Need advice on a 35mm lens purchase

[chuck_wullenjohn]

<p>I am a relatively new Leica shooter but own an M6 Classic body, 50mm f.2.0 Summicron lens, and 90mm f/2.8 Elmarit lens. I am looking at buying a wide angle lens, but want to get the best bang for my buck, keeping in mind that I intend to use whatever I buy for a long, long time. I am looking at three possibilities for purchase:<br>

1) Leica 35mm Summicron, but it seems wildly expensive, even used. I know it is a great quality lens, but the price makes me think twice.<br>

2) Voigtlander Color Skopar 35mm f/2.5, but I wonder if this lens isn't as sharp as a Leica and won't hold its value. I bought into Leica for its top-notch reputation and wonder if "wandering off the ranch" is a good idea. On the other hand, I read it is a great lens, and much cheaper than the Summicron.<br>

3) Leica 35mm f/3.5 Summaron. I could get this for around the same price as the Skopar, but it's an older lens and I have read mixed reviews on it. <br>

< p> I would appreciate any input from the knowledgeable people out there!<br>

< p>Chuck<br>

�</p>

[julien_boudreau]

<p>Chuck, </p>

<p>I'm in your situation; I purchased a 50mm Summicron, with the intent on later purchasing a 35mm Summicron. Unfortunately, prices have almost doubled on the used market for the 35mm Summicron, and it's simply out of reach. The 2.8 Summaron is also priced out of reach, and so we're left with Zeiss glass, which is excellent by any means, and Voigtlander glass. </p>

<p>I looked at the 3.5 Summaron but it's just too slow. I don't want anything slower than 2.8, and even then, could really use F2. The problem for me with the Zeiss is that they're not the smallest lenses. The voigtlander F1.4 is small, and gets good reviews, but has well noted back focus issues (if anyone can clarify here, would be appreciated). </p>

<p>I'm leaning towards the Voigtlander F1.4 for its size and image quality. I also have the M6 classic (Wetzlar edition), and will mostly shoot TriX and Portra 160. </p>

<p>J</p>

[mukul_dube]

<p>The 35/3.5 Summaron (I've had two examples of it) is notorious for haze. It is also believed to give a certain "plastic" quality to images that no other lens can manage. I use a C-V Ultron f/1.7, but I understand that the Color Skopar is an excellent performer. I'll advise you to add one of the current Zeiss offerings to your list.</p>

[michael_a._shapiro]

<p>I highly recommend a Zeiss 35/f2.</p>

[SCL]

<p>I owned the 35/2.8 Summaron (not the 3.5) for over 20 years & it is the one lens I regret selling, as I loved its rendition. Today I use the 35 ASPH Summicron and it is truly razor sharp (what I thought I wanted), but I think I'd switch back to the Summaron if it wasn't such a pain to find one affordable and in top notch condition. I can't speak to the CV, as the only one I've used id the 15 Heliar. It does what it is supposed to, but the build quality doesn't approach Leica's standards, but it is quite acceptable. If you have a chance to try out a couple of 35s at a local dealer or photo-club, before jumping with your wallet, you might find that you like the ergonomics of one better than the other. As far as holding value...there is a distinct difference between a photographer's one and a collector's one; the one which gets used loses value more readily than one which sits on a display shelf. I wouldn't worry about retention of value...the marketplace will determine that for you whatever you get. Try to find something which delivers the characteristics you seek...for instance has the vignetting, contrast and resolution at the aperture you plan to mostly use it.</p>

[paul_wheatland]

<p>I recommend the vintage last issue Canon in black 35mm f2 with the LTM to M adapter, you'll be happy as I am with this lens on my M-3.</p>

[david_franklin1]

<p>Dear Chuck,<br>

I have recently purchased a Zeiss 35mm f2.8 having been in a similar situation to yourself. I didn't need a fast lens and wanted something compact with good performance to go on an M4. If you are happy with f2.8 then I would thoroughly recommend it, for the price it is an excellent lens. </p>

[fred_c1]

<p>Look for a 35/1.7 Ultron in LTM. Best bang for the buck.</p>

[john_boyle3]

<p>If you can find an f2.8 Summaron go for it. Those of us that have one are very pleased with it. It will also take the E39 filters that your two other lenses use. It's a sharp lens and very well built.</p>

[jean_yves_mead]

Do you know anyone who can lend you a 35mm of any description to try? I found the focal length to be too close in practice to 50mm for my tastes, and instead settled on 28mm as my regular wide (a pretty little Voigtlander f/3.5 Color-Skopar).

