35mm Summicron v3 f2 compared to 35mm voigtlander lenses?

[nicolasraddatz]

<p>Hi all, I've been recently offered a tabbed Canada 35mm summicron f2 with original hood and lens cap at a very good price (300 box). I have just seen the lens on some pictures, but hopefully I'll have a ride to the sellers house soon (he's like 150km away from home). I know it has some scratches on the lens body, but let's suppose for a while that the optics and general mechanics are in good shape.</p>

<p>How would you compare this lens to the current comparable offerings from voigtlander (under 500-600 usd)? I'm interested in each lens characteristics such as out of focus rendition, handling, contrast, saturation. Whether it's suited for B/W or color photography. What you personally like or dislike. I'm not so much interested in knowing which lens is best, as this is personal and debatable, but rather what you like or dislike of each.</p>

<p>If you had to choose one, which would you buy? Why? Thanks!</p>

[Alex_Es]

<p>Make sure there are no scratches on the glass before buying the crone. The current VCs are certainly good optically. Leica beats all with build quality.</p>

[nicolasraddatz]

<p>Hi Alex, thanks for replying. Could you compare them in terms of<br>

-Out of focus rendition<br /> -Sharpness<br /> -Contrast<br /> -Saturation<br /> -Whether it's best suited for B/W or color photography.<br /> -Handling<br /> -What you personally like or dislike.<br>

Do you think they have different "character"?<br>

(BTW, The comparable offerings from voigtlander would be 35mm f/1.4, 35mm f/2.5, right?)<br>

Thanks!</p>

[michael_a._shapiro]

<p>I would check out reidreviews.com if you're going to be buying new lenses. He deals with all those matters and shows examples.<br>

If there are no scratches, dust, fog, etc. on the glass, I'd buy the leica no matter what. In fact, if you don't want it, I'll take it.</p>

<p>Michael</p>

[aplumpton]

<p>I've had both (at least CAN Summy c1980 and classic f2.5 VC, c2007). If it is 300 or even 600, I'd take the Summy. If you need f2 and the bokeh, I'd take the Summy, even at 900. The little VC is great, especially with B&W shooting, and you probably wouldn't wear out either in normal use. No competition, though, if the Summy is 300$ (or even Euros or Pounds) and mechanically and optically perfect. </p>

[35mmdelux]

<p>At $300 for a cron nothing more to discuss.</p>

[koray_p]

<p>I just sold a not so mint v.4 Summicron 35 for £500 under 12 hours at ebay, so at $300 it is a no brainer, regardless of its version.<br>

K.</p>

[nicolasraddatz]

<p>Thanks guys, appreciate your thoughts</p>

[miklosphoto]

<p>Hi Tom, here is my take on this.<br>

I have the LEICA SUMMICRON-M 1:2/35 mm ASPH for long time now. I bought a Voigtlander Nokton 35mm f/1.2 in May, and sold it yesterday.<br>

So these are the only two lenses I can compare, but it should give you an idea about thetwo brands in general.<br>

-Out of focus rendition<br>

I really liked the CV Nokton wide open. Preferred it to the Summicron.<br>

<br /> -Sharpness<br>

Summicron is unbeatable. CV was soft wide open. At f/2 summicron is still slightly better.<br>

-Contrast<br>

Summicron is better, nice contrast wide open.<br>

<br /> -Saturation<br>

Summicron is better.<br>

<br /> -Whether it's best suited for B/W or color photography.<br>

Does not matter. The quality of B/W depends on the film/processing or software conversion if it is digital. Even with a flat CV contrast uou can do awesome things in software when you convert.<br>

<br /> -Handling<br>

CV is to big for my taste on an M body. Summicron 35mm is one of those lenses I call miracle in tiny size. Nevertheless, focusing is also easy on CV.<br>

<br /> -What you personally like or dislike.<br>

Sold my CV, because don't need two 35mm lenses, if you look at my answers above, you understand why.</p>

<p>Hope this helps.<br>

Miklos</p>

[Troll]

<p>Any clean lens that says "Summicron" on it is better than any other lens of the same focal length.</p>

[02Pete]

<p>Given the choice between a used Leica 35mm f/2 v3 and a Voigtlander 35mm lens, I would probably choose the Leica, particularly if offered a genuine bargain. A Voigtlander 35mm might well prove to be a good choice, though, if cost is a consideration and you have second thoughts about this particular deal after meeting the seller and inspecting the lens.</p>

<p>All of the versions of the 35mm f/2 Summicron, including v3, have had excellent reputations for resolution, contrast, saturation, overall image quality and mechanical durability, with the later versions offering improvements to the already high image quality of the earlier versions. I am using an older 35mm f/2 Summicron v1, and don't have any complaints about its performance. </p>

<p>If given the chance to buy a 35mm f/2 Summicron v3 for $300, I would consider that to be quite a bargain so long as you are satisfied that the seller is the legitimate owner of the lens (i.e. not selling stolen equipment), so long as the lens does not have visible scratches on the glass or visible internal fungus or heavy dust, and so long as the focusing and aperture rings move smoothly without binding or feeling loose. These lenses usually sell for higher prices, so while the low price is attractive, it should also alert you to be a careful buyer in terms of the provenance and condition of the lens. If this turns out to be an honest deal involving a lens in good condition, though, it would be a real bargain offering excellent value for money.</p>

<p>I haven't used the Voightlander lenses, so I can't comment on their performance or compare them with my Summicron based on direct personal experience. There are several different models of Voightlander 35mm lenses, and these might well produce somewhat varying results. Their general reputation, for what that is worth, appears to be that they offer very good image quality for the money, and are certainly good enough for most amateur photographers in general shooting, but may perhaps be a step behind Leica lenses, particularly at full aperture, when all other factors are controlled to produce the best possible images from both pieces of equipment. A few of the most expensive Voigtlander lenses reputedly offer exceptionally high image quality, closer to but still not quite a match for current-production Leica aspheric lenses, but they may not be quite as much a bargain as the less expensive ones. Voigtlander lenses also have the reputation of having mechanical construction that is quite good, and directly comparable with most other brands of photo equipment, but not quite as strong or durable as that of Leica lenses. </p>

<p> </p>

[john_gellings]

<p>You really had to ask this?</p>