35mm Lens for M6....Budget that is.

Discussion in 'Rangefinder Forum' started by Sportera, Feb 25, 2006.

  1. Sportera

    Sportera Member

    Messages:
    933
    Joined:
    Dec 16, 2003
    Location:
    New Orleans
    Shooter:
    4x5 Format
    I am in the market for a 35mm for my M6ttl. I don't have a lot of money to spend on this, I would have to give up something to get a summcron. I have already a CV 21, 90 APO Lanthar, and a Summicron 50mm latest version. My favorite of the trio is a 50mm but sometimes I would like a wider view, but not quite 21mm wide.

    These are my choices as far as I know
    35mm Summaron (hard to find a good example, but I do like vintage glass)
    35mm CV Pancake II F2.5 (almost too small for my liking)
    35mm CV Ultron f1.7 (Fast, most expensive)

    I know of Canon and Nikon SM lenses but they are hard to find.

    Any advice would be appreciated, and if you have or know of one of the above for sale please let me know.
     
  2. Gordon Coale

    Gordon Coale Advertiser

    Messages:
    45
    Joined:
    Jan 2, 2005
    Location:
    Whidbey Isla
    Shooter:
    Multi Format
    There is always the Jupiter 12 35/2.8 in LTM from the former Soviet Union. They can be had for under $50. It's a copy of the pre-war Carl Zeiss Biogon 3.5cm f/2.8 for the Contax.
     
  3. df cardwell

    df cardwell Subscriber

    Messages:
    3,341
    Joined:
    Jul 16, 2005
    Location:
    Dearborn,Mic
    Shooter:
    Multi Format
    A '78 Summicron is a great choice.

    A Summaron is a very good lens,indeed.

    As for Jupiters: please see the article at Apugger Dante Stella's site: http://www.dantestella.com/technical/compat.html

    The whole Jupiter / LTM problem seems to boil down to ( simply ) there were different specs for Soviet LTM cameras than for Leicas

    My own experience with Jupiters (very good) is on SLRs and Contax/Kiev rfdrs, where the LTM problems don't exist.

    I'd go for one of the CV lenses, and get shooting.
    They are excellent lenses, and a great value.



    When things settle, and you're really flush, snag one of those 35/1.4 ASPH s... in the meantime make some great pictures with the CV..

    good luck

    don
     
    Last edited by a moderator: Feb 25, 2006
  4. srs5694

    srs5694 Member

    Messages:
    2,725
    Joined:
    May 18, 2005
    Location:
    Woonsocket,
    Shooter:
    35mm
    You might want to check out Karen Nakamura's equipment page. In particular, she's got a page devoted to wide angle LSM lenses. She likes the Jupiter 12 that Gordon mentions, but with some rather important caveats. (A tip: A Kodak plastic film can, cut to be a bit shorter, makes a good rear lens cap for the Jupiter-12. Other brands of film can aren't quite the right diameter.) I've got a Jupiter 12 but I seldom use it because I change lenses frequently, and that's awkward with a rangefinder, so I end up using SLRs more often than my two FEDs. I haven't used the Jupiter 12 often enough to really evaluate it properly, but my initial impression is positive. OTOH, I've got FEDs, so I don't have the problems that are mentioned on the page I referenced.
     
  5. Lee Shively

    Lee Shively Member

    Messages:
    1,325
    Joined:
    Apr 4, 2004
    Location:
    Louisiana, U
    Shooter:
    Multi Format
    The CV 35/2.5 Color Skopar "Classic" is nice. It's the same size as the CV 21mm...takes 39mm filters...has the useless lens hood. It's pretty close to the 35mm Summicron in performance. I like the one I have enough to keep it even though I eventually bought the Summicron.
     
  6. Biogon Bill

    Biogon Bill Member

    Messages:
    92
    Joined:
    Nov 27, 2004
    Shooter:
    35mm
    I don't know what your definition of "budget" is. It might be helpful if you post a price range.

