My next lens for GXR M mount is..

[Brentliris]

My next lens for GXR M mount is going to be a 50mm F2. It's been a few days of daily research. What I thinking fo getting now is the Zeiss planar F2.

It's fairly well regarded, sharp enough and the bokeh is not to eccentric. I like subject isolation living in a somewhat cluttered city enviroment, it's important to me that I can deal with this.

The voigtlanders and the Jupiter lenses bokeh are somewhat eccentric and therefore I don't think I'd be satisfied with them. The Summicron has the nicest finish and has good bokeh, but they are expensive new and the used ones that are within a reasonable price range seem pretty beaten up, and there's a lack of documentation from the ebay sellers as to what exact version they are selling.

That leaves the Zeis Sonnar 50mm f2, which is plentiful used and seems like a decent performer with acceptable sharpness and bokeh..

Am I missing anything here, are there hidden gems out there that can do better for equal or less money than the Zeiss?

 

[agfa100]

Don't laugh but a Russian Jupiter 8 is a very nice lens and will save you a lot of cash..

Now I must say I have way too many lenses that I use on my GXR. My main lens these days is the Macro-Switar 50mm f1.9, but also includes a 50mm summilux V2, a Hexar 50mm 2.0, a Jupiter 8, a Jupiter 3, and pre-war Fed 50mm 3.5 and a pre-war Fed 50mm 2.0. All have their uses and are great fun, but get which ever lens you want as you will not be happy with anything else.

wbill

 

[ThomasB]

My next lens for GXR M mount is going to be a 50mm F2. It's been a few days of daily research. What I thinking fo getting now is the Zeiss planar F2.

The voigtlanders and the Jupiter lenses bokeh are somewhat eccentric and therefore I don't think I'd be satisfied with them. The Summicron has the nicest finish and has good bokeh, but they are expensive new and the used ones that are within a reasonable price range seem pretty beaten up, and there's a lack of documentation from the ebay sellers as to what exact version they are selling.

Am I missing anything here, are there hidden gems out there that can do better for equal or less money than the Zeiss?

In 50mm I own several different RF lenses but not the Zeiss one. I've bought all of them second hand much below the price of the ZM lens.
I have an old Leitz Summicron F2, a Voigtländer Nokton F1.5 (first M39 version), both Jupiters 3 and 8 and several other Russian slower ones.

In terms of bokeh I would consider the Nokton as best as it's very smooth and soft. The Summicron in comparison appears a bit more nervous. However, there is no sense to argue about bokeh as different folks have different preferences and in the end it's just a matter of taste.

The depth of field at F1.5 is very shallow as can be seen here in this example from my Nokton:



Finally it's almost impossible to go really wrong with 50mm RF lenses as with very few exceptions they are all rather excellent performers. It's more or less all about bokeh, taste and price.

Rgds, Thomas

 

[Brentliris]

Don't laugh but a Russian Jupiter 8 is a very nice lens and will save you a lot of cash..

Now I must say I have way too many lenses that I use on my GXR. My main lens these days is the Macro-Switar 50mm f1.9, but also includes a 50mm summilux V2, a Hexar 50mm 2.0, a Jupiter 8, a Jupiter 3, and pre-war Fed 50mm 3.5 and a pre-war Fed 50mm 2.0. All have their uses and are great fun, but get which ever lens you want as you will not be happy with anything else.

wbill

I guess I shall have to try the Jupiter 8 as it is bargain and can give me a feel for the FOV. I hadn't noticed a Macro-Switar f1.9 so will check that out. I'm just hoping for getting something I be pleased with so I can get on with taking photo's instead of browsing endless lists of lenses on ebay.

 

[Brentliris]

My next lens for GXR M mount is going to be a 50mm F2. It's been a few days of daily research. What I thinking fo getting now is the Zeiss planar F2.

The voigtlanders and the Jupiter lenses bokeh are somewhat eccentric and therefore I don't think I'd be satisfied with them. The Summicron has the nicest finish and has good bokeh, but they are expensive new and the used ones that are within a reasonable price range seem pretty beaten up, and there's a lack of documentation from the ebay sellers as to what exact version they are selling.

Am I missing anything here, are there hidden gems out there that can do better for equal or less money than the Zeiss?

In 50mm I own several different RF lenses but not the Zeiss one. I've bought all of them second hand much below the price of the ZM lens.
I have an old Leitz Summicron F2, a Voigtländer Nokton F1.5 (first M39 version), both Jupiters 3 and 8 and several other Russian slower ones.

