rollei sonnar 40mm hft vs c summicron 40mm

greem · Joined: 04 Feb 2013 Posts: 18

Anyone can compare the two?
I can't seem to get enough info on the sonnar.
Is it a zeiss lens? Is it as sharp as the summicron, or perhaps a bit more like the pictures on the net insinuate?

scsambrook · Expire: 2011-11-18

It seems to be a bit of a 'mystery' lens. Some writers on other forums insist it was made by Cosina, others that it is indeed a Zeiss Germany product. One suggestion is that it's optically the same as the 40mm f2.8 used on the Rollei 35S. Whatever the truth, it's certainly not often found and is therefore likely to be expensive there days.

I wouldn't be inclined to rely on what you see in internet pictures, especially scans from film images. They are far from reliable indicators of how good a lens might be. But even if you can buy one for the same price as a 40mm Summicron, the latter is probably a more useful lens given its extra speed.

One other possibility for using on the CL is the current Voigtlander 40mm f1.4, although maybe you've thought about that already. It gets varied reports but the grudging consensus from the diehard LeicaFans is that it's actually an excellent lens and amazingly good value for money. I've never been able to try one, so I've no first-hand experience to help you Sad

By the way, did you sort out the infinity-focus issue with the CL that you mentioned in earlier posts?

ForenSeil · Joined: 15 Apr 2011 Posts: 2726 Location: Kiel, Germany.

Summicron-C 40/2 is better than CV 40/1.4 but I have absolutely no clue about the Sonnar
If you can get the Sonnar for a low price, I would try it!

greem · Joined: 04 Feb 2013 Posts: 18

Hi Stephen.
regarding the summar and CL.
When I tried to focus the summar on the E-P1, it focused exactly like the CL, meaning right before the notch got to the infinity lock position. On the Leica IIIa the summar focuses at ilp. Therefore I may have to conclude that the shorter rf base length og the CL compared to the IIIa is responsible for the different focus position. The E-P1 lengths almost like a CL, although not an rf.
I may again be wrong. I won't know till I mount a proper M mount lens on the CL, shoot some film, and have it developed.
What do you think now?

With regards to the rollei sonnar:
The summicron seemd to have a "zeiss mojo", sharp and contrasty. The 35mm 2.8 biogon is more contrasty than the summicron.
From my looking at scanned internet pictures I'd say Leica gives out more light and dark grey variation , rollei more variation between dark grey tones, and some zeiss accentuate tonal contrasts between light and dark tones. But like you say, a printed image form a darkroom may differ from a scanned one. The question is are they so different so that the eye is fooled when looking at the internet?