Switch to English Language Passer en langue française Omschakelen naar Nederlandse Taal Wechseln Sie zu deutschen Sprache Passa alla lingua italiana
Members: 70,333   Posts: 1,537,406   Online: 1147
      
Page 1 of 2 12 LastLast
Results 1 to 10 of 20
  1. #1
    Sportera's Avatar
    Join Date
    Dec 2003
    Location
    New Orleans La.
    Shooter
    4x5 Format
    Posts
    933
    Images
    82

    40mm or 35mm that is the question, for me at least.

    I have been wanting a 35mm for my M6 for the longest time. I don't have a lot of cash to spend so price is an object and keeps Leica lenses far from my reach.

    I had made up my mind on the 35mm f2.5 skopar until I ran accross a thread in the range finder forum about the 40mm Nokton.

    I can't seem to make up my mind, do I give up 5mm of focal length to get 1.5 stop more light? or vice versa. What of their optical qualities? Or the ergonomics on an M body?

    Any information would help.

  2. #2
    Sportera's Avatar
    Join Date
    Dec 2003
    Location
    New Orleans La.
    Shooter
    4x5 Format
    Posts
    933
    Images
    82
    BTW my current kit consists of a 21 F4.0, 50 Summicron, 90mm F3.5

  3. #3
    Petzi's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2006
    Location
    Europe
    Shooter
    Med. Format Pan
    Posts
    857
    I would go for the 35mm lens then. 40 is too close to 50, and the 35mm fills the huge gap between 21 and 50 nicely.
    If you're not taking your camera...there's no reason to travel. --APUG member bgilwee

  4. #4
    Jim Jones's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2006
    Location
    Rural NW Missouri
    Shooter
    4x5 Format
    Posts
    1,805
    Quote Originally Posted by Petzi
    I would go for the 35mm lens then. 40 is too close to 50, and the 35mm fills the huge gap between 21 and 50 nicely.
    I agree. 21, 35, 50, and up Leitz M mount lenses have worked well for me for several decades. Only if your style of photography requires very fast lenses is the 40mm better.

  5. #5

    Join Date
    Jan 2004
    Posts
    129
    how about the 35/1.7 ultron?

  6. #6

    Join Date
    Aug 2004
    Location
    Rochester, NY/Toronto, ON
    Shooter
    Multi Format
    Posts
    559
    40mm is not necessarily "too close to 50". It's not just how much field of view you have, it's also perspective and how a lens draws. Three of my fixed lens RFs have 42mm lenses (Oly 35SPs and Oly 35RC), and I find the way they render images significantly different than 50mm.

    35mm is a big change from 50mm, so if a big change is what you're looking for, then it is a good choice. For many years I used a 35mm as my "standard" lens, and I still love how it works for me, even though a 28mm is my current love for semi-wide angle.

    I think it's almost impossible to make a decision without trying them, so I don't know how you'll come to a conclusion. It also depends on the type of photography you do. I guess the question would be why you want a wider lens so badly.
    Honey, I promise no more searching eBay for cameras.

  7. #7
    Uncle Bill's Avatar
    Join Date
    Apr 2005
    Location
    Oakville and Toronto Canada
    Shooter
    Multi Format
    Posts
    1,370
    Images
    308
    I would go for the 40mm lens, I use a Canonet and I love that focal length and would love to get a lens for my Leica. It really depends what you are shooting.

    Bill
    "Life moves pretty fast, if you don't stop and look around once and a while, you might just miss it."
    Ferris Bueller

  8. #8
    narsuitus's Avatar
    Join Date
    Nov 2004
    Shooter
    Multi Format
    Posts
    548
    It really depends on your personal preference and your shooting style.

    For me the choice would be 35mm because of the 28mm, 35mm, 40mm, 45mm, 50mm, and 55mm primes lenses that I use on 35mm cameras, I find myself using the 35mm more than all the others.

  9. #9
    tony lockerbie's Avatar
    Join Date
    Feb 2006
    Location
    Bega N.S.W. Australia
    Shooter
    Multi Format
    Posts
    2,307
    Images
    373
    Yes Sam, I find that a35mm on your rangefinder would be the way to go. If you were going to stump up the money for a nokton I would suggest you get the 35mm Ultron.
    This is the lens that I use most on my Bessa R, the quality is excellent. Of course if you crack that lottery - a 35mm Summilux.....

  10. #10
    gnashings's Avatar
    Join Date
    Apr 2005
    Location
    Oshawa, Ontario, Canada
    Shooter
    Multi Format
    Posts
    1,376
    Images
    17
    This is in the "I thought I read somewhere" category - but, isn't the Nokton optimized for low light, high contrast scenes and at near or wide open? This is a very specific mission statement for a lens and may actually detract from its performance in more general applications. I do agree as a QL17 user that the 40mm is a very nice focal length, all other things aside.

    Peter.

Page 1 of 2 12 LastLast


 

APUG PARTNERS EQUALLY FUNDING OUR COMMUNITY:



Contact Us  |  Support Us!  |  Advertise  |  Site Terms  |  Archive  —   Search  |  Mobile Device Access  |  RSS  |  Facebook  |  Linkedin