35mm Lens Cold Feet

[david_l3]

Any one will do fine, there are no ugly dogs in the list. I have a version 2 Summicron with slight edge separation I got

almost for nothing. And guess what, I use it much more often than my ASPH. Buy what you're comfortable with and use

any remaining money on film. Not least of all, have fun and post some photos.

[mark_amos]

I have all kinds of equipment including Nikon classic SLR lenses that I won't part with and Cosina Voigtlander lenses that I bought for the AMAZING value they represent for the capability they offer. The decision about your lens has to do with your personality, which is impossible for me to estimate. If you are never really deeply satisfied and anticipate from your other experiences with hobbies and pursuits that you will want to trade or sell whatever you get because you are excited largely by the new acquisition and exploration of the equipment then you should explore the classic Leica 35s or enjoy the value of the 35 biogon. If your first lens is a total experiment, then get one of those.

 

I don't like swapping too much although it is sometimes necessary. I placed absolute value on the careful balance of lens size and quality (which I could judge from my already fine Nikon lenses) over the widest range of use while acknowledging that I wanted to "feel" I had the best to satisfy this aspect of the "hobby" of rangefinder photography. I didn't want to accumulate a lot of lenses. I do a lot of research (like you) and do not move until I am very confident that I know what I am getting. Then there is budget. I am fortunate that my money resources grew as did my quest, but the quest was already well defined when I started. What I mean is that I started with rangefinders with a $100 Canonet and then a Leica CL with the wonderful 40 C (I still have them) and then an M6 with a 35 cron aspherical, which ended the quest because I knew what I was trying to achieve all along even when I couldn't afford the "best". I wanted to meet or if possible exceed the quality of my Nikon system in a smaller camera package while achieving even better intuitive control and low light capability, which I realized in the rangefinder concept.

 

If you take the square hood off the 35 asph, it is really small. Its not quite as small (by a couple millimeters) as the version IV, but it is a sharper lens wide open. There is no way I would aspire to a Biogon in its place.

[Rob F.]

Raid, I'm happy with my 8-element Summicron too, but the cost of this lens has now gone out of all reason. If he doesn't want to spring for the ASPH, he certainly won't want to spend for the Version I.

 

Chris, I think you should either go for the Zeiss, or watch for an ASPH in your price range. One will come along. The Zeiss is bulkier, but for good reason: a larger lens can be optically superior to one that has to be small. While on the subject, I have the 35/2.5 Voigtlander as well, and can't find anything wrong with it. I think I paid $125.00 for it.

[Rob F.]

By the way, who was it that said, "The quality remains after the price is forgotten?" Was it John Ruskin? At any rate, it applies.

[Rob F.]

I just googled it. It was Henry Royce of Rolls-Royce.

[chris_raney1]

My choices are narrowing down to two: the Biogon or the Cron ASPH. And no, I'm not in the least bit interested in assembling a collection of expensive lenses. Though I'm stunned at the expenditure, I'm heartened by those in this forum who own two, three or even four 35mm lenses and who are in a position to offer advice on the qualities of each. I'm glad my subsequent 90mm choice will be much easier (the Tele-Elmarit).

 

And I am indebted to Jim Arnold and his side-by-side comparison site of the Cron IV vs ASHP! The latter easily wins, in my opinion.

[mohir_ali]

The TE may devlope fungus. The current Elmarit is only slightly bigger, cost a bit more, and performs better.

[02Pete]

If you can't afford to spend a whole lot of money, but you want a 35mm lens that will deliver sharpness, good contrast and excellent image quality even at f/2, and is compact and handles well to boot, you might consider a Canon 35mm f/2 LTM with a bayonet adapter, if you can find one in good condition. Tests would show a current Leica 35mm f/2 ASPH to be technically superior, and maybe a Zeiss 35mm f/2 Biogon or Voigtlander 35mm f/1.4 Nokton as well, but the 35mm f/2 is still an excellent lens for taking photographs with.

[james mitchell dc]

I agree with Mohir on the 90mm. Get the current Elmarit. It performs better than the Tele-Elmarit. I had one of those a few years ago and sold it for the current lens. I'm very happy with the choice. If I were looking for a new 35, I would probably go with the Biogon as well. I have the Canon LTM 35/1.8, the 'cron IV, the 'cron ASPH and the 'lux ASPH. I really like all four lenses in different ways and wouldn't sell any of them. If you want an inexpensive Leica lens that is close to the focal length you're talking about, consider the 40mm 'cron. I love this little lens. You can get it for under $300 in good used condition.

[35mmdelux]

Some good recommendations here and what Francisco said. Bust a move. He who hesitates loses. As Steve Gandy says, whatever you get is perhaps opticaly superior to what many of the "legends" used (paraphrased).

[barry_passaris]

35mm 'Cron ASPH...sharp wide open...sharp all the way to f11...modern Leica glow..just beautiful!!..it is fixed on my M7! ...no other lens needed!

[wolf_rainer_schmalfuss]

Hi ALL, save your money, and get you the excellent new and compact ZM 2,8/35mm Biogon! You will be surprised, how much it beats the much more expensive crons and other stuff.

 

 

Cheers