COMPACT lenses for landscape

alan davus said:
I'll be heading off to New Zealand for my annual 3 week hiking holiday on Dec 26 with either the Hex 35 2 UC or the MS Optical Perar 35 3.5 paired with the CV 50 3.5 Heliar. Compact, light and sharp: (speed is not over important.)
Click to expand...

Nice trip plan!

You must have the original 101 Heliar. Have you used it for landscape before, Alan? What's it like?
 
noimmunity said:
Nice trip plan!

You must have the original 101 Heliar. Have you used it for landscape before, Alan? What's it like?
Click to expand...

Jon, I have one of the nickle reissue Heliars. Bought it about a year ago and took it to New Zealand last summer: love it for landscape used in tandem with either a 28 or 35 ( I only ever take 2 lenses because of weight issues and one is always a 50). Normally I shoot Velvia 50 or Astia. After years hearing about how the 50 3.5 Heliar was one of the sharpest lens ever made for 35mm photography, I wasn't going to miss a chance to grab one. It takes a bit of getting used to, but with lansdcape you're not necessarily shooting in a hurry. Love it when hiking.
 
alan davus said:
Jon, I have one of the nickle reissue Heliars. Bought it about a year ago and took it to New Zealand last summer: love it for landscape used in tandem with either a 28 or 35 ( I only ever take 2 lenses because of weight issues and one is always a 50). Normally I shoot Velvia 50 or Astia. After years hearing about how the 50 3.5 Heliar was one of the sharpest lens ever made for 35mm photography, I wasn't going to miss a chance to grab one. It takes a bit of getting used to, but with lansdcape you're not necessarily shooting in a hurry. Love it when hiking.
Click to expand...

Alan, if you have a photo album on line that I could check out or would be generous enough to share some samples with me by email, please let me know. Sounds like my intended usage is similar to yours.

A quick plug here for the ZM C Biogon in tandem with Velvia! I really like the extra breadth compared to a 28, especially for shots emphasizing sky and clouds, long ridgelines, and interesting trees/rocks. If I weren't so attached to the ZM 21, I might consider picking up the CV 28/3.5 because it pairs perfectly with the Rollei Sonnar.

The collapsible part of the Heliar equation doesn't bother me at all. I'm really only concerned about compactness, but want a high-quality distinctive image quality. Not just sharp, but also something with a little pop or magic.

I have to say I love the way the Nickel Heliar looks! And I suspect from the few comments I've seen that it has a look that matches Zeiss well. I couldn't find much on flickr that was both landscape and shot on chrome...
 
Here's my "compact/landscape" kit, Jon. Note that I often use it with the CS 35/2.5, which is higher resolution than the 28/3.5. But that 50/2.4 is absolutely stunning - never had anything else as sharp.

907615977_ocoCg-XL-1.jpg


Roland.
 
For me, this photo really proofs that Oskar Barnack got it right when he designed the small Leica to substitute large and heavy cameras when hiking. Very nice photo, Steve !:)

Bingley said:
Some samples, FWIW:

Leica Elmar 50/3.5 coated, on TMax 100 @ iso 50 in Rodinal:

4928685532_abc4d159f4_z.jpg
Click to expand...
 
120/6,8 Angulon. 150/4,5 Apo-Langthar. 300/9 Nikkor. All very compact, and great on 4x5. The Nikkor is good on 5x7, too.

But if you want 35mm, 90/3,5 Apo-Lanthar (pack the hood separately).

Cheers,

R.
 
Not the focal length that the OP is looking for, but this is my favorite:
35/2.8 Biogon-C. 2TMY, XTOL 1+1. Compact and bitingly sharp into the corners.

Click on the picture to see a much larger version.

 
Last edited:
Nice photo!
Of course I had considered the C Biogon. Used to have one in fact and miss it.

For my own personal kit, I want a different FL to pair with the other C Biogon, the stellar 21/4.5, which I will never ever sell, hence the desire to look for 40s and 50s (wish I could go even longer, but then physical size becomes much larger).

