Bill Pierce
Well-known
Leica recently introduced the APO 35/2 Summicron, by all reports an outstanding lens with performance that makes it a leader both now and in a future when digital sensors get even better. There’s a catch. The lens costs $8195 U.S. dollars.
Cosina has announced the Voigtlander M 35/2 Apo-Lanthar which should be available some time this month. The price s $1149 U.S. dollars. I use a 50mm Apo-Lanthar on the Sony A7R IV with its 61.2 MP sensor. With the huge image magnification available in this mirrorless camera I am able to nail wide open focus precisely with this manual focus lens. There is no doubt that this lens is one of the “sharpest” I own. Nor is this just my opinion. I have a friend who is pretty high up on the photo ladder. I recently got an email from him asking if I knew anything about the 50mm Apo Lanthar. He had just seen some prints and was blown away. I told him it was my favorite 50, and, since I was an elderly photographer, I remembered how to focus manually. With practice the fingers on my left hand were strengthening. He’s buying the lens. My guess is the 35mm version will be in the same league.
Certainly, the amount of research and development that goes into a lens, especially one that will not have super mass sales, justifiably increases the retail price of a lens like the Apo Summicron. Nor are we talking about two lenses that have established track records. For now, we just guess. But I do wonder about the seven times price difference on 2 top-of-the-line, but similar lenses.
Your thoughts?
Cosina has announced the Voigtlander M 35/2 Apo-Lanthar which should be available some time this month. The price s $1149 U.S. dollars. I use a 50mm Apo-Lanthar on the Sony A7R IV with its 61.2 MP sensor. With the huge image magnification available in this mirrorless camera I am able to nail wide open focus precisely with this manual focus lens. There is no doubt that this lens is one of the “sharpest” I own. Nor is this just my opinion. I have a friend who is pretty high up on the photo ladder. I recently got an email from him asking if I knew anything about the 50mm Apo Lanthar. He had just seen some prints and was blown away. I told him it was my favorite 50, and, since I was an elderly photographer, I remembered how to focus manually. With practice the fingers on my left hand were strengthening. He’s buying the lens. My guess is the 35mm version will be in the same league.
Certainly, the amount of research and development that goes into a lens, especially one that will not have super mass sales, justifiably increases the retail price of a lens like the Apo Summicron. Nor are we talking about two lenses that have established track records. For now, we just guess. But I do wonder about the seven times price difference on 2 top-of-the-line, but similar lenses.
Your thoughts?
kshapero
South Florida Man
CV Lenses are just getting better and better. Some reviews put them ahead of Leica's legendary lenses.
xayraa33
rangefinder user and fancier
It is nice to have exotic high priced lenses available to buy for those who can afford them or got to have them at any cost or sacrifice as much as it is nice to have a choice to buy the latest Rolls Royce or Ferrari or Lamborghini...but for most of us we get along with a used Toyota Corolla or a used Ford F-150 just like we do on common 1950s Leitz or Canon or Nikkor LTM lenses.
No need to spend 8 grand to produce a great photo image and you would be a fool to think that you would with that getup any more than buying a Les Paul Guitar and a 50 watt Marshall tube amp will make you play like mid to late 1960s Eric Clapton.
No need to spend 8 grand to produce a great photo image and you would be a fool to think that you would with that getup any more than buying a Les Paul Guitar and a 50 watt Marshall tube amp will make you play like mid to late 1960s Eric Clapton.
olakiril
Well-known
I wouldn't be able to play like Eric Clapton but I would enjoy playing it as I would enjoy shooting with the leica.
Now as much as any exponentially more expensive extra benefit they bring on the table, I wouldn't call that rational choice by any stretch of my imagination.
JeffS7444
Well-known
Although the 50 Apo-Summicron M appears to be a superb lens per Roger Cicala's bench tests, it's not clear to me that it's optimized for today's digital sensors, whereas the SL lens presumably is. To my untrained eyes, the optical designs of these two Leica lenses appear quite different:
50/2 Apo-Summicron-M specs
50/2 Apo-Summicron-SL specs
What's got me excited about the Voigtlander Apo-Lanthars is having the option of a modern, digital-optimized design in a compact package closer in size and weight to an adapted M lens than an SL lens. For much of what I do, autofocus is optional. Not that there's anything wrong with the A7R4's autofocus, but I'm discovering that my sloppy kinda-sorta autofocus techniques just aren't good enough anymore: Now I need to decide exactly what to focus on.
