD-X

[jlw]

The 50/1.5 Nokton is excellent by any standard, and sensational at its bargain price -- although you won't be able to see its full performance in this EI 1600 shot:



[Detail:]



The 28/1.9 is another fine performer at a reasonable price, although I haven't got any example photos handy.

You asked about screwmount lenses, so I can't mention the 35/1.2, which is absolutely stellar but only comes in M mount.

[ferider]

They are all good, in particular the 75 in your list.

You are missing out though if you do not consider 28mm. Both CV 28mm
lenses are probably the best LTMs available in that highly useful focal length.

You can find a lot of photos taken with various CV lenses here:

http://www.flickr.com/groups/m-mount...57600006086860

Also, while I do recommend CV lenses full-heartedly, I recommend to
use them on a classic Leica, you can get a good M2 for the price of a new
R[234]*, get a CLA for US 80 and have it outlive you. Metering is better
hand-held or by guessing anyways

Roland.

[photobizzz]

I have the 21/4, 35/1.7, 50/1.5, 75/2.5 lenses and find them all to be very sharp and have good contrast. The 21 and 35 are great but you have to be careful for flare with the 21. I have the rectangular hood on the way to help with that. The linked photo is taken with the 75. I have a Bessa-R and a Bessa R3A in the mail and have no complaints. Not as heavy as a Leica, not going to last 50 years. But who wants the same camera for 50 years? LOL. My consensus on CV cameras and lenses is: Worth every cent and more. If you dont have the money for Leica CV is the next best thing and I carry one every day.

Migrant Worker

[Anupam]

All the street shots in my website are made with either the 21 or the 40mm Cv lenses, you can tell which ones are 21 from the perspective, if you aren't interested in the 40.

[Bingley]

Check out the Gallery. Many RFF members use CV lenses, and the notes to their photos will tell you which ones. In addition to the posters above in this thread, Nico, Tuna, Marc.A, lZr, RayPa, Claremontphoto, gb hill, x-ray, and Avotius (to name a few, and there are many more) have terrific photos posted in their respective galleries that were taken with CV lenses.

[jeffsb]

I have the Color Skopar 21mm (thread mount) and the Nokton 50mm and love them both. I have just picked up the APO Lanthar 90mm over the holidays and am anxious to see what it can do. For my uses (hobbyist) the difference between the CV lenses and the Leica lenses isn't worth the price difference. The point photobizzz made about the 21mm flaring is mentioned a lot with that lens and the hood is something that I would get. The 21mm thread mount comes with the accessory viewfinder which is really good - nice and bright. There is a new 21mm M-mount that does not come with the viewfinder if I remember correctly.

If you haven't checked it out yet, Sean Reid has some excellent reviews of rangefinder lenses with most of the reviews feature pitting the CV lenses against Leica and Zeiss lenses. Worth the few bucks a year to subscribe to the site which can be found here: http://www.reidreviews.com/reidreviews/

Here are a few links to some shots that I have taken with both the lenses that I mentioned above - hope they are helpful.

http://www.flickr.com/photos/jeffsb/...lorskopar21mm/

http://www.flickr.com/photos/jeffsb/...dernokton50mm/

[Prosaic]

Originally Posted by jmooney

I've been reading my eye out on Leicas and RFs and have come to the conclusion that my best bet is the Bessa/VC system. I love the Leica "mystique" but I'm not willing to pay the premium for it, especially with a built in meter.

If you feel like talking yourself out of an M at this point, you wont be happy with a Bessa anyway. That said, CV lenses are spectacular and will work fine on any M.

[mr_phillip]

Originally Posted by ferider

You are missing out though if you do not consider 28mm. Both CV 28mm
lenses are probably the best LTMs available in that highly useful focal length.

I've got to second that. I've owned a good few of the screw-mount CV lenses, and the 28mm Ultron is one of my absolute faves.

[Thardy]

I don't see how VC lenses can always be "just as or almost as good" as Leica" at a fraction of the cost but one should not even consider a Bessa which is a fraction of the cost of a Leica.