    If you were able to afford the latest version of a 50 Summicron, you can afford the Zeiss ZM 35/2 Biogon. I bought one used for the same price I paid for my 50 Summicron (latest version) on eBay - or about half what you'd pasy for a used 35 Summicron, 4th version, or 1/3 the price of a used 35 ASPH. The grey market price of the Biogon is about the same as what a used 50 Summicron (latest version) costs from a dealer.

    Good luck,
    Bill
     
  7. mikeg

    mikeg Member

    Messages:
    570
    Joined:
    Apr 16, 2003
    Location:
    Shropshire,
    Shooter:
    35mm RF
    Another vote for the CV 35mm f/2.5 Classic. It handles very well with a little knob for focussing. I found the Pancake version too small. It's light and razer sharp. OK the lens hood is a bit small but I've had very few problems with flare. I bought mine on ebay for 120 pounds (~ US$210). It's my favourite lens.

    Mike
     
  8. Stephanie Brim

    Stephanie Brim Member

    Messages:
    1,607
    Joined:
    Jul 28, 2005
    Location:
    Iowa
    Shooter:
    Multi Format
    I have a J-12 that I'm using on a Canon P. I love it. It's been adapted to the camera, though, by someone who does such things.
     
  9. laptoprob

    laptoprob Member

    Messages:
    5
    Joined:
    Jan 9, 2006
    Shooter:
    35mm RF
    classics?

    I too can reccommend the 35/2,5 CV. Better OOF than the Rokkor 40 and about equally sharp. Very contrasty though.
    If you consider the Canon wideangles, they are terriffic. Sharp enough and lower contrast. I am a 50's glass user. I sold the CV for that.

    How fast do you need it?

    Up to you...
     
  10. petebown

    petebown Member

    Messages:
    20
    Joined:
    Feb 15, 2005
    Location:
    The Cotswold
    Shooter:
    35mm RF
    I've used both the CV 35mm f2.5 (the non-pancake version) and the CV 35mm f1.7 and briefly owned both lenses at the same time. Therefore, I was able to carry out a comparison test of my own. I put some of the shots from my test on my gallery for RFF some months ago. The link is given below.

    Nothing much to choose between them. The OOF (bokeh) effect is slightly better on the f1.7. The f1.7 would also be more suitable if you are likely to use the lens for portraiture photos at or near maximum aperture.

    The f2.5 lens is half the size and weight of the f1.7 and also has a minimum aperture of f22. The f1.7 lens only goes down to f16. For image quality at mid aperture, I would say the f2.5 has the edge.

    In case you wanted to know... I sold my f2.5 and kept the f1.7. The reasons are the f1.7 OOF effect is much nicer and its easier to focus.

    There is a good lens test report here
    http://www.luminous-landscape.com/reviews/lenses/rd-1-lens.shtml
    It is intended for Epson RD-1 users, but is quite useful to us 35mm ludites.
     
  11. MMfoto

    MMfoto Member

    Messages:
    415
    Joined:
    Sep 11, 2004
    Shooter:
    35mm
    I would go for a 35mm Summaron, or a budget Summicron like the one DF mentioned-2nd version??

    Personally I would steer you far away from 3rd party lenses for your new M. Not to say many of them aren't superb, but that can be a long road that usually leads you back to Leica glass which can often be had for what is ultimately not that much more money, and a whole lot less hassle. Find a good user Summaron and you'll sleep better at night.
     
  12. Magnus

    Magnus Member

    Messages:
    58
    Joined:
    May 8, 2005
    Location:
    Munich, Germ
    Shooter:
    Multi Format
    as mentioned the VC are good lenses, personally I used the 35 ultron for about a year on my M6... excellent quality I must say and unless you judge every picture with a 10x loupe I think it will serve you well.

    It also depends a lot on your style of photography, I like OOF/Bokeh or whatever it's called, in this area the Ultron is rahter harsh (personal) and during the year of use I found myself shooring more and more a open apperatures and appreciating the OOF area as a counterpart to the actual image. I tested the 35mm asph summicron and the CZ 35mm 2.0 both for a couple of days and found that the Carl Zeiss meets my expectations so I bought that one and am pleased with it.