35mm choice

<p>Hi everybody; I am looking for a cheaper alternative to 35 summicron or summilux; I am thinking about getting the Zeiss 35/2.8! could anybody kindly enlighten me about this lens in regards to quality, flare issues, handling etc. Thanks in advance for all the responses.</p>

<p>Don't forget the Leica 35mm Summarit - f2.5, so a tad faster than the Zeiss. There's not much about it out there - few Leica users with 'cron/'lux 35mm lenses have bothered with it (why would they?) but it's well regarded. Erwin Puts, for one, rates it very highly.</p>

<p>35mm 1:2.8 Summaron -- actually, one of the best 35's Leitz ever made IMHO.</p>

<p>I would also take a Summaron over the Zeiss.</p>

<p>As Paul suggested, the 35mm 2.8 Summaron is an excellent lens.</p>

<p>There are also alternatives from Voigtlander. You could get a f1.4 lens for less than any of the Zeiss or Leica offerings.<br>

http://www.cameraquest.com/inventor.htm<br>

http://www.cameraquest.com/voigtlenchart.htm<br>

http://www.cameraquest.com/voigtlen.htm</p>

<p>The Voigtlander 35mm 2.5 Color Skopar gets good reviews. Sure I'd like all my lenses to say Leica on them since I can't afford most of them the little Voigtlander makes for a pretty decent substitute. Check our Sean Reid's review of this lens.</p>

<p>My pal Bill by 35 Summaron 1:2.8</p><div></div>

<p>Zeiss Biogon 35/2. A good lens at a reasonable price.</p>

<p>I have the zeiss and I love it. Sharp, contrasty, perfect. I do not have a Leica lens to compare with but I am very happy.</p>

<p>The Zeiss lenses are great options. I think I'd probably take the 35/2 over the 35/2.8. But if you don't need the speed, the 35/2.8 is a great lens.</p>

<p> </p>