28mm M - your opinion matters

[carlos_borges]

Hello to you all.

I'm trying to add a 28mm lens to my M gear.

I consider just 3 - the 28mm f:2.8 Rokkor (from the CLE), the

previous version of the 28mm f:2.8 Leica-M or the 28mm f:3.5 CV (I

want a small lens so the F:1.9 is not a option). I also need a bright-

line finder for the CL.

Do you have any experience with this 3 lens??

Please just stick with this 3.

Thanks

[andrew_lee2]

Just FYI: the previous version of the 28/2.8 Elmarit-M is not a small lens. It has a 49mm filter ring (gargantuan by Leica standards) and is easily taller than a rigid 50 Summicron. Great lens, though; I have no complaints.

[henry_ting2]

The 28mm Elmarit pre-asph is a fine lens. Market price for a mint one runs about $1000. To me, the asph version is negated almost entirely by the user. Unless, everything is perfect, including shooting from a tripod, the asph advantage is really a moot point.

[al_kaplan1]

My only experience is with the first model 28 Elmarit and the Minolta Rokkor. The Rokkor was a fantastic lens. According to Modern Photography magazine test reports in the early 1980's it was as good as the contemporary model Elmarit at half the price. Eventually it developed those white spots all over, and I understand that even those that haven't got them yet will most likely get them.

 

The old Elmarit was a decent lens but I eventually traded it for a 21/3.4 Super Angulon. The Rokkor was quite sharp and contrasty when new. It won't bring up the 28mm frame line in Leica M cameras. Unlike the 40 which can be lightly filed down to bring up the 35mm frame line, the 28mm would require adding metal to the bayonet flange to actuate the 28 frame. If I were looking for a small 28 today I'd consider the Voigtlander.

[roberto_watson_garc_a]

I own a third version of the elmarit, and contrast at 2.8 is very good, I could say that close to the 35 asph at 1.4, this by a comparison test I did weeks ago, although it is not so big.

[joel_matherson]

For a CL, I would definately go for the Voigtlander 28mm f3.5. Its a nice compact size matching the camera. Its very well made and optics to match. THe Rokkor 28mm f2.8's still fetch more than you can now buy the Voigtlander lens new and most have a problem with the coating on one of the front elements. It was a good lens in its day but the Voigtlander is better. Voigtlander have a great metal 28mm finder and also the new dual 28/35 compact finder. Since the CL doesnt have 35mm framelines either, that new finder may be well worth a look.

[m_.]

I happen to be a true believer of Elmarit 28/2.8 pre-asph. There really shouldn't have much more to say about it.

 

Used M-Rokkor before and it is a sharp lens. Love the smaller size but my lens started to develop those white spots so I traded in for something I don't remember anymore. If you are going to get one of this, make sure the lens is clean with no white spots around the front element.

 

Never used VC 28 lens so can't tell you.

[paul_sharratt]

Hi Carlos -

 

Go for the CV 28 3.5. I really enjoy using this lens. I've had it about 6 months now and have not been disappointed. See this -

http://www.photo.net/bboard/q-and-a-fetch-msg?msg_id=007ft2 - link for an example. Plus the best part . . . price. Have fun with whichever lens you choose.

[paul hart]

The CV is better built than any other CV lens I've had, and image quality is of the highest order. It's extremely compact, so as you say you want a small lens it would seem to suit you fine. The remarkable price is the icing on the cake.

[dan flanders]

I�ve used both the Rokkor and the Elmarit and consider them equal for all practical purposed. However, like most retrofocus lenses they are both larger than the prime lens. A conventional wide angle protrudes so far back into the camera that it most often interferes with internal metering. If size is important, consider the 25mm Snapshot Skopar and use external metering if it causes a problem. My Skopar, w/o RF coupling , does everything I expect of a WA but is a beast for flare if not carefully used. If size doesn�t bother you consider the CV. I�ve had no experience with it but I�ve heard nothing negative about it either, but flare is a possible problem with most WAs. Pricewise you cant beat it.

[ant_nio_ferreira]

I had three(!) Rokkors 28 for my Leicas. First was stolen in Paris in 1983, and it was fantastic! Both center and edges AND CORNERS were perfect. Second was merely very good, the corners were a bit soft even closed down. Then I got a third one, which was also excellent. The tiny white spots are present, but until now I see no effect in the pictures. Compared with the Elmarit I got about one year ago I see no difference, except when shooting against the sun, the advantadge going to the Leitz lens. Mechanically the Rokkors are great, probably not to the level of Leica nevertheless.

[Craig_Cooper11664875449]

Hi Carlos,

 

I originally had the CV Ultron 28mm f/1.9. However, due to the store having a buyer

desparate for this lens in Black I was asked if I'd part with it until the next shipment

arrived - personally know the owner. I agreed but not being keen on the size of the Ultron

took the opportunity to say "well if you have the f/3.5 version I'll just take that one". Deal

done I couldnt be happier. Over a year ago now, no regrets on losing the Ultron, cant fault

the f/3.5 which actually feels a better build quality; just dont use it enough next to the 35

lux.

 

regards

Craig / Beijing

[frank_bunnik]

You might also consider the Konica Hexanon 2,8 28mm. Very well made lens, high optical quality, small size.

[neil_baylis]

I can strongly recommend the VC 28/3.5 It's very small, sharp and contrasty. I do notice some vignetting, but it's not a problem for me, as I usually burn the edges of my images anyway. See this image:

 

http://www.pixpopuli.com/index.php?cs=6&id=041124

 

I use it on a CLE, and just use the entire finder as the frame (no brightlines). There have been plenty of times when I wish I had a few more stops, but I just can't afford a faster 28 right now -- I'm trying to save up to buy an M4 ;-)

 

Neil

[hil3]

I've owned an M-28/2.8 III version (49mm filter size) for about 3 months. I find it very sharp and contrasty. I don't use a bright-line finder with it on my .72 Ms but I think it would help to do so. The hood infringes on the viewfinder significantly, even with the vented hood, and takes some getting used to. Since my most used lens is a 50/2, the 28 is a much better complement to it than the 35/2 I semdom used. $1000 is too much to pay for this lens. $600-$800 is a better ramge for version III.

[michael_cependa]

I just purchased a 3rd version 28mm Elmarit and was very impressed by the image quality of my black and white 8x10s. I don't think you would be disappointed. I use it on an M3 for which I acquired a metal VC clip on finder from Cameraquest. With the clip on finder there is no issue of the lens or hood intruding into the framelines.

 

On the other hand, I wouldn't call it a small lens by Leica standards.

[michael_b._elmer]

I have used a M 28/2.8 from 1983 for twenty years. It is an absolutely superb wide-angle lens. I recommend it very much even though I normally prefer faster lenses.

[joel_matherson]

"I use it on a CLE, and just use the entire finder as the frame (no brightlines)."

 

Neil, the CLE has 28mm framelines which are always visible.

[ray_nieves]

Have the Rokkor 28 since '85. I use on my CL/CLE. Great, compact lens, great reults, I love it..If I lose it, I might get a CV. You won't be sorry. How good are Rokkors? for many years the R system used Rokkors for the 16mm fish eye and some zooms. They had Leitz on the barrel and if no one told you, you would never know these lenses were not made along side others in the Leica factory.

 

If you can get a 28 Rokkor without the spots, grab it and don't look back!