CV 50mm f/2.5 Color-Skopar

[Aoresteen]

I have a few questions for users of the Voigtlander 50mm f/2.5 Color-Skopar.

I would get the lens with the Voigtlander square shade.

 

1. Has anyone used the 50mm 2.5 with the square shade on a Leica IIIf

camera? How much of the viewfinder does it block? How much of the viewfinder

does it block without the square shade?

 

2. How is sharpness & contrast at f/5.6 and beyond?

 

3. Do you like the tab focusing with the 50mm f/2.5?

 

I plan to use it with my M3 and IIIf bodies. Many thanks!

 

Tony<div></div>

[al_kaplan1]

I love tab focussing lenses in general. With a bit of practice you can focus with an extended finger of the same hand holding the camera, hany if you'r holding a flash in the other or just hanging on to something to keep from falling. You can also get pretty good at "guess focussing" by the position of the tab.

[jack_wilber]

Anthony, I noticed that this lens got very lukewarm reviews when it was first released. As a result, I am not sure it sold very well, so there isn't a huge user base out there to vouch for it. Here are some reviews from some people who have bought it:

 

http://photosig.pcphotoreview.com/cat/pcphotoreview/digital-accessories/lenses/35mm-primes/voigtlander/PRD_135724_3111crx.aspx

 

The lens barrel was designed to look like a first generation 35mm f/2 Summicron, which is a nice looking piece of gear.

 

I don't want to rain on your parade, since it sounds like you're pretty much decided to go for this lens based on its classy looks, but I have found that the Russian 50's, especially the Jupiter-3 and Jupiter-8 and most especially the Industar 61-L/D are simply spectacular performers. Unfortunately, they are pretty cheezy from an industrial design and build quality standpoint. The Industar 61-L/D can be gotten for really cheap. I paid $15 for mine. It's so sharp I get paper cuts just looking at the prints and it's relatively contrasty, too.

[leica ron]

I used mine on a IIIf and a IIIc, I don't recall if the lens-shade blocks anything.

 

I really thought that the lens was very blah in terms of performance. It's build quality is very good, but glass performance isn't close to what I expected for a modern optic. All of my Summicrons (from a 50's collapsible to a 1978 rigid) out-perform this lens as well as the 3.5 Elmar.

 

If I could go back in time I wouldn't have bought this lens, I would have waited for the Summitar that I eventually found ....

 

Chhers,

Ron

[Aoresteen]

Thanks all. I found an Industar 61-L/D on ebay for $29 shipped from Moscow. I will let the pictures decide.

 

I have seen a few reports for the CV 50mm 2.5 being poor but I assumed it was for the initial batch. I'd still like to hear from users of the lens and what their results have been.

[jim_mcbride]

I have a 50mm Industar of recent manufacture which I bought from Russia on eBay. It

seems to have decent build quality. I use it on a Cosina/Voigtlander Bessa R and it is sharp

as a tack. I typically use it in situations where I don't care to risk my 50 Summicron.

[todd_phillips1]

I've read on the web that there are sample varitations in the Industar, but I bought one from a forum member and tested it on transparency film and was VERY surprised. Very sharp and contrasty.

I'll continue to use it without hesitation.

 

Enjoy your Industar!

[dan d. chang]

I have this lens, the build quality is very good to excellnt, optical performance show very good creamy OOF, it is sharp. The problem is price only little low than 50/1.5, so most people go for the f1.5. I like it because of the size and feeling. 2.5 is little slow.

[nasmformyzombie]

There are any number of superior 50mm lenses, and all of them are faster than the Skopar. IMHO, Canon f1.4, Canon f1.5, Canon f1.8, 'Cron (any version), Nikkor f1.4 and Nikkor f2.

[kaiblanke]

Tony,

 

if you are looking for an industar, you can have mine for USD 23 shipped, payed by paypal (would be less if shipping from Switzerland would be not that expensive). Mine is a nice user version with the front letters blackened out, and working very nice. But I prefer using my 40/2 and my 50 Konica. Send me a mail if interested.

