Does anyone have experience with both the Minolta 28mm CLE lens and the new Voigtlander 28mm f/1.9? I'm looking for a lower cost 28 to augment my 3E. Or are there any bargin Leica 28s which are worth the extra over either of these two lenses.

-- mark (mramra@qwest.net), July 14, 2001

Answers

I'm curious as to why you would want another 28mm in addition to the Tri-Elmar, especially the Minolta which is a 2.8 lens and only 1 stop faster than the 3E? The 28 end of the 3E is much better than any Leica 28 except the last 2 versions of the Elmarit and the latest Summicron ASPH, and compared at f/5.6 I doubt there is any difference there, either. The 3E handily outclasses the CLE 28. I have no experience with the "Voigtlander" Cosina 28/1.9 but there the question is how much of the potential optical capability will be actually be preserved all the way through the assembly tolerances, and how the build-quality of the lens will hold up with contintual use. I'll admit the Cosina lenses are priced such that they're very tempting. I've got the 15 and I briefly had a 75 and they're nice, at least when they're spankin' new. I carry a 35/1.4ASPH with my 3E-- ok, there we're talking 3 stops advantage, *stunning* performance at all apertures and distances, and a focal-length smack in the middle of the 3E's range. Or, consider a 21mm, which would increase your focal-length range.

-- Jay (infinitydt@aol.com), July 14, 2001.

I used for only some shoots the Minolta 28mm CLE. It is not a Leica quality lens. If you don’t have second body stay with the 3E.

Street Photography by Dimitris Kioseoglou

-- Dimitris Kioseoglou (kosefoto@otenet.gr), July 14, 2001.

The new Voigtlander 28 is probably worth looking into if you wanted a fast wide angle. There is more info on it a few dozen threads down. I am still waiting for someone here to pick one up and review it for us. I checked out the Konica 28mm M lens and it seems well made and is fairly compact. I shot some test shots with it comparing it to my Voigtlander 25mm and will have the film back in a few days. The tests I've seen of the Konica lens put it slightly better than the current Leica lens, and it is about 1/2 the cost.

-- Andrew Schank (aschank@flash.net), July 14, 2001.

Yes, the 3E is a magnificent lens, just a tad slow. There are times I am nervous about taking an expensive lens and go out with a CL and a definite user lens. I was just looking for something in the 28mm range that I wouldn't worry about too much.

-- mark (mramra@qwest.net), July 15, 2001.

Andrew

I'm eager to know your judgement on the Konica lens. It has brilliant reviews and looks quite compact and sturdy. I opted for a test ride on the Voigtländer and am awaiting to get one these days. (There seems to have been a supply shortage over here in Europe...) Will let you know about my first impressions as soon as possible.

Cheers

-- Lutz Konermann (lutz@konermann.net), July 15, 2001.

Just got back a few shots I took with a borrowed Konica 28mm. This isn't a very scientific test--I just wanted to shoot a few indoor low light shots and some outside in overcast morning light and compare them to the same shots taken with the Voigtlander 25mm I currently own.

First of all, the finish and feel of the Konica lens is very nice-at least as good as the current Leica lenses I own. Infinity lines up correctly in the finder image, and there was zero play in the mount.

The stuff shot indoors with the Konica lens was noticeably sharper than those taken with the 25mm Voigtlander lens. At 15 X magnification, I could read much more detail on the film boxes on display in the camera store where I borrowed the lens from.

The outside shots also seem to have better snap to them on the Konica, but the difference was not as great at f8 as it was at f4.0. There still was a noticeably nicer look to the images with the Konica, even the ones outside at mid appertures. Of course the Voigtlander doesn't have a f2.8 and is also scale focused as opposed to being rangefinder couples. Distortion and corner fall off were not readily noticeable to me with either lens. The fact that the Konica lens uses a standard Leica size 46mm filter size is a nice point. Without its hood, there was little intrusion into the finder on my CLE. I didn't have access to the hood to check it out with the hood in place. By the way, it brings up the 90 lines on the CLE as well as the 28 lines, which are always present. Anyone interested in the Konica 28 will likely be happy with its performance, even based on my not to comprehensive testing.

I want to also get a hold of the new Voiglander 28mm f1.9 and do some shooting with it as well. If the Voiglander isn't too much larger than the Konica and gives good center sharpness wide open, it could be a very useful lens to own. The 28 f1.9 Voigtlander is priced lower than the Konica as well.

-- Andrew Schank (aschank@flash.net), July 16, 2001.

Mark, get the Voigtlander 28/f1.9 and rejoice. I have 2 CLEs and the Voigtlander 28mm. It sits nicely on the CLE. The hood protrudes but not too badly. It's the fastest 28mm lens ever made. I shot a whole series of pix at a conference in Naples, Italy. Wide open the results are as crisp as my Summicron 50/f2. It is the first non-Leica lens that I have used that, so help me, gives that Leica extra something. The other nice thing is that the price is right. The Minolta CLE 28/ f2.8 is over-priced as an antique. Some have trouble with spotting (multicoating flaws). Also its cam makes it impossible to use on Leica M-4Ps and M-6s without a 28mm auxiliary finder. (The cam brings up the 35-135 frames on these Leicas.) With the Voigtlander, which is Leica thread, you can change M adaptors (28-90, 35-135). I just use the 28-90, which gives me the Leica look in my CLE (bringing up the 90mm frame). With the 35-135 adaptor the 90mm frame disappears. Elegant, but I hate changing adapters all the time.

Should mention that I used the very compact but slow Minolta limited edition 28/f3.5 for a couple of years. It's light and beautitfully made. The protuding rear element is a drag if you are using it with M mount adapters. I had to made my own extended rear caps using old Minolta rear caps and filter cases (a long story).

I've also used a c. 1972 Elmarit 28/f2.8. with the CLE. The hood protrudes but not that hideously. It balances well. But it is heavy. The Voigtlander is marigally lighter and a little over 1 stop faster.

The New Tri-Elmar with its complex dept of field markings seems really cool. I'm tempted to get one myself. But I do understand why you'd want to augment it with a prime 28mm lens. Speed. Weight.

Anyway, my susggestion is to get the Voigtlander 28/f1.9. It's about the same price as the Minolta CLE 28/f2.8 (or cheaper), more versatile, optically superior, and faster.

-- Alex Shishin (shishin@pp.iij4u.or.jp), July 21, 2001.