The condition (in photographs at least) of ANY Leica M camera which cost the same as a Bessa is to me just ...... (I know it's all subjective)

Anyway, I do have a CV 40 f/1.4 and have just ordered a 21mm in LTM mount in order to get the external viewfinder.

In the near future i'll probably get a good-looking, good condition Leica M , which will cost much more than any new Bessa, just to get it out of my system....I mean 'cause I've always wanted one , and I deserve it.

[ferider]

Originally Posted by Thardy

The condition (in photographs at least) of ANY Leica M camera which cost the same as a Bessa is to me just ...... (I know it's all subjective)

You are not looking hard enough.

Used Leicas being expensive is a stereotype just like CV lenses being worse than Leitz lenses and Zeiss lenses
having magnificent build quality (search for Biogon and Wobble).

I've had R, R2, R3a and T. So I tried.

- After a few months of use they all felt rougher (or looser) than in the beginning.
- viewfinder was either off out of the box (several inches at close focus) or went out of alignment quickly, in particular on the R3.
- I do get noticably sharper pictures with my Leicas. The noise has to go somewhere ....

Plus I hate the short EBL.

Nice entry machines to get introduced to RF GAS but that's about it. And maybe, the post Zeiss Ikon bodies are better than the ones I used (some
of the Bessa internals changed).

To each his own of course. If you only shoot slow/wide lenses it doesn't
matter so much anyways.

Roland.

[Nokton48]

"The biggest complaint I have is focus rings and f-stop rings that are too close together, so that I disturb the f-stop when I focus. Having said that, if you want new lenses they are really inexpensive compared to their "equal" Leica counterparts."

This weekend I put a Leicagoodies STEER on my CV 28mm f1.9 Ultron, and I -won't- be disturbing the f/stop ring any more. Problem solved for $18.

I'm in the process of upgrading from Bessa-R's to Leica M2 (my old friend). But I am keeping my black Bessa-T and winder (for now) as backup. My wife will -not- allow me to sell our two Bessa-L's.

I'm keeping all our CV lenses (12,21,25, 28/1.9, 2-35's, 50Nok, and 75). Haven't found anything better, especially for the price.

[jmooney]

Originally Posted by Prosaic

If you feel like talking yourself out of an M at this point, you wont be happy with a Bessa anyway. That said, CV lenses are spectacular and will work fine on any M.

I wouldn't say I'm talking myself out of one. It's something I would like to own someday but at this point toasting my whole camera budget on a M6 body just won't do me any good. I'd love an M6/35 'cron but it's not a smart move at this point for me. I don't look at this as "settling" for CV gear, just making the decison to go with the best kit I can afford at this point in my life. Much the same as I am a fan of Bronica in MF. Hassy is great gear but for one Hassy body and lens I can get a whole lot more Bronica kit. I could go for the Lecia/Hassy but I'll have fewer options and will probably wind up with fewer photographs and that would defeat the purpose of this whole excersie: Making photographs.



Incedentally my initial thoughts are to go with 2 bodies. One with a 35mm and one with a 75mm. Next would be a 15 or 21. I did some shooting with a borrowed Contax G1 kit (great system BTW) and the 28 was too wide and the 50 a bit cramped and the 90 too long. I also shot with one body and found it hard to decide on the 28 or 50. I'll split the difference with the 35 will be a great fit and the 75 will do me fine for any tele work.

Thanks for all the advice so far, it's very valuable. Looking forward to more.

Jim

[Nokton48]

"will probably wind up with fewer photographs and that would defeat the purpose of this whole exercise: Making photographs."

Not in my case, I think there have been many specific instances (and photographs) that have occured as a direct result to "tuning in with the M2" and it really does approach an almost "zen-like experience" I can't explain further, but I definately remember the experience, and I have the pictures, which are the proof of the pudding.

My Bessa-R's are great, but I'm moving on. The lenses are as good as anything else you can get these days, for a half-way reasonable price.

[Joe Brugger]

In-camera metering is overrated and can be a distraction -- I like having aperture-priority or shutter-priority in some situations but if automation isn't being used, the meter might as well be in my pocket as on the body.
The longer rangefinder baselength of the M series is a distinct advantage.


