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.
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.
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.
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.
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?
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.
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.