cameron_sawyer

If you don't need the speed of the 28 'cron (expensive and bulky) or the VC 28/1.9 (very bulky), I would definitely go with the VC 28/3.5 in this focal length. Besides being an excellent optic, comparable optically to the Elmarit, it is beautifully made with a heavy brass barrel, and the most compact lens I have ever seen for any 35mm camera -- hardly bigger than a body cap. A real winner, only half a stop or so slower than the Elmarit, Rokkor, and Konica offerings and with all these other advantages.

 

As icing on the cake, this lens is dirt cheap -- less than $300 new with a hood. I don't know why anyone would pay triple that for a used Elmarit.

Ben, I've had both the old 90 'cron with the two-part built-in hood and removeable Visoflex head, and the recent one just before the current Apo-Asph. I liked them both optically -- the old one shows somewhat low contrast wide open, but both are quite sharp. I got rid of the old one because it is really amazingly huge -- not a telephoto design as far as I know -- and awkward to use. The more recent one is reasonably compact, fatter but no longer nor heavier than the current Elmarit. And it gives beautiful results -- one of the best M lenses in my opinion.

 

The recent 'cron does not block the viewfinder. You will really want a higher mag viewfinder, however, as the 90 frames are really tiny. Best of all is the 0.85 finder plus the 1.25x magnifier, which is what I use when I'm not too lazy to mount the magnifier.<div></div>

Does anyone know whether or not the Leica version of the Schneider

28mm Super Angulon shift lens is the same as the version which takes

interchangeable mounts for Nikon, Canon, etc.? In other words, can

the mount be changed on the Leica version?

Yes, the light is very soft and diffused through the clouds and heavy humidity. I rather liked it, actually, although the effect is, indeed, gloomy. The only strong color is the striking green of the vegetation -- the Emerald Isle indeed.

Thanks Jorn -- but these images look crappy, for some reason, at that size, at least on my monitor.

"Bad idea. First, the Hologon is a fixed focus lens. It wouldn't be rangefinder coupled."

 

The Hologon was NOT fixed focus. The Contarex version had two focus settings, .3 meter and infinity, as far as I know. The Leica version could be scale focussed from 0.2 meters to infinity.

 

As to rangefinder coupling -- no one cares about rangefinder coupling a 15mm lens. At F8, the depth of field reaches from a few inches to infinity.

 

That being said, no one needs the fantastically expensive Hologon when you can have a 15/4.5 from VC which is better in every possible way.

Training<div></div>

Monastery<div></div>

With only one lens.<div></div>

Yes, but not the Nokton. It's an entirely usable general purpose lens. A bit on the bulky side.

For me the difference between F/2 and F/1.4 (or 1.5) is often crucial when shooting indoors. The thin depth of field at 1.4 (or 1.5) is also an effect I like in a lot of cases. If you're going to be shooting indoors, I think you'll want the extra stop. If you don't want to shell out for the summilux, the Nokton is at least 96% of the optical quality for about 13% of the price -- I love mine and use it more than my summicron.

Guys, you're not listening to the man. He wants a 35/1.4 and is willing to spend up to $2000. This is a no-brainer -- a used 'lux asph from a reputable dealer like Photo Village.

 

He also asked whether the Leica glass is really so much superior to other variants. I think the answer is that many Cosina lenses are equal to or very close to their Leica equivalents optically, and in some cases mechanically, too, at a fraction of the price. The Konica M-mount lenses are also supposed to be first-rate.

 

In the case of fast 35's, both the VC 35/1.7 and even more the 35/1.2 are definitely Leica-class optically. I wouldn't personally recommend either one however: the 35/1.7 is one of the early VC designs and not up to the mechanical quality standards of later VC creations. I had one, loved the optical quality, hated the barrel, sold it. The 35/1.2, as someone mentioned, is just too huge to be a primary lens. It is apparently the equal of the 'lux asph optically, and is half a stop faster, but you just wouldn't want to walk around with that bazooka all the time.

 

So, with your budget and criteria: 35 'lux asph. By the way, this lens is also pretty bulky; I especially hate the shade which looks like the bell of a trumpet. The non-asph 'lux is much more compact (and cheaper), but optically inferior.

I have the P1 -- optically it's right up there with the 35 'cron but it's almost a stop slower. As a result I almost never use it.

 

The 40/1.4's combination of speed and compactness is really intriguing.

I have had very good success focussing the 50/1.5 Nokton on the Bessa R, no worse than with an M6 0.58. The Bess'as rangefinder patch is exceptionally bright and is free of any flare, which seems to make up, to some extent at least, for the shorter RF base.

