Archived posting to the Leica Users Group, 2010/02/26
[Author Prev] [Author Next] [Thread Prev] [Thread Next] [Author Index] [Topic Index] [Home] [Search]It is a very good lens but I don't have any sample pictures I can put my hand on at the moment. I don't think you would be disappointed. My feelings are that Zeiss has never really produced a bad lens, and the recent M-mount lenses are all very high quality. There are some focusing isuues with the 50/1.5 Sonnar, but the others are very high quality. And there isn't much out there to compete with it now that Konica is not longer in business and producing the 35/2 Hexanon. The 35/2.5 M Skopar (Voigtlander) is "nice" and the 35/1.7 Ultron (Voigtlander) is better, but the Zeiss is better in build quality than the 35/1.7. My gut feeling is that they rank in this order: 35/2 Summicron (tops) 35/2 Biogon and 35/2 Hexaonon - tied 35/1.7 Ultron 35/2.5 Skopar And if you want to play with fire, 35/1.2 Nokton (it's big, it's heavy, and it can be finicky, but it's fast!) Jeffery On Feb 26, 2010, at 10:59 PM, Wendy Thurman wrote: > I'm not necessarily in the lens market; I feel I should stick with the 50 > lux I have as I learn the Leica system. One of these days I'll want/need a > wider lens. While of course a Leica 35 cron is, well, a Leica, I would > appreciate opinions or experiences any of you may have with this lens. > It's > affordably priced and appears to be generally well-regarded. > > Thanks, > > Wendy > > _______________________________________________ > Leica Users Group. > See http://leica-users.org/mailman/listinfo/lug for more information