View Single Post

Old 04-20-2019   #21
Teemō
Registered User
 
Teemō is offline
Join Date: Oct 2016
Posts: 32
Quote:
Originally Posted by presspass View Post
Repeating what was said earlier - consider a Canon f2.0. It is a much smaller lens and you give up a minimal maximum opening. The only problem with the Canon is the lens hood. I don't think Canon made one for this lens, but I have been using a Fuji 40mm diameter hood and it seems to work well. The rendering is more modern than my other LTM lenses but not obnoxiously so. They, too, can have haze. Neither lens has a focus tab, if that's important to you. The CV 35 2.5 gets rave reviews.
I will keep it in mind as an option! Unless it uses an odd pitch on the thread, a hood shouldn't be a problem to buy.

Quote:
Originally Posted by Ko.Fe. View Post
I can't recall distortion to be something bugging me within years I used all three different versions of this lens. Same about focus shift. Can't recall any.
It was sharp like any other normal lens. No corners smearing.

Nine pages of images from this lens, many are taking with film.
https://www.rangefinderforum.com/forums/showthread.php?
t=97500&page=1

Hundred of mine with Color Skopar 35 2.5. All on film. Some of them with it on R.

https://www.flickr.com/search/?user_...%20Skopar%2035

This one should be wide open. It was getting dark and it was crappy Polypan F 50.

-clipped-
Bessa R and Color Skopar 35 2.5 P. Focus on fire pit.
Looks sharp right into the corners to me. It may be the ticket, we'll see! No viewfinder blockage would be superb. Do you have the 'P' or 'C' version?

Quote:
Originally Posted by rfaspen View Post
If there is haze between cemented elements, no you will not have them separated by anyone. First, I strongly suspect the cement in modern CV lenses is not balsam but new UV cured cement. Essentially permanent. Second, if the cement is separable there are few who can or will attempt the repair in a RF lens. The last person I know of in the US has retired. The few less well known techs likely stick to older LF lenses that are easier to work with, collimate, and with balsam cement. If you happen to find someone competent who will work on cemented elements in the CV 35/1.7, they will cost at least 1.5 times the value of the lens.
Just saying.
They can be separated. There are a few services in Asia which do this specifically for vintage lenses. I don't know about cost, I'll get a quote, but so far at least one business doesn't appear to have dealt with any 35/1.7's in over 5 years of business, but plenty of 50/1.1 Noktons and 75/90mm CV's. I can't find any reference to the 35/1.7 having cement issues but it appears fairly common in their other lenses. I am seeing quite a few 35/2.5's with similar mild haze. I'm thinking it's condensation due to humid storage conditions. I don't think that would occur between a doublet that doesn't have cement issues, but it could still be between individual elements of the optical block (despite that they are sealed).
The way I see (hope) it is, the haze has got a good chance of only being on the surfaces directly adjacent to the aperture - they are most exposed to penetration throughout the rest of the lens. Because of the number of CV lenses with haze or cement issues, I'm not exactly full of confidence that the issue won't just develop in the future, if the conditions are right.
  Reply With Quote