A cheap 35 for my Leica M2

Tōrō

H
Tōrō

  • 0
  • 0
  • 13
Signs & fragments

A
Signs & fragments

  • 4
  • 0
  • 58
Summer corn, summer storm

D
Summer corn, summer storm

  • 2
  • 2
  • 59
Horizon, summer rain

D
Horizon, summer rain

  • 0
  • 0
  • 58

Recent Classifieds

Forum statistics

Threads
198,821
Messages
2,781,357
Members
99,717
Latest member
dryicer
Recent bookmarks
0

Huss

Member
Joined
Feb 11, 2016
Messages
9,058
Location
Hermosa Beach, CA
Format
Multi Format
My 35mm f/1.4 Zeiss Distagon ZM cost less than the $6,000 35mm f/1.4 Leitz Summilux.

For less than $500, the 35mm f/1.4 M-mount 7Artisans is a bargain.

I have the ZM, and hardly use it because it is so long. Takes up about 1/3 of the vf.
 

ericdan

Member
Joined
Feb 28, 2014
Messages
1,359
Location
Tokyo
Format
35mm RF
Biogon 35mm f/2.8 is a great lens.

  • Image quality 2nd to none - can a lens be any sharper?
  • You can shoot this lens straight into the Sun and get no flare
  • The focus knob is for me easier to use than Leica's tab
  • the 43mm filter threads were a bad idea, not a common size
  • the focus throw is much shorter than Leica lenses. Not ideal for zone focusing until you get to f/11 f/16
  • f/22 stop not really useful for me
  • 1/3rd stops are a bad idea for a rangefinder 35mm lens. who actually uses that?
 
Last edited:
Joined
Nov 6, 2009
Messages
168
Location
Florida
Format
35mm
I have that lens and it is super smeary from middle third outwards on film.
Fine if you want that look, but not exactly a versatile, sharp all-rounder.

Also the aperture lever just fell off on mine, never to be found again... Luckily it was not the focus lever, as the aperture ring itself can be turned.

I've never understood the point of the Lomo LC-A lens in Leica M-mount. It retails for $350, but you can buy a whole LC-A camera for only $275 if you want that look on film.
 

drmoss_ca

Subscriber
Joined
Apr 25, 2010
Messages
462
Format
Multi Format
That's the Leica tax; everything costs more because the buyers are perceived as being able to bear it. Of course, the other issue is that Lomo exists to make profit, not to benignly enable film photography for the masses.
 

Huss

Member
Joined
Feb 11, 2016
Messages
9,058
Location
Hermosa Beach, CA
Format
Multi Format
I've never understood the point of the Lomo LC-A lens in Leica M-mount. It retails for $350, but you can buy a whole LC-A camera for only $275 if you want that look on film.

You have much more control using it with a Leica M. With focus (it is RF coupled), and with exposure. It also makes an M camera extremely compact.
So I 'get it', just didn't work out for me.
 

reddesert

Member
Joined
Jul 22, 2019
Messages
2,405
Location
SAZ
Format
Hybrid
I've never understood the point of the Lomo LC-A lens in Leica M-mount. It retails for $350, but you can buy a whole LC-A camera for only $275 if you want that look on film.

I don't have a dog in this argument, but the lens has an M-mount and is rangefinder coupled. Making the lens mount and the rangefinder cam (even if it's only Lomo-precise) in small quantities could easily make the lens more expensive than the LC-A camera. From the consumer's point of view it might not make a lot of sense, but then an LC-A seems a little overpriced to me, too.
 

leicaboss

Member
Joined
Jan 31, 2022
Messages
21
Location
California
Format
Multi Format
Although I was fortunate to have started my M journey with a Leica lens, I did enjoy my first encounter with the 35mm focal length on a Voigtlander Nokton 1.4 - SC if I'm not mistaken. It provided fairly great results for my needs and the lens was small - but my particular copy (a used one) had a really nasty tight/heavy focus throw. Later CV lenses I have tried have not been that way, but YMMV. Have you considered the CL/CLE 40mm?
 
Joined
Nov 6, 2009
Messages
168
Location
Florida
Format
35mm
I don't have a dog in this argument, but the lens has an M-mount and is rangefinder coupled. Making the lens mount and the rangefinder cam (even if it's only Lomo-precise) in small quantities could easily make the lens more expensive than the LC-A camera. From the consumer's point of view it might not make a lot of sense, but then an LC-A seems a little overpriced to me, too.

I didn't mean to start an argument. It's just always seemed like either just buying an LC-A camera or buying a Color Skopar (or, say, an LTM Canon or Nikon lens) for only a little more than the LC-A M-mount lens would make more sense. But I've never shot one so what the hell do I know. If someone else likes it, more power to them.
 

Huss

Member
Joined
Feb 11, 2016
Messages
9,058
Location
Hermosa Beach, CA
Format
Multi Format
I didn't mean to start an argument. It's just always seemed like either just buying an LC-A camera or buying a Color Skopar (or, say, an LTM Canon or Nikon lens) for only a little more than the LC-A M-mount lens would make more sense. But I've never shot one so what the hell do I know. If someone else likes it, more power to them.

The 7Artisans 35mm f2 is a very good cheap option. I got great results from mine and they go for about $200 used.
 
Photrio.com contains affiliate links to products. We may receive a commission for purchases made through these links.
To read our full affiliate disclosure statement please click Here.

PHOTRIO PARTNERS EQUALLY FUNDING OUR COMMUNITY:



Ilford ADOX Freestyle Photographic Stearman Press Weldon Color Lab Blue Moon Camera & Machine
Top Bottom