50/2 Apo-Summicron-M specs
50/2 Apo-Summicron-SL specs
What's got me excited about the Voigtlander Apo-Lanthars is having the option of a modern, digital-optimized design in a compact package closer in size and weight to an adapted M lens than an SL lens. For much of what I do, autofocus is optional. Not that there's anything wrong with the A7R4's autofocus, but I'm discovering that my sloppy kinda-sorta autofocus techniques just aren't good enough anymore: Now I need to decide exactly what to focus on.
Gregm61
Well-known
If I were in the market for a 35mm f2 APO, I'd get the Voigtlander. If I were in the market for a 35mm f2 APO and money was not a factor at all, I'd go for the Leica.
I think the size difference between the two lenses is substantial with the Leica being smaller and there's something extra in the cost for Leica being able to do what they did at that size.
Of course, the Leica name and "APO" is also an obvious part of the price difference too just like any other product in the Leica catalog and anyone even remotely familiar is aware of that.
I think the size difference between the two lenses is substantial with the Leica being smaller and there's something extra in the cost for Leica being able to do what they did at that size.
Of course, the Leica name and "APO" is also an obvious part of the price difference too just like any other product in the Leica catalog and anyone even remotely familiar is aware of that.
zuiko85
Mentor
Ok sure...the Leica is a bit more. But I’ll bet the packaging is like really nice and, there is probably included a red dot on the carton.
Top that.
Honestly, there are quite a few of us for who the Voigtlander price is out of the question. I’m 71, and just bought my third new lens since starting out in photography at 20. It was $107, with tax, and I sweated the decision for 3 or 4 weeks before pulling the trigger. My more usual purchase is a dinged up used optic (bargains to be found if you are careful), or, someone just gave me a lens.
Top that.
Honestly, there are quite a few of us for who the Voigtlander price is out of the question. I’m 71, and just bought my third new lens since starting out in photography at 20. It was $107, with tax, and I sweated the decision for 3 or 4 weeks before pulling the trigger. My more usual purchase is a dinged up used optic (bargains to be found if you are careful), or, someone just gave me a lens.
Ko.Fe.
Lenses 35/21 Gears 46/20
Some footwear made by not doing well labor is x7, x8 more expensive comparing to same quality footwear. The only difference is in marketing investments.
Leica Camera AG optics are overbid by competitors on many fronts now. Not just for the price.
It is hard to tell without image where they are side by side. But CV 35 APO is 304g and Leica 35 APO is 320 g.
Cron reminds me Summarit-M 35, but on steroids. Same tiny front element, filter size within in-proportionally big diameter.
APOL is next to same in diameter and bit longer. And with existence of Seven Tartirans sooner or later CV will realize what hood and adhesive tab as included with lens might be a good thing.
Leica Camera AG optics are overbid by competitors on many fronts now. Not just for the price.
It is hard to tell without image where they are side by side. But CV 35 APO is 304g and Leica 35 APO is 320 g.
Cron reminds me Summarit-M 35, but on steroids. Same tiny front element, filter size within in-proportionally big diameter.
APOL is next to same in diameter and bit longer. And with existence of Seven Tartirans sooner or later CV will realize what hood and adhesive tab as included with lens might be a good thing.
zuiko85
Mentor
Here is something to consider.
That post about the Chinese made 8 element 35mm f2 Summicron copy is up to 4076 comments. Quite a bit more excitement over that lens than over a new Leica lens.
Yeah, I know, this post is a few hours old but cheese man, that count is still amazing.
That post about the Chinese made 8 element 35mm f2 Summicron copy is up to 4076 comments. Quite a bit more excitement over that lens than over a new Leica lens.
Yeah, I know, this post is a few hours old but cheese man, that count is still amazing.
pluton
Well-known
I'll bet that Apo Summicron 35 has really nice image quality on the 24MP Leica M. Also, probably on the new 40MP Leica M also. Those smooth Leica tonal gradations really are something to see.
But the Leica M is primarily intended as a handheld camera, right? Handheld and super high resolution don't exactly go together, IMO. Come to think of it, neither do rangefinder focusing and super high resolution go together.
But the Leica M is primarily intended as a handheld camera, right? Handheld and super high resolution don't exactly go together, IMO. Come to think of it, neither do rangefinder focusing and super high resolution go together.