This was done with an M4-P (less than $600 locally) and a Voigtlander 50/2.5.

[chikne]

Originally Posted by mr_phillip

I've got to second that. I've owned a good few of the screw-mount CV lenses, and the 28mm Ultron is one of my absolute faves.

Stunning picture! May I ask where it was taken?

[Kim Coxon]

I would say then that you are looking at an R3 and R4 then.

Whilst I don't disagree with many of the comments about Leica, I think that I would go the same route as you propose if I was starting again. You can get some good deals on secondhand CV kit and you will not lose much if and/or when you decide to "upgrade". In the meantime, you will get the experience and lnowledge to know which finders/framelines suit you best. If you find you use very wide lenses much of the time, you may decide to stay with the R4 to avoid aux finders. If you tend not to use the 75 much, you may look at the ZI. In the process you also discover you like the ZM glass.

Kim

Originally Posted by jmooney

Incedentally my initial thoughts are to go with 2 bodies. One with a 35mm and one with a 75mm. Next would be a 15 or 21. I did some shooting with a borrowed Contax G1 kit (great system BTW) and the 28 was too wide and the 50 a bit cramped and the 90 too long. I also shot with one body and found it hard to decide on the 28 or 50. I'll split the difference with the 35 will be a great fit and the 75 will do me fine for any tele work.

Thanks for all the advice so far, it's very valuable. Looking forward to more.

Jim

[Kim Coxon]

Looking at the architecture, I would hazard a guess at the Natuaral History Museum in London.

Kim

Originally Posted by chikne

Stunning picture! May I ask where it was taken?

[chikne]

Originally Posted by Kim Coxon

Looking at the architecture, I would hazard a guess at hte Natuaral History Museum in London.

Kim

Do they allow photography in there?

[chikne]

Yes!!!!!! =)

[Thardy]

Originally Posted by ferider

You are not looking hard enough.

Used Leicas being expensive is a stereotype just like CV lenses being worse than Leitz lenses and Zeiss lenses
having magnificent build quality (search for Biogon and Wobble).

I've had R, R2, R3a and T. So I tried.

- After a few months of use they all felt rougher (or looser) than in the beginning.
- viewfinder was either off out of the box (several inches at close focus) or went out of alignment quickly, in particular on the R3.
- I do get noticably sharper pictures with my Leicas. The noise has to go somewhere ....

Plus I hate the short EBL.

Nice entry machines to get introduced to RF GAS but that's about it. And maybe, the post Zeiss Ikon bodies are better than the ones I used (some
of the Bessa internals changed).

To each his own of course. If you only shoot slow/wide lenses it doesn't
matter so much anyways.

Roland.

Hey Roland,

if you could point me in the direction of a (Leica) M body priced similar to a Bessa R2* - R4*, I will buy it. I think I have looked around at internet sources and prices for something not beat up is much more than a CV Bessa.

Maybe I'm too picky?

[photobizzz]

I was just about to buy a Leica M body, well I bought a M body...A Bessa R3A. I wanted apature priority shooting, and the 1:1 finder appealed to me as well. With the extra money I saved I bought a Leica 90/2.8 tele-Elmarit and sold one CV lens and bought a Leitz Summicron 50/2. In the end it is all trial and error I suppose as most of us dont have the chance to borrow or use several different cameras or lenses at the time of purchase....probably why our classifieds section is so busy!

[back alley]

i quite like my r4a and would be satisfied it were my only camera.
i plan to get an r3a in the future.
i have owned an m4-p and an m3, both very nice heavy cameras, well made etc.
i'm still happy with the bessas though.
joe

[ferider]

Originally Posted by Thardy

Hey Roland,

if you could point me in the direction of a (Leica) M body priced similar to a Bessa R2* - R4*, I will buy it. I think I have looked around at internet sources and prices for something not beat up is much more than a CV Bessa.

Maybe I'm too picky?

OK, Thardy. Will give a HU next time I see one for less than US 540.
Will most likely be an M2. Best Leica anyways

Cheers,

Roland.

PS: just noticed that here are two SS M3s for US 575 each, this does come pretty close:
http://www.rangefinderforum.com/phot...p?product=8527