So Claude, Andy, you've used the adaptors, and they give you accurate exposure over the life of the battery? Reading the materials from that Dutch guy you see how great those mercury cells were and so why they were specified in the first place.

Does anyone have concrete experience using the MR-9 adapter in a CL

or M5? Is the meter as accurate as with the original mercury

cells? The Wein cell seems like a poor choice for cameras which are

used occasionally -- once you expose them to air, they start running

down regardless of whether they are being used or not. And it seems

like the voltage is not an exact match for the mercury cells. Any

practical experience, guys?

External finders are not parallax corrected and are much less convenient than built-in ones. Try the Bessa -- the eyepiece is much larger, and you may find it easier to see the framelines. Magnification is not the only factor.

P.S. There is nothing off topic about discussing VC gear. This forum is about photography with Leica-mount RF gear, which the VC gear certainly is.

For use primarily with a 35mm lens, you would be much better off with the R. External finders are not parallax corrected, and stick out of the camera in an awkward way. And the finder of the R is terrific -- probably better than that of the M6.

 

If you want something less plasticky than the R, then consider a well used M6, which you can have for around $1000. In my humble opinion the R2 is not enough better than the R to be worth the extra money. It remains to be seen whether the R3 is any improvement in terms of shutter noise, build quality, etc. Perhaps there has been some significant development in connection with the new Zeiss camera. The shutter appears to be the same.

 

I agree with the poster above that the 40 Nokton is pretty enticing.

"Cameron, not one of these new lenses is the same as the Voigtlander range so how can you possibly say that. It seems far more likely these are zeiss designs that they are getting Cosina to build just like Kyocera does."

 

Sure, but nothing in the lineup adds anything to what you can already get from Cosina or Leica. The superwides are faster than Cosina's, but only the relatively fast 15 is anything you can't get from Leica. The 35, 50, and 85 are equivalent to the corresponding 'crons, and none of the Zeiss lenses is aspherical. Since the Cosina lenses are very nearly equal to Leica optically already, it is hard to imagine that any of these will break any new ground in that department, either.

 

 

"Also all this talk that its a rebadged Bessa is nonesense too, this is a higher quality and spec camera as well and it will be priced higher as such. Its not like the Rollei experience at all."

 

I hope you're right, but I doubt it. Zeiss does not make cameras so it is reasonable to assume that the body is more or less entirely the work of Cosina. The shutter is the same as Bessa's. Hard to imagine that it will be a compelling case to shell out $2000 or $2500 when you can get a mint M7 for that kind of money.

 

I'm afraid that this is a classical case of "badge engineering", familiar from the automobile industry. An elaborate exploitation of the value of Zeiss as a brand (maybe less brazen than the $2000 Rollei RF, but in the same spirit). In short, lots of form and little substance.

Well, first of all, I don't plan to use only one lens, and secondly, I am not at all interested in an autofocus P&S.

 

I have used a Bessa-R with the 35 pancake for travel duty. It's light and very nearly pocketable. But the pancake is an f2.5 -- a little slow. The 40 'cron is nearly a stop faster and no less compact. And the 40 Nokton is another stop faster and still about the same size!

Viewfinder, not rangefinder. The rangefinder is different (at least, the base has been spread out). But I would be surprised if the viewfinder is different. And why should it be? The Bessa finder is really better than Leica.

"Anyway, Cosina made Voigtlander lenses have been highly praised as well, so I don't think that Consina made Zeiss lenses would be any worse."

 

Certainly no worse, but not better, either. And double or triple the cost. What's the point? Other than the long RF baseline, there's nothing here you can't have much cheaper under Cosina's own brands.

 

I especially like the way Zeiss brags about the finder. There is no doubt in my mind that this is the very same finder dating back to the Bessa-R, which lately can be had for one-tenth of the presumed 2,000 euros price of the Zeiss-branded Bessa.

It won't sell for less than the Rollei RF, so figure at least four times the price of the R3. Until recently, that was Leica territory, but see thread above -- Leica prices will go up sharply, leaving this niche vacant. None of this is actually good news.

Leica is adapting itself to its natural market, offering a prestigious custom toy for really rich guys. The MP will now set you back around $4,000. For that, however, you get to configure however you like. There's even an M7 rewind crank option.

 

Thus Leica volumes will fall further still (but that's ok -- it will be ever more exclusive) and margins will rise. It could not have been otherwise -- Leica has been losing a raft of money. I suppose we should be glad that Leica might survive after all, but they are not making gear for the likes of us. You guys who speculate that a little Cosina competition will lead to reduced Leica prices have been simply dreaming.