[chris_chow]

I had this lens for about a year before I sold it. Optical quality is below average if contrast and centre sharpness at f8 or wider is important to you. I shoot color only. Dont know its performance in B&W.

[steve salmons]

I further endorse the performance of the Industar 61 L/D. It is embarassingly good for the money compared to every other lens I own. I just wish it was an F2 like the Jupiter 8 rather than a f2.8. The build quality (of mine at least) is fine. If you are concerned about the looks of the lens on your IIIf then that could be a drawback as it does looks mighty tacky. I never did like orange on black!!The other possible problem is that the hood on the lens (an easy to find 40.5mm screw thread)does obscure a good bit of the viewfinder image.As I use a separate 50mm finder on the accessory shoe this is not an issue for me but you should be aware of it.

However my advice would be get this lens anyway as the financial risk is minimal and you will be pleasantly suprised by the performance of such an inexpensive optic.

Cheers Steve S.

[Aoresteen]

Thanks all!

 

Kai , I already bought the Industar on Ebay. Thanks for the offer.

 

 

Chris, I asume you are refering to the CV Color Skopar 50mm f/2.5. Correct?

 

I should mention that I have (and use) the Canon 50mm f/1.2 which is my "speed" lens. The f/2.8 max aperture of the Industar doesn't bother me at all. The Canon 50mm 1.2 is big and heavy thus my search for a smaller 50mm for when the light is good.

[jtk]

The problem with square shades is alignment. If CV aligns perfectly (bayonet system?), great. If not, it's a bad idea. I have such a hood, a non-CV clamp on, and it's useless.

 

Vented hoods don't have to be aligned and are barely perceptable in the viewfinder.

 

Presumably the goal is to have some kind of theoretically ultimate shade..the notion that square shade relates to rectangular film. But that reckons without the fact that the lens is circular.

 

A rfdr Leica is not a view camera, though some inexperienced photographers treat it that way (big tripod, fussy framing etc). It's not the right device for fastidious study of subjects. Better is a view camera or SLR of some sort (in studios that kind of work usually calls for medium or large format, not 35)...there you'd want a rectangular compendium shade and you'd adjust it according to the shot...the most careful adjustment is ordinarily impractical for hand-held studio work.

[Aoresteen]

There is a simple way to align square shades that clamp on. Loosen the clamp, place the camera on a flat surface (desk, table) and tilt the camera forward. When the lens shade touches the flat surface, it will align itself perfectly. Tighten down the clamp and the shade is alligned. Now if the front of the lens rotates when you focus this is worthless!

 

This is how I align the square shade for my CV 21mm lens.

[skip_williams]

I have had the 50/2.5 since its introduction and use the square hood with both LTM and M cameras. With the LTM cameras, you get a fair bit of finder obstruction, IMO. I like the visual profile of the little round hood on LTM cameras, so that's what I use. I usually supplement with the superb Voigtlander 50mm finder (Leitz clone) with the LTM bodies to avoid using the old, squinty in-camera finders.

 

On the M's, I stick with the rectangular hood for it's superior shading. There's very little obstruction with the M finders.

 

Regarding the hood alignment, it's locked in place with a set-screw, so there's never an issue of mis-alignment unless you knock it around This is in contrast to what you might get with a bayonet hood. Since it's an LTM lens, a bayonet hood would be impractical, as not every camera of every make will allow the lens to tighten at exactly 12:00.

 

Performance? Superb, but I don't have any high-tech comparisons vs. my other 50's. Best at ~f/8, which is what you'd expect.

 

Tab focusing? I like it, but some find it annoying. YMMV

 

I think that this is the perfect modern 50mm lens to fit to an LTM cameras if you don't need high-speed. You get classic styling, small size, and 21st century performance and coatings. Mine looks great on my black-paint 1929 Leica I (converted to a II).

 

Skip

[luis triguez]

Agree about Industar 61 LD . This ugly-beautiful lens performs as good as any.<div></div>