In terms of bokeh I would consider the Nokton as best as it's very smooth and soft. The Summicron in comparison appears a bit more nervous. However, there is no sense to argue about bokeh as different folks have different preferences and in the end it's just a matter of taste.

The depth of field at F1.5 is very shallow as can be seen here in this example from my Nokton:



Finally it's almost impossible to go really wrong with 50mm RF lenses as with very few exceptions they are all rather excellent performers. It's more or less all about bokeh, taste and price.

Rgds, Thomas

Thats a picture I'll never tire of, such a scultural quality and silvery glow. That Nokton is a very nice lens for sure. I'm over the nervousness about M39 and can see there are advantages of screwmount lenses. Especielly if I would use and old film body at some point.

Thanks for the info. Thomas



--
Reflections, understandings, discoveries and intimations..

 

[agfa100]

The only problem with the Macro-Switar 50mm 1.9 is the price these days is very high, it has become a collector lens.

Back in the mid to late 80's Leica purchased the company for the binocular's sales. The story was that Kern which was a Swiss optic's co. sold the Swiss govt. all their binocular's which were highly regarded and Leica wanted the sales but the Swiss at that time had a law that they could only purchase from a Swiss based company. So Leica bought the company and stopped the lens production, Kern was mostly known for there cine lenses, they did not make much for 35mm film cameras other then the Macro-Switar for use on the Alpa 35mm cameras.

Also if you find a lens diagram of the Macro Switar and compare it to the new Apo-Summicron they almost look like brothers, Of course the newer Leica lens has new and better glass and coatings, I have been lucky enough to shoot with one as a friend has one.

wbill

 

[ThomasB]

I'm over the nervousness about M39 and can see there are advantages of screwmount lenses. Especielly if I would use and old film body at some point.

As already stated in an earlier post, the M39 versions offer more flexibility and in the end you can always add a cheap M-adapter and leave it on the lens. But there is no way to do it the other way round. Also accessories such as distance rings and bellows are much cheaper in M39. Only my Elmarit 90/2.8 is in M-mount but it has a detachable lens head for macro purposes anyway and at the time of purchase the M39 version was much more expensive.

 

[Brentliris]

I'm over the nervousness about M39 and can see there are advantages of screwmount lenses. Especielly if I would use and old film body at some point.

As already stated in an earlier post, the M39 versions offer more flexibility and in the end you can always add a cheap M-adapter and leave it on the lens. But there is no way to do it the other way round. Also accessories such as distance rings and bellows are much cheaper in M39. Only my Elmarit 90/2.8 is in M-mount but it has a detachable lens head for macro purposes anyway and at the time of purchase the M39 version was much more expensive.

Yes those facts about close focus gear make the M39 option interesting. Also there are a great variety of lenses available for that mount. Also som older cameras to try the lenses on..

 

[Brentliris]

I've read some good things about the Leitz Summicron "Rigid" version. I would feel safer getting a newer lens as a 50 year old lens can be in need of cleaning and lubrication and an added expense can perhaps make matters worse if done incorrectly not to mention the time I'd be waiting for the lens to be ready.

So this leaves me again either with a newer Voigtlander like the Nokton 1.5 m39 version or the Zeiss Sonnar which I've read up on now it has a classic rendering with generally smoother bokeh than the planar.

 

[Harold66]

My next lens for GXR M mount is going to be a 50mm F2. It's been a few days of daily research. What I thinking fo getting now is the Zeiss planar F2.

It's fairly well regarded, sharp enough and the bokeh is not to eccentric. I like subject isolation living in a somewhat cluttered city enviroment, it's important to me that I can deal with this.

That leaves the Zeis Sonnar 50mm f2, which is plentiful used and seems like a decent performer with acceptable sharpness and bokeh..

I am not sure if this is just a typo or if you are a little bit confused about the 50mm Zeiss offering. The 2/50 mm planar is a typical planar design, a very good lens no doubt

the 1.5/50 mm Sonnar ( not a f2.0) is a very different beast, which has been optimized for rendition at the largest apertures. A different design which would be a better choice based on your comment on subject rendition

there was a very good article on the sonnar on TOP ( the online photographer) . Maybe a google search would help

H

 

[Brentliris]

My next lens for GXR M mount is going to be a 50mm F2. It's been a few days of daily research. What I thinking fo getting now is the Zeiss planar F2.

It's fairly well regarded, sharp enough and the bokeh is not to eccentric. I like subject isolation living in a somewhat cluttered city enviroment, it's important to me that I can deal with this.

That leaves the Zeis Sonnar 50mm f2, which is plentiful used and seems like a decent performer with acceptable sharpness and bokeh..