 

I have owned the 35mm Color-Skopar in the past. It's a good lens - compact, sharp, contrasty, and free of any obvious distortion. Residual value isn't really a concern - it's an inexpensive lens to begin with and you'll easily get your money's worth out of it. I only got rid of mine because of my preference for 28mm.

[robert_hooper1]

<p>Best bang for the buck 35mm Leica lens, according to Sherry Krauter, is the Summaron 1:2.8. </p>

<p>Irwin Puts says of this lens:</p>

<p><em>"The lens is an excellent perfomer and is better than the 8 element Summicron at f2.8."</em></p>

[ray .]

Zeiss, Summicron, Summaron. You can't go wrong with any of them if they're in good condition.

Even if you paid more than you want for a Summicron, there's little doubt it's going to hold it's value.

[Fotohuis RoVo]

<p>You can also think of the 2,5/35mm Summarit. The 35mm and 75mm versions are also very good.</p>

[steve_harris10]

<p>I second the recommendation for the Ultron 1.7, it's a great lens, compact, and not expensive.</p>

[paul_neuthaler]

<p>Just get the 2.8 Summaron & don't look back. You will never regret it.</p><div></div>

[steve_bellayr]

<p>35mm Summicron and you will never upgrade. Of the ones you listed the Summaron is too slow while the quality of the Skopar does not match the Summicron. The Zeiss at F2.0 Biogon would be your second best bet.</p>

[julien_boudreau]

<p>The summicron is indeed the ideal leans. However, its recent increase in price - $1900 BGN on KEH - makes it out of reach for most. </p>

<p>J</p>

[michael j hoffman]

<p>I recently purchased the C-V Color Skopar 35/2.5 Classic to use on my Sony NEX-5. It is a very good performer even when compared against images from my Leica lenses. Excellent image quality, build quality second only to the 'cron, small, compact, etc. I got mine with an LTM-to-M adapter included for $360 on ebay, practically new in the box.</p>

<p>I also have the C-V 40/1.4 Nokton Classic. I am not as impressed with its image quality or its mechanical handling.</p>

<p>Michael J Hoffman</p>

[Alex_Es]

<p>It is simple. If you cannot afford a Summicron 35/2 get the Zeiss Biogon 35/2. The ergonomics are not as good as the Summicron but it is a very good lens. </p>

<p>Another great lens is the Summaron 35/2.8. Not very expensive. Will knock your socks off.</p>

[julien_boudreau]

<p>Alex,</p>

<p>The Summaron goes for about the same price as the ZM. Between the two, do you have a preference?</p>

<p>J</p>

[mac_kennins]

<p>Forgive me if I'm a little off-topic. However I was in the same boat before. Ended up buying the ZM 35/2. And honestly it's a fantastic lens. Creamy and contrasty even wide open. But if you're looking to keep an all Leica kit or even a compact one. What about the 35 Summarit? I believe it's gotten some favourable reviews. Or even the 28 Elmarit ASPH? It's not 35 yes, but it's only slightly wider. The cheapest of Leica and also the most compact. I cannot believe how light it is compared to my ZM 35/2!</p>

[chuck_wullenjohn]

<p>I really appreciate the variety of interesting, well-thought-out suggestions offered. I haven't purchased a lens yet but am leaning toward the Leica f/3.5 Summaron 35mm lens. I would prefer the f/2.8 version, but it's more than I can afford at this time. I don't feel the f/3.5 will loose value, however, so I can upgrade in the future and not lose anything. The Voigtlander 35mm lenses are tempting because of the reasonable prices and the fact that the offered apertures are wider. I've read about them quite a bit on the web and almost swallowed the bait to buy one. I liked the suggestion that buying the CV Color Skopar f/2.5 would give me a common filter size for all three of my lenses. I dislike carrying all kinds of accessories around, not counting the extra expense. Straightforward solutions are good! From what I read, the Summaron lens also uses the same size filter. Thanks again for your input -- more thoughts are still welcome ...</p>

[john_kwok]

<p>Chuck,<br>

I own a late 70s vintage 35mm Summicron, 35mm F2 Summicron ASPH, 35mm F1.4 Summilux ASPH and a Zeiss 35mm F2 Biogon. Of these lenses, the one I use most is the Biogon, with the Summilux used only when I need the additional speed. Don't even think of getting the cheaper Summarons. The Zeiss Biogon is better than them with regards to contrast and resolution, even wide open.</p>