Where are pictures of your ex? I might need more than an lens to jump....
oldoc
oldoc
My wife threw them out....
Guess she didn't think much of the bokeh...
Guess she didn't think much of the bokeh...
oldoc
oldoc
Roland, thanks for the in-depth.
I think that there just isn't enough to make me jump back to Leica from CV unless the deal is REALLY right.
My problem is recognizing the versions. Right now, I find myself depending on the seller description, which can be...ahem...risky.
I think that there just isn't enough to make me jump back to Leica from CV unless the deal is REALLY right.
My problem is recognizing the versions. Right now, I find myself depending on the seller description, which can be...ahem...risky.
raid
Dad Photographer
Here are three small sized pics from the version 1 Summicron. It paints.
Attachments
oldoc
oldoc
Anyone have thought about Zeiss 35/2.0?
Krosya
Konicaze
If you are talking Summicron, I'd FOR SURE consider Biogon and Hexanon - M and UC - both. I used to have a UC-Hexanon (which is supposed to be similar to Cron IV) and it's one outstanding lens. I sold it and miss it at times. But I now have M-Hexanon 35/2 which I like a lot as well. Plus CV 35/1.2 - which I think is the best 35mm you can buy.
Here is a shot fron UC-Hexanon 35/2:
and one more:
Here is from M-Hexanon 35/2:
I dont have Biogon 35, but I like pics I have seen from it.
As far as CV 35/1.4 goes - so far I have only seen ONE photo I liked from it. One by Roland, of the pier, (maybe he will post it here). Otherwise, to my eyes this lens is really nothing special, with rather poor bokeh. I'd even suggest CV 40/1.4 over it - seems sharper, cheaper and images from it seem to be more pleasant to me. If I wanted 35-40mm lens thats faster than 2.0, and small - I'd go for CV 40/1.4. Summiluxes are nice but more expensive. So, your best bet would be Biogon, Hexanons or Summicron IV or ASPH IMO.
Here is a shot fron UC-Hexanon 35/2:
and one more:
Here is from M-Hexanon 35/2:
I dont have Biogon 35, but I like pics I have seen from it.
As far as CV 35/1.4 goes - so far I have only seen ONE photo I liked from it. One by Roland, of the pier, (maybe he will post it here). Otherwise, to my eyes this lens is really nothing special, with rather poor bokeh. I'd even suggest CV 40/1.4 over it - seems sharper, cheaper and images from it seem to be more pleasant to me. If I wanted 35-40mm lens thats faster than 2.0, and small - I'd go for CV 40/1.4. Summiluxes are nice but more expensive. So, your best bet would be Biogon, Hexanons or Summicron IV or ASPH IMO.
notturtle
Well-known
If I was buying a sub $1k Leica 35 there is no question what it would be: used 35 Summarit 35.
However, if I was happy with a slow any brand 35 there is no question what that would be: 35 Biogon C
If I wanted a F2 35 for under 1K, it would be the 35 f2 biogon (used or new)
If I wanted a faster than F2 lens it would not be a CV 35 1.4 or teh insanely expensive Lux asph. I would rather buy a CV 35 1.2 and a CV 35 2.5 Pancake.
Personally, I feel the Cron V4 is waaaaay overpriced, but know that many love them. Thats fair enough but $ for $ I could not begin to justify it. Even the V1-3 seem to be going for silly money these days.... as can the 35 2.8 summaron. The latter is a much more cost effective slower lens if you don't need f2. I would prefer to buy a UC Hex for $800 by far than a V4 for $1200. Just my opinions!
However, if I was happy with a slow any brand 35 there is no question what that would be: 35 Biogon C
If I wanted a F2 35 for under 1K, it would be the 35 f2 biogon (used or new)
If I wanted a faster than F2 lens it would not be a CV 35 1.4 or teh insanely expensive Lux asph. I would rather buy a CV 35 1.2 and a CV 35 2.5 Pancake.
Personally, I feel the Cron V4 is waaaaay overpriced, but know that many love them. Thats fair enough but $ for $ I could not begin to justify it. Even the V1-3 seem to be going for silly money these days.... as can the 35 2.8 summaron. The latter is a much more cost effective slower lens if you don't need f2. I would prefer to buy a UC Hex for $800 by far than a V4 for $1200. Just my opinions!
oldoc
oldoc
No one has commented on bokeh of the Zeiss 35s. I have a Zeiss 50/2.0 Biogon, which I love, and a Biogon 21/2.8 which I LOVE. How about the 35/2.0?
I have seen some images that seem to suggest it is better than the CV 35/1.2 and 35/1.4 IMO. Thoughts?