I am not sure if this is just a typo or if you are a little bit confused about the 50mm Zeiss offering. The 2/50 mm planar is a typical planar design, a very good lens no doubt

the 1.5/50 mm Sonnar ( not a f2.0) is a very different beast, which has been optimized for rendition at the largest apertures. A different design which would be a better choice based on your comment on subject rendition

there was a very good article on the sonnar on TOP ( the online photographer) . Maybe a google search would help

H

--
FOLLOW me on IG @haroldglitphotography. one NEW picture EVERY day !
thedemandingtraveler.org
www.haroldglit.com
www.modelmayhem.com/haroldglit
IG :haroldglitphotography

Thanks Harold you are right the sonnar has the more classic rendering and better bokeh. I have gone back and forth on this the last 48 hours, in fact I have an extremely long to do list.

On the other hand this process is a great learning experience too. I like the idea of the Zeiss Sonnar, and Have looked at multiple images with it, I have looked at the planar. And in a way it is so sharp steller, but the bokeh gets a little to nervous for my tastes. So weighing these issues against the prices paid and the ease of use factor. I feel I just don't want to use so much money on either of the Zeiss Lenses .

I just now decided to go with the M39 version Voigtlander Nokton classic 1.5 found it in excellent + shape for a decent price. I'll be able to use it with a macro rings for close focus and it's chrome will match the Voigtlander snapshot colorskopar F4 I have on order(silly reason perhaps). It's bokeh should be almost equal to the Zeiss Sonnar. Later I may choose to look at the Zeiss Planar for it's acuity as a complimentary lens to the Nokton.

--
Reflections, understandings, discoveries and intimations..

 

[ThomasB]

I've read some good things about the Leitz Summicron "Rigid" version. I would feel safer getting a newer lens as a 50 year old lens can be in need of cleaning and lubrication and an added expense can perhaps make matters worse if done incorrectly not to mention the time I'd be waiting for the lens to be ready.

So this leaves me again either with a newer Voigtlander like the Nokton 1.5 m39 version or the Zeiss Sonnar which I've read up on now it has a classic rendering with generally smoother bokeh than the planar.

When buying such old gear a trustworthy vendor is very important. I've therefore bought my old Leitz lenses mostly at the Leicashop.com or comparable vendors. That's maybe not the cheapest option but you get what you've ordered and there is no need to repair the lens in order to make it ready for use.

The Voigtländer Nokton is certainly a good choice. On the other hand the Zeiss Sonnar and the Jupiter-3 are more or less identical. Some of the older Jupiters from the early post war production are even built with original German parts and glass. Sometimes Jupiter-3 lenses are offered with Zeiss name ring engravings via Ebay to get much higher prices. Beware of such fakes or take the Jupiter-3 instead. Bottom line: The Jupiter-3 is the Zeiss Sonnar made in Russia and in the final picture you hardly will be able to see any difference.

 

[Brentliris]

I've read some good things about the Leitz Summicron "Rigid" version. I would feel safer getting a newer lens as a 50 year old lens can be in need of cleaning and lubrication and an added expense can perhaps make matters worse if done incorrectly not to mention the time I'd be waiting for the lens to be ready.

So this leaves me again either with a newer Voigtlander like the Nokton 1.5 m39 version or the Zeiss Sonnar which I've read up on now it has a classic rendering with generally smoother bokeh than the planar.

When buying such old gear a trustworthy vendor is very important. I've therefore bought my old Leitz lenses mostly at the Leicashop.com or comparable vendors. That's maybe not the cheapest option but you get what you've ordered and there is no need to repair the lens in order to make it ready for use.

The Voigtländer Nokton is certainly a good choice. On the other hand the Zeiss Sonnar and the Jupiter-3 are more or less identical. Some of the older Jupiters from the early post war production are even built with original German parts and glass. Sometimes Jupiter-3 lenses are offered with Zeiss name ring engravings via Ebay to get much higher prices. Beware of such fakes or take the Jupiter-3 instead. Bottom line: The Jupiter-3 is the Zeiss Sonnar made in Russia and in the final picture you hardly will be able to see any difference.

 

[ThomasB]

I just now decided to go with the M39 version Voigtlander Nokton classic 1.5 found it in excellent + shape for a decent price.

That's a wise decision. It's most probably the best lens in that price range.



Regards, Thomas

 

[langag]

To digitize 35mm slides: Canon FL 50 3.5 macro, Canon Bellows FL with Canon Slide Duplicator, Canon Lens Mount Converter B, Leitz SM to M adapter, GXR-M with VF-2 flipped up for focusing (FA mode 2 seems best).....