which voigtlander: snapshot 25 mm v 35mm v 40mm v 50 mm?

<p>I appreciate everyone's expertise and experience as I wade into the rangefinder waters.<br>

So I'm planning on buying a lens for the voigtlander 3A this week. Does anyone have strong opinions about which of the following voigtlander lenses are most satisfying?</p>

<p>Please see the answers in the other thread you started.</p>

<p>OK, Which car is the best for me: Mercedes, Porsche, Jaguar or Kenworth?</p>

I have the 25. Great for street shooting. I would never be without a 50 and I do like my 35, neither of mine

Voigtlanders. Without knowing what you like to shoot I would have to recommend all three focal lengths, but I have no

knowledge of the characteristics of the two longer focal lengths in the CV line. It's a tough school here as you can see.

<p>thanks Richard. the first week at school is the toughest. j/k. the 25 looks really good as does the 21.</p>

<p>For your normal lens, choose between a 40 and 50 M-mount rangefinder coupled lens (either fits your camera; a 35 does not). Add a 25mm/4 Snapshot-Skopar with an external viewfinder for wide angle shots.</p>

<p>Go 50mm. Add 40mm later.</p>

<p>My personal favorite focal length is 35mm.<br /> But considering your VF brightline limits, I'd get the 40mm f/1.4<strong>;</strong> it will handle most every situation well.</p>

<p>Now in keeping with <em><strong>Alex's</strong></em> recommendation, the comparison <strong>sample images</strong> from this "loose review" of the Voigtlander 50/1.5 Nokton Aspherical (along with others) were very impressive.</p>

<blockquote>

<p><a href="http://www.luminous-landscape.com/reviews/lenses/fastlensreview.shtml"><strong>"</strong>Voigtlander 50/1.5 Nokton performed so well that one has little sense of having compromised quality at all for the one-stop increase in speed over an F/2.0 lens<strong>"</strong></a><strong> <<< click</strong></p>

</blockquote>

<p>The 25 snapshot skopar has worked well for me as a wideangle on the M8. And it's very light and takes 39mm filters.</p>

<p>I agree with Gus: get the 40/1.4 Nokton M-mount for $479 new. Very good lens at a great price and it fits the widest framelines of your camera. And yes the 25mm snapshot skopar is a really nice lens that you can buy used. It will require an M39 to M-mount adapter of course. After that you get a 75 or a 90 and you have a nice 3 piece lens kit.</p>

<p>addendum<br>

Here is a link: the 40/1.4 on your camera.<br>

http://cameraquest.com/jpg5/voigt_r3a_4014b.jpg</p>

<p>which old canon lenses are compatible with the R3A? the FD series? sean reid reviews some of them on his website and they seem like the bargain option.</p>

<p>There are bargains and then there are "bargains." A perusal of e-bay shows that the cheapest Canon RF 50/1.8--the lens that is usually recommended --is $250, for a lens with a scratch; the average is around $300. If you are patient and go to other sites you might get an excellent example for $300--for a 30 year old lens--and you'll need an adapter for it (added cost). I thought about buying the Canon 50 after hearing about it on a different site, but decided instead for an almost new Voigtlander 35/2.5 Skopar Classic, M39 mount. In your case, owning the R3A with its M-mount and 40mm frame-lines, makes the Nokton 40mm awfully attractive. Just checked e-bay; some one is selling a single-coated Nokton for under $400.</p>

<p>Hopefully someone will let go of a nokton 40 mm for closer to $300.</p>

<p><em>"There are bargains and then there are "bargains." A perusal of e-bay shows that the cheapest Canon RF 50/1.8--the lens that is usually recommended --is $250, for a lens with a scratch; the average is around $300. If you are patient and go to other sites you might get an excellent example for $300--for a 30 year old"</em></p>

<p>I have a heavy chrome type 4 Canon 50mm f1.8 without any cleaning marks or anything, so you think if I put it up for $200 on the classifieds that would be a fair deal?<br>

<em><br /></em></p>

I'm NOT a big fan of the 40 Nokton - it's not very sharp and I don't like its bokeh. I think the snapshot Skopar is a much better lens. Haven't tried the 50s, except the 50 Heliar collapsible, which is very good.

<p>what about the 35 mm 1.7 ultron? would that be hard to use on my 3A w/o a viewfinder?</p>

<p>The 35 Ultron has an excellent reputation for picture quality (especially for b&w: it's a low contrast lens), but has had some problems with mechanics and durability (the front ring has been known to fall off) . It's a fast lens which contributes to a relatively steep price tag. Regularly goes on e-bay for $350-400 and I saw one listed on another RF camera forum for $400, albeit in mint condition. It is screw mount lens so you would need an adaptor.<br>

35 presents a nice FOV too, but your frame lines are for a 40mm (why I suggested the 40 Nokton to be begin with). I guess you can always try to compensate by remembering that the lens is a bit wider than the frame lines indicate. Frame lines are never precise anyway. There must be someone out there who has tried a 35 mm lens on a R3a/R3m.</p>

<p>I'm not sure about the reply which says the 35mm is not suitable for the camera's mount. I'll assume the 25mm and 35mm lenses Mike refers to are LTM mount, and the camera in question is an M mount. I have both these lenses, and use them on my M mount bodies with the corresponding adapters. I use them on my LTM Leicas without the adapters, of course. That these lenses can be used on either camera style just makes them more versatile, IMO.</p>

<p>Also not sure about the comment stating that the 40 Nokton is not sharp enough. I've no complaint with it, and I'm fairly critical (though these days If an 8 x 10 looks good, I'm happy. No more shooting NBS test charts for me. At age 70, I have better things to do!</p>

<p>I have all the lenses mentioned except for the 50. I also have the 28/3.5 CV. I find them all to be equally good, no strong preference for one over the other. I do, however, like to think of each lens as a member of system, or team of lenses. With that in mind, 25-35-50 make a good team, as each one covers exactly half the subject area (no the width or height, but the area) of each preceding lens. Then again if the choice is to get the 40, for its agreement with the camera's finder frames, then 28-40 is another such combo: the 40 covers half the area of the 28. And as a three-lens group, a 21mm will cover twice the area covered by the 28mm.</p>

<p>Hope these ideas are useful.</p>

<p>Best,<br>

Rob</p>

<p>I am getting the 25 mm skopar lens. I'm excited. Thanks to everyone who gave me advice on this.<br>

Eventually I'd like to try some of the classic old lenses that the voigtlander bodies are supposed to utilize. </p>

If you want a truly excellent 40mm lens the Minolta M-Rokkor 40/2 which was made for the CL/CLE is worth a look.

There's one on eBay now

 

http://cgi.ebay.co.uk/ws/eBayISAPI.dll?ViewItem&item=220780877721&ssPageName=STRK:MEWAX:IT#ht_500wt_922