I replaced the C Biogon 35 with a Rollei Sonnar 40. The Rollei is definitely competitive with the C Biogon 35. Not as sharp across the frame, it is sharper (*I think*, since I never did tests) on center. Sometimes that kind of balance creates a pleasing effect to draw the viewer in. The Rollei is physically smaller. It has equally nice bokeh wide open, perhaps even better than the C Biogon, and it has a Zeiss "pop" to the image, with no noticeable vignetting wide open. Finally, the Rollei can usually be had for less than the C Biogon. Just another alternative...
 
The 21/4.5 is an awesome lens, ins't it?

The 90/4 Macro collapses down pretty small. It's a fantastic lens, especially if you can find it without the macro adapter. I think I paid $1k for mine.
 
noimmunity said:
Well, I have the cron. It's pretty much the ideal in terms of IQ and the extra reach is really useful in the mountains. But Sir Cron is hardly lord of the compactness department!

Personal illustration: Taking the cron when I go backpacking means having to leave behind a second body. I like to take two bodies, one loaded with RVP50, the other loaded with Acros, each in a separate Ortlieb side pocket. These side pockets are well padded and totally waterproof, but they won't easily accommodate long lenses. Taking the cron (or the 135/4 TE for instance) would mean leaving a body at home...But yeah, sometimes I do that, too, heh-heh. Compact here means like less than 35mm long; even the Planar is a little too long. I went last week with a C Sonnar and am waiting to get the results back from that.

I guess there are so few Heliars out there it will probably be hard to get some user feedback specific to my question...
Click to expand...

I'm not really understanding how the 75 Cron could be too large. I borrowed one at the Louisville Leica Annual meeting, and was thrilled with its compact size--especially for such a fast 75. In fact, I remember it as being not much larger than my little 75/2.5 color Heliar. It, and my 90mm Tele-Elmarit, seem like ideal choices when a longer than normal compact lens is needed. They would both get lost in one pocket of my photo vest.

My feeling would be to take the 75 Cron along. I think you will probably accept it once you get used to having it along a few times. If I had one, it would always go along! (Someday I will have one, even if I have to sell my 90 ASPH or my 75 Lux.)
 
I don't think I can offer any examples right now, but I'll second the final version 50/2.8 elmar as excellent. Compact, sharp... no problems.
 
Rob-F said:
I'm not really understanding how the 75 Cron could be too large. I borrowed one at the Louisville Leica Annual meeting, and was thrilled with its compact size--especially for such a fast 75. In fact, I remember it as being not much larger than my little 75/2.5 color Heliar. It, and my 90mm Tele-Elmarit, seem like ideal choices when a longer than normal compact lens is needed. They would both get lost in one pocket of my photo vest.

My feeling would be to take the 75 Cron along. I think you will probably accept it once you get used to having it along a few times. If I had one, it would always go along! (Someday I will have one, even if I have to sell my 90 ASPH or my 75 Lux.)
Click to expand...

Hard to believe, I agree, since the cron is such a compact lens for such a high-powered short tele!

My considerations have to do with the physical limitations of the pockets in which I carry body and lens when backpacking.

But yeah, if I could adjust to carrying it, it would probably be the ideal lens for mountain use from the point of view of both IQ and FL, as well as its ability to get in closer than almost any other RF lens.

Interesting, Rob, that you'd even trade your 75 lux for it. The ergonomics of the cron are so much better than the lux that it was easy for me to decide. On the other hand, sometimes I do miss the extra stop, and I could see how the lux might be a more beastly-perfect partner for the 35/1.2 Nokton.
 
1. Elmar-M 2,8/50mm collapsible
2. Macro-Elmar-M 4/90mm collapsible

Both are very compact and great performers.
(There are older and cheaper versions of both, too.)
 
Jon - The CV Colour Skopars are wonderfully small and light, but I started to doubt my 35mm Colour Skopar's definition at all focusing distances, particularly far ground. It was replaced by the Zeiss 35mm f2.8 C-Biogon which has turned out to be a spectacular replacement. My 'stitched exposure' landscapes have exposures focused by-my-toes ranging through to infinity focus; the C-Biogon does with ease what the Colour Skopar struggled with.

............. Chris
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top