I think I want a 35mm lens for my Canon VT. I currently have a Canon 50/1.8 and a Voigtlander 15/4.5. The Canon lens is nice and fast, but sometimes a hair too long. I think a 35 would be about right. However, which 35 to get? There's the VT 35/2.5 Color Skopar, which is inexpensive and compact. Or the VT 35/1.7, which is nice and fast, sharp, but heavy (though probably about the same as the Canon 50 I have). Of course there are various Canon 35s, but they tend to be a bit pricey or in rough shape or both.
I'm leaning heavily toward the Color Skopar due to price and size, but wonder if I should be giving more consideration to the other options.
As for what kind of shooter I am, I do a bit of everything, mostly targets of opportunity while engaged in other activities.
Chris
I like that description:”mostly targets of opportunity.”
As for your choice of 35mm lenses, I have no suggestions. I would just get what feels comfortable. I usually go for the smallest for use on a rf camera.
I have the Nikkor 35mm f 2.5 in S mount and it was made in l-39 too. I have always been very happy with mine. I also have the 25mm Voigtlander and it is very good. If the 35mm is as good you will be happy. Some of that Canon RF glass was first class. I had some years ago.
The Canon 35mm f2 is excellent, I have one and it is up to modern standards. It would pair well with your canon 50mm in rendering style.
I had a Voigtlander 35mm f1.7 and it was a very good lens, but most of them today have haze in them that has damaged inner elements because of the lubricants the manufacturer used. I would not buy one today.
The Voigtlander Color-Skopar is very sharp and inexpensive, but its rendering is harsh, a lot of contrast. I had one of them, too...and I sold it.
I've been happy with the color skopar. You might consider that 40mm f2.8 Heliar. It's not 35, but sortof close. Rangefinder framing isn't super precise.
I had a 35mm f3.5 Summaron once that imaged just like the 50 Summicron. The pics had a nice, old timey Leica look, and it could make 3-D images at times. It always imaged like a Leica lens though, and that's what I liked about it. Plus, it was tiny.
It's a relatively inexpensive lens for a Leica. $300 should get you a clean one.
If your 50mm is only sometimes a hair too long, you are going to find a 35mm a big jump. Also, if your shooting is opportunistic, you are presumably not looking to keep changing lenses? For both reasons, 40mm is very much worth considering.
Get pancake version of voigtlander, very short travel, you don't need more precision for 35mm f2.5 lens, f stop ring is large and comfy
Q: Which 35mm FL LTM lens? A: All of them, Katie. It almost doesn't matter. The best 35mm LTM lens I have is an old f/4.5 Xenar that came in a box of junk, it doesn't couple to the RF so it must have been somebody's pet modification project. I would not have known to search for it. Serendipity and trying new stuff are always your friend, if not your wallet's.
I use all Nikkors on my Canon VI.
We use cookies and similar technologies for the following purposes:
Do you accept cookies and these technologies?
We use cookies and similar technologies for the following purposes:
Do you accept cookies and these technologies?