The secret to handheld high resolution is that you don't have to print large... also, use a high shutter speed and this is mitigated completely.
leicapixie
Well-known
The sad part of high-end lenses is "special" glass used in the elements.
May of us have had to ditch, scrap and sell off lenses that developed severe haze from failing glass, thru use of rare earth elements glass and lubrications..
May of us have had to ditch, scrap and sell off lenses that developed severe haze from failing glass, thru use of rare earth elements glass and lubrications..
Last edited:
Ko.Fe.
Lenses 35/21 Gears 46/20
Think is in my nature. With 35 mm lens and super high resolution all you need is f8 and slide focus tab where you need it.
Dogman
Mentor
Today we have a great choice in outstanding lenses--gigantic and heavy or small and grossly expensive.
It's good to have alternatives. Voigtlander makes good stuff.
It's good to have alternatives. Voigtlander makes good stuff.
raid
Dad Photographer
It seems that the Leica L lenses are the superior lenses, and that cameras such as the Leica SL2 have the capabilities to get most information to the sensor and with L lenses. Such lenses are large and very expensive. Now, Leica is working on extracting most of the qualities of L lenses into "Top" M lenses, such as the 50 APO and 35 APO. As stated above, such lenses are very expensive. If I had been a professional photographer who depends on having top equipment to get the daily work done, I may have been interested in buying L lenses or M APO lenses, but I am taking photos as a hobby. I try to balance my expenses with what is needed to be paid for at home, and having the CV APO lenses in M mount is a way to be able to try out such lenses. I bought a 50mm 2 APO. I use this lens almost each day now. I am glad that CV "is there".
Out to Lunch
Menteur
During my working life, I've met with many professional photographers and none of them used Leica gear. Instead, they all used Nikons and Canons 'to get the job done'. I am now retired and none of the professional photographers I know today use Leica gear, either. Those who do use Leica gear are amateurs and enthusiasts like myself. All of them have a bit of coin on the side to make this possible. Cheers, OtL
Timmyjoe
Mentor
"And the rest of the day to you."
Oh, sorry, thought you said "Top of the Morning."
As far as lenses that cost three times what my first new car cost, got no time for those, putting two kids thru college.
Best,
-Tim
Oh, sorry, thought you said "Top of the Morning."
As far as lenses that cost three times what my first new car cost, got no time for those, putting two kids thru college.
Best,
-Tim
chipgreenberg
Well-known
\\]
Right. And most working photographers I knew, including me in the day did not use the latest most expensive gear to get the job done. Didn't make business sense.
ellisson
Well-known
Most of the well known film photographers who used Leica gear, e.g. at Magnum and elsewhere, did not depend on apochromatic or the aspheric lenses for their work. Their work speaks for itself.
For film shooters and for most users of digital gear who post to internet sites, forums, and make prints no larger than 8x10 or even 16x20 inches (I've done this for my own exhibits, and BTW, people have to stand back to look at 16 x 20 inch prints: they are not pixel peaking!), non-APO, non-aspheric lenses do not significantly limit the ability to make quality images.
IMO, the main area of limitation is in the head of the photographer and the comfort level with the gear they use, real or perceived. Many Leica lenses are objects of art themselves apart from the images they produce.
ellisson
Well-known
Difference in cost: Leica versus CV
Difference in cost: Leica versus CV
Regarding the cost differential between the two 35 APO lenses (and also the Leica 50 APO versus the CV 50 APO), it would be interesting to see the breakdown of production costs including design effort/time, materials (glass elements, lens body composition - mechanical parts and body coverings), overhead for assembly and quality control (maintaining minuscule tolerances), machine operation, maintenance, calibration etc., human labor expenses, packaging, factory operation/overhead, and marketing among other costs. This would be interesting to compare...if it were ever all available.
Difference in cost: Leica versus CV
Regarding the cost differential between the two 35 APO lenses (and also the Leica 50 APO versus the CV 50 APO), it would be interesting to see the breakdown of production costs including design effort/time, materials (glass elements, lens body composition - mechanical parts and body coverings), overhead for assembly and quality control (maintaining minuscule tolerances), machine operation, maintenance, calibration etc., human labor expenses, packaging, factory operation/overhead, and marketing among other costs. This would be interesting to compare...if it were ever all available.