which 35mm on a budget?

[frederick_muller]

Try the VC 35mm f1.7 Ultron. I think it's a better lens than the Skopar.

[h._p.]

Ultra cheap is the Ukrainian/FSU Jupiter 12. I've got one of these for my M3 and it's surprisingly good. No snob appeal, of course, but it depends what you're looking for.

[mattalofs]

"Has anyone mentioned the Konica Hexanon-M 35? Seldom for sale second hand but worth the wait. "

<br><BR>

If anyone knows where I can get one of these drop me a line. <br><br>

 

Leslie, if you are on a budget, I highly recomend the CV 35 1.2. Take a look at my review here: <a href="http://www.1point4photography.com/cv35nokton.php">http://www.1point4photography.com/cv35nokton.php</a>.

[john_boyle3]

As previously noted, the 35mm 2.8 Summaron is an excellent lens. The build quality is superb and the optics simply excellent. However, you may have trouble finding one. I've had mine for 38 years and would never part with it.

[richard crawford]

try the Zeiss Ikon 35mm - you wont find one SH but brilliant lenses with 1/3rd stop aperture idents. Sharp to the corners and little distortion. Saw a review somewhere (helpful if I could find the link) that rated it nearly as good as the 35mm asph ... all at half the price.

 

Rich

[awahlster]

Canon 35mm f1.8 Black and chrome

[peter_evans4]

You might also look for a Komura 35/2.8 (3.5?). I've read that it's not so good wide open, but excellent stopped down just a little. It may well cost more than a CV 35/2.5, which is probably better; but then again you might be lucky and be asked for less. I've read similar things about the similarly unglamorous Tanar 35/2.8 (3.5?) as well.

[taffer]

Pretty much what has been said. I've used and use (from more to less contrasty), a CV 35/2.5 pancake, 40/2 Cron and Canon 35/2.8. They are all excellent lenses, so which one to go for is mostly a thing of personal taste of its imagery, condition and price, in the end you may just find yourself doing like me and going for them all :)

 

Whatever you get, enjoy !

 

Oscar

[wgpinc]

Lot of good advice here. Nobody has mentioned the CV Nokton 40mm 1.4 that for $350 is a bargain and reputed to be a good performer. Cheap enough so that I'm thinking of trying one along with the 75mm 2.5 as a good inexpensive travel combo.

 

http://www.cameraquest.com/voigt4014.htm

[scott_mcloughlin]

I too have a CV 35/2.5 Pancake I. Very nice lens. Great build quality, somewhat short focus throw. Picked it up used from B&H for very little money. There are nice vented 43mm shades on the auction site for something like only $8 or so. As for the optical quality, pretty good bokeh, nice contrast as well, just a pretty rendition. Takes nice pictures.

 

The "Classic" version of this 35/2.5 lens is very inexpensive, still available, has an identical optical formula, takes 39mm filters and is every bit as small as the pancake. A great bargain. I'd go and buy one of these and a $8 39mm vented shade and see how you like it before springing for something pricier.

 

The current CV Pancake II is supposed to have an updated optical formula, but I can't "see it" in any of the pics I've looked at. Better stock shade than the (now discontinued) P1.

 

I've seen lots of CV Ultron 35/1.7 shots. To my eye, the rendition looks a bit lower contrast and a bit more revelation of fine detail. Lovely as well. Larger lens, if that's an issue for you.

 

Except for the expense, you can't go wrong with the current Leica 35/2, 35/1.4 or ZI 35/2. Stellar lenses by all accounts. The ZI 35/2 is said to be a bokeh king, and the sample pics I've seen seem to back this up. But I like smaller lenses, and it looks considerably larger than the Leica 35/2. Both the 35/2 and 35/1.4 seem to pop up used quite a bit, but even used, the 35/1.4 would set you back some $$$$.

 

Personally, for now I'm very content shooting my CV 35/2.5 until I can scrounge up the funds and the will to spring for a used Leica 35/1.4.

 

OTOH, I generally shoot a Leica 28/2 more often in combo with a 50mm lens, either a CV Nokton 50/1.5 (another great CV bargain) or a current Summicron 50.

 

 

Scott

[todd_phillips1]

Lots of good advice above. I'd have to throw in another vote for the 3.5 Summaron. I have one made for the M2 (not one of the M3 models with the eyes removed) and it really lives on my M2. Very sharp, good contrast and it is really small. The V'lander 2.5 may be smaller, but as others have said there may be quality control factors with this or the P'cakeII lenses.

 

I also have a version IV 'Cron which is perfect....but at F8 to F16 I really can't tell them apart. Check out a 3.5 Summaron...it's not a speed devil...but you can always push Tri-X to 1600 in Diafine!

[pensacolaphoto]

I have used the Summicron 35mm/2 first version and find it a very good lens with excellent overall qualities. Mine is the one with goggles for the M3. I use more often a Canon 35mm/1.8 lens (chrome). It is a great performer, in my opinion. I also use a 35mm/3.5 Summaron, which can give very pleasing results. It is the smallest and lightest of my three 35mm lenses. None of my lenses is very expensive and each has its fingerprint. I think, you have plenty of excellent options these days to choose your 35mm lens at your chosen budget.

[ray .]

I had nothing but an f/3.5 Summaron for years, never giving a

thought to needing something else. Good enough unless you

want something faster. All the pre-2002 photos here were taken

with it:

http://chaospress.com/pre2002_tns.html

[jja]

Ray, Image 10 in the <2002 folder makes a compelling argument for the Summaron f3.5,

maybe I'll order a copy of that photo! This thread demonstrates that while many, including

myself, covet the pre-asph and asph Summicrons, there really are a lot of high quality 35s in

the new and used market. I shoot a Classic Skopar and I'm very happy with the results I get

from it. Some day I'll get a Summicron, just to know what the hype is about, but for now that

little Classic allows me to shoot good quality photos at an affordable price. I also think the

focusing tab, combined with its size, make for a very easy to use lens.

[peter_evans4]

<p><em>The current CV Pancake II is supposed to have an updated optical formula, but I can't "see it" in any of the pics I've looked at.</em></p><p>That it's updated is a rumor I've helped to propagate, I'm sorry to admit. It's untrue. The three CV 35/2.5 lenses are optically identical. The diagrams of the lenses imply this, and my well-informed source in the Voigtländer Service Room confirms it.</p><p>Meanwhile, people persist in talking about the virtues (or faults) of the LTM Canon 35/2, as if there were only one optical design. (There were two.)</p>