.... how does this lens compare to the Summicron 40 mm for the LEICA CL?

Did anyone compare it to the M-Summicron 35 mm from the 70ies?

CouldnŽt find anything on this on the E. P. sites. IŽam interested in a smaller lens for my M- Leica than my 35 mm Summilux asph. IŽam offered the Minolta lens for half the price I normally see for a Summicron 40 mm. Is the ROKKOR a lens you should go for when you really want to have a compact LEICA M outfit?

Thank you for your answers in advance.

Best wishes

K. G. Wolf

-- K. G. Wolf (k.g.wolf@web.de), November 08, 2001

Answers

The ROKKOR is exactly the same lens as the 40 cron, only with better coating and of course, different brand. I don't own the lens, but have read many times, that this lens is comparable with the pre-ASPH 35 crons. If the price is good and you don't mind the brand, I'd say grab it!

Cheers

-- joel (joel_low@pacific.net.sg), November 08, 2001.

I have the later, CLE 40mm Rokkor, and to me it is as good of a lens as you could possibly ask for. I shot a roll comparing it even to the new 35 aspherical, and I doubt anyone could tell which shots were done with the Rokkor, except maybe the ones shot wide open. It has no noticeable distortion, great color reproduction, high resolution, good contrast, and is very flare resistant. All that in a tiny package-a superb lens.

-- Andrew Schank (aschank@flash.net), November 08, 2001.

I heartily concur w/Andrew Schank's praise for the 40mm M-Rokkor for the CLE, which is a multi-coated improved version of the 1 made for the CL (see Stephen Gandy's discussion @ http://cameraquest.com/c le.htm. I particularly like to use it on my M3, using the entire viewfinder as an approximate field of view. A truly excellent lens.

-- Chris Chen (furcafe@crisNOSPAM.com), November 08, 2001.

Hallo Joel, hallo Andrew, hallo Chris,

thank you for responding to my queery.

I got the ROKKOR-lens this morning and IŽam still on the first film with it. Opticially the thing looks very good, very clean glass but the mechanics are a bit (just a bit) more wobbly than the ones of my Summilux.

WonŽt do any harm, I guess.

The bigger issue now is: how do I frame properly? With the lens applied the 50mm frame comes up, would have prefered the 35 mm.

Best wishes and good shooting.

K. G. Wolf

-- K. G. Wolf (k.g.wolf@web.de), November 09, 2001.

There is a way to make he 35 lines come up, but it means permanantly modifying the lens. Make sure you are happy with it first. I just shoot a bit "wide" on the 50 lines and have had no problem framing the 40. At infinity, the 50 lines show closer to what a 40mm lens sees anyway.

-- Andrew Schank (aschank@flash.net), November 09, 2001.

Ditto on what Andrew says. On my M2, I think I prefer having the 50mm frame come up & end up getting a shot that's too wide rather than relying on the 35mm frame & having something critical cut off.

-- Chris Chen (furcafe@NOSPAMcris.com), November 09, 2001.

Thanks once more for contributing your posts to the viwefinder question.

Will try this out and stick to the 50 mm technique shooting wider.

Can hardly wait to see my first negs coming back.

Best wisches and good shooting

-- K. G. Wolf (k.g.wolf@web.de), November 09, 2001.

Final contribution to the vf- question:

Tried out a (very) old accessory finder just now, a VIDOM. I set the frameselector between the 50 and the 35 mm markings and found this is a good way to get used to the new imagesize. Perhaps I can do without the finder later, but for the time being ...

Best wishes

-- K. G. Wolf (k.g.wolf@web.de), November 09, 2001.