Switch to English Language Passer en langue française Omschakelen naar Nederlandse Taal Wechseln Sie zu deutschen Sprache Passa alla lingua italiana
Members: 71,930   Posts: 1,585,404   Online: 1000
      
Page 4 of 4 FirstFirst 1234
Results 31 to 40 of 40
  1. #31

    Join Date
    May 2008
    Shooter
    35mm
    Posts
    47
    To answer your question directly, I would have a hard time deciding between the Summicron DR 50/2 and the Canon 35/2. There is one for sale on eBay now from a reputable seller. This lens will probably sell for $350-$400

    If I had $500 though, I'd spend it on the following 3 lens set: The CV 25/4 could be found for $250. The Canon 50/1.8 can be bought for $150. Which leaves you $100 to buy a portrait length lens. Actually, I have a very capable Komura 105/3.5 for sale on eBay myself for $100.

  2. #32

    Join Date
    Sep 2006
    Location
    UK
    Shooter
    35mm RF
    Posts
    3,557
    I use both the Canons, 5cm f/1.8 and 3.5cm f/2, on M bodies with adopters, try and get a type II 35mm f/2, i.e. late high serial number, and you need to get 2x canon 40mm UV filters and series hoods as well.

    They are cheap but medium to high in contrast, prefer then to the leitz contentomparies.

    The CV 40mm f1.4 is another option, filters and hoods are simpler and you have only one lens, i.e. no swapping.

    Noel

  3. #33

    Join Date
    Apr 2009
    Location
    Los Angeles, CA., U.S.A.
    Shooter
    Multi Format
    Posts
    228

    Voigtlander Bessa L with a 12 mm f 5.6 lens, in Black.

    I had the complete Minolta CLE, 3 lens kit made by Leica in the m mount, ( the Leica 28 mm f 2.8 Elmarit the Leica 40 mm f 2.0 Summicron & the 90 mm f 2.8 Tele-Elmarit ) & the stupid little flash.

    I traded the whole set for a Black Contax G2 with the 4 A.F. lens set, ( the 21 mm f 2.8 Biogon, the 28 mm f 2.8 Biogon, the 45 mm f 2.0 Planar & the 90 mm f 2.8 Sonnar ) & the stupid little flash. Never regretted it, for a second.

    But since the 16 mm f 8.0 was out of the question,
    I got a Voigtlander Bessa L with a 12 mm f 5.6 lens, in Black.
    I'm currently looking for a Black 15 mm f 4.5 to round out this kit.

    So the answer is a Voigtlander Bessa L with a 12 mm f 5.6 lens, in Black.

  4. #34
    narsuitus's Avatar
    Join Date
    Nov 2004
    Shooter
    Multi Format
    Posts
    575
    “because if budget restraints you could only afford one RF lens $500.00 or less what would it be?”

    Due to budget restraints after purchasing a Leica MP and a Leica 90mm f/2 lens, I would purchase a Voigtlander Nokton 35mm f/1.4.

  5. #35
    3 Olives's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jul 2007
    Location
    Charlotte
    Shooter
    35mm
    Posts
    156
    I could be wrong, but it will depend on which body you have and if you want to use a finder. I'd stick with a 50mm for the older Leicas.

  6. #36
    Chaplain Jeff's Avatar
    Join Date
    Mar 2008
    Location
    Norfolk, VA
    Shooter
    35mm RF
    Posts
    172
    Mine was the Summicron DR 50mm, f/2. That's what I paid for it. The goggles were an extra $150.
    Jeff M


    M3, M5, CLE, Minolta XE7, Minolta Maxxum 9, Minolta Maxxum 9000, Nikon F3HP, etc., etc.

  7. #37

    Join Date
    Nov 2008
    Location
    Essex, UK.
    Shooter
    Multi Format
    Posts
    478
    Images
    8
    I had an M6 and my first lens was a Canadian-made Summicrom-M 35m/f2. It might be possible to get a version within budget but they're commanding a bloated price (probably due to the relative weakness of £ sterling right now).

    I supplemented this with a CV 28mm/f1.9 and CV 75mm/f2.8 but 90% of my shots were taken using the 35mm as it is just so versatile, razor-sharp, quick and distortion-free.
    Paul Jenkin (a late developer...)

  8. #38

    Join Date
    Jan 2008
    Shooter
    35mm RF
    Posts
    17
    "Rigid" Summicron. It's the same optical cell as the Dual-Range, it's 50mm, lighter and cheaper than the DR. Great Leica optic. I'm assuming a Leica M camera. In screw mount, I'd get a newer ('50s) Elmar 3.5. The lens that made Leica famous.
    Vic

  9. #39
    thomasw_'s Avatar
    Join Date
    Oct 2007
    Location
    Fort Langley, BC, Canada
    Shooter
    Multi Format
    Posts
    42
    A Leica M-mount lens for $500 or less?

    1. Well if it must be a Leica, then you are mostly going to be looking at older Leica lenses for $500 or less.

    All of the following can be found in perfectly fine user condition in your price range.

    -50/2,8 Elmar
    -50/3,5 Elmar
    -50/2 Summicron Collapsible
    -50/2 Summitar
    -50/1,5 Summarit --> beautiful rendering but buy only if it has no scratches/haze

    2. Non-Leica M mount lenses:>

    -Used ZM 50/2 Planar
    -CV 50/1,5 in LTM
    -CV 50/2 50/3,5
    -Canon 50/1,4 LTM ---> excellent all-round lens
    -Hexanon M- mount 50/2 --> superb lens, but might be just above 500$
    "A great civilization is not conquered from without until it has destroyed itself from within." W. Durant

    flickr

  10. #40

    Join Date
    Mar 2008
    Location
    London, UK
    Shooter
    Medium Format
    Posts
    42
    You might also consider a 35/2.8 Summaron. The one for the M3 (which I have) has the infamous goggles...which add a bit of weight, but look wicked cool. The M2 version lacks the goggles, as the viewfinder of that camera (and succeeding) had the 35 framelines.

    The goggled version is a little cheaper, as it is somewhat more awkward to use. It can be employed on any M camera, though.

    And mine is sharp. Amazingly so. You can probably find the goggled version for not much more than $300 if you look around, and the later, goggle-less version for maybe a couple of hundred more.

Page 4 of 4 FirstFirst 1234


 

APUG PARTNERS EQUALLY FUNDING OUR COMMUNITY:



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