I have seen some images that seem to suggest it is better than the CV 35/1.2 and 35/1.4 IMO. Thoughts?
I have the first version, but I agree with Roland that if you have the 1.4/35 Nokton there’s little reason to want the Summicron too. For what it’s worth the shape and arrangement of elements in the Nokton are very much like the first version Summicron. Maybe save your $$ for other uses. 
And if you love the look of the Zeiss 50 Planar and 21 Biogon, note that Zeiss makes the effort to keep a family look and consistent color among their lenses. So the 35 Biogon would be a possibility.
I’ll attach a landscape photo with 1.4/35 Nokton and M8, unfortunately not illustrating bokeh of any sort, but FWIW...
And if you love the look of the Zeiss 50 Planar and 21 Biogon, note that Zeiss makes the effort to keep a family look and consistent color among their lenses. So the 35 Biogon would be a possibility.
I’ll attach a landscape photo with 1.4/35 Nokton and M8, unfortunately not illustrating bokeh of any sort, but FWIW...
Attachments
notturtle
Well-known
lots of other threads have though so you wont find opinions in short supply. The 35 biogon is truly superb and has a very similar look to the planar 50 (which I assume is what you own as there is no 50 biogon). I own the 50 planar and 21 2.8 and agree they are wonderful. The 35 biogon has great bokeh and all the more remarkable when one considers the edge to edge performance and outright resolution.
However, the OP asked about crons so i thought I would sneak in comment on the summarit as it is at least the right brand and has a rep for the great bokeh many love in their pre-asph lenses. The only thing I wished my Biogon had was the size of teh V4. as for peformance, no criticism. Its far better than I am.
As an aside and on the subject of V4 prices rising followed by other versions, any noteiced the same happening to the remarkable 90 Elmari-M too now that has been out of production for a while?
ferider
Mentor
Maybe this one ? On Reala again, at f5.6 or so:
I like the 35/2 UC Hexanon, too, probably optically the best 35mm lens that I have. But not for my Leicas, the long min. focus bothers me. I keep it attached to my Hexar AF
I disagree about the 35/1.2 being the best 35 RF you can buy. Too large. Similar distortion as the 35/1.4 Nokton.
Cheers,
Roland.
Last edited:
raid
Dad Photographer
Roland,
I respect your opinion a lot when it comes to lens optics.
I only have the first version Summicron and the Canon 35mm lenses but no CV 35mm lens. Am I missing out?
I respect your opinion a lot when it comes to lens optics.
I only have the first version Summicron and the Canon 35mm lenses but no CV 35mm lens. Am I missing out?
kevin m
Mentor
Which Summicron? Canadian v. German; Version I v. VerIII, IV, etc., I don't think it really matters that much. What's worse, it gets your head in the wrong place from the get go, thinking about "bokeh" and "magic" lenses, rather than concentrating on those aspects of craft that really will make a difference. I'm not saying it's an absolute waste of time, just time that could be better spent. And yes, I'm speaking from experience, sadly.
Last edited:
Krosya
Konicaze
Maybe this one ? On Reala again, at f5.6 or so:
I like the 35/2 UC Hexanon, too, probably optically the best 35mm lens that I have. But not for my Leicas, the long min. focus bothers me. I keep it attached to my Hexar AF
I disagree about the 35/1.2 being the best 35 RF you can buy. Too large. Similar distortion as the 35/1.4 Nokton.
Cheers,
Roland.
yep - this is the one.
oldoc
oldoc
Gotta be story there, Kevin...
I am just trying to determine my direction for re-orienting the glass in my bag.
I am basically happy with what I have obtained, but have CV35/1.4 for M8 and Summaron 35/3.5 for the M6 classic.
Would truly prefer a Summicron 35, but have two very good Zeiss ZM lenses and the Leica glass is older vintage. Probably really should CLA my Elmar 90/4.0sell a couple of Summicron 50's, one which is the "with eyes" version I cannot use with the M8 (from my old M2, which I will sell, too) and a collapsible Summicron 50/2.0 which scares me to use with M8.
So much for my equipment saga...
I am just trying to determine my direction for re-orienting the glass in my bag.
I am basically happy with what I have obtained, but have CV35/1.4 for M8 and Summaron 35/3.5 for the M6 classic.
Would truly prefer a Summicron 35, but have two very good Zeiss ZM lenses and the Leica glass is older vintage. Probably really should CLA my Elmar 90/4.0sell a couple of Summicron 50's, one which is the "with eyes" version I cannot use with the M8 (from my old M2, which I will sell, too) and a collapsible Summicron 50/2.0 which scares me to use with M8.
So much for my equipment saga...
