Jerome Neauport , Mar 07, 2004; 02:07 p.m.
Could someone tell me if the build quality of those two lenses in
Black are close to the actual VC 28/3.5 or standard as the 35/2.5
classic ?
Thanks in advance
JN
Sam . , Mar 07, 2004; 02:48 p.m.
I have both the 21/4 and the 35/2.5 classic. The two are nearly impossible to tell apart without looking for the rather prominent "21" or "35" on the barrel. Not sure what you mean with regard to "the actual... or standard..." but I can tell you that the build quality of the two lenses I have is nearly identical. If you intend to use it to shoot, then go out and buy it... if your intent is to stare at it dreamily and adore it, then you may be in for a let-down (or maybe not if your a VC fan ;>P).
Jerome Neauport , Mar 07, 2004; 02:55 p.m.
Thanck for your answer Sam. In fact, I ve been using both a 50/2.5 and a 35/2.5 from VC, and I found the build quality of the 35 lower than the 50/2.5 one. Since I'm thincking of buying a 21 or a 25, I was wondering if it was similar to the 35/2.5 or the 50/2.5 (or the 28/3.5)
JN
Leslie Cheung 
, Mar 07, 2004; 03:21 p.m.
generally, the later lenses are built better. the 50 2.5, 35 1.2, 28
3.5 etc...
Leslie Cheung , Mar 07, 2004; 03:23 p.m.
the 25mm is clicked stop and non rf coupled for your info.
Sam . , Mar 07, 2004; 03:31 p.m.
According to Steve Gandy's site, http://www.cameraquest.com/, the 21, 25, and 35 classic are all built on the same lens barrel. I would expect build quality to be the same on all of these lenses - in my experience the build quality has been satisfactory, just not in the same league as Leica (this is not true of the results, as the VC lenses I have produce equally good - although different - images as my Leica lenses). I have to say that I would highly recommend the VC 21 as the closest Leica equivalent will run several times more and still not yeild appreciably different results... this of course does not factor in the cost of the 21mm Leica finder - the VC 21 lens comes with a VC 21 finder as well. I'm truly happy to have these Voigtlander alternatives as I'm able to experiment with focal lengths on my M that I would never otherwise have been able to afford. Good luck.
Paul Hart , Mar 07, 2004; 05:04 p.m.
Having owned the 21, 25 and 28/3.5, IMHO the latter is much better built than the other two.
Paul Neuthaler , Mar 07, 2004; 05:22 p.m.
My 21 seems fine: less than $400, including a new Bessa L from Gandy. I have a ball with it.
Joel Matherson , Mar 08, 2004; 07:44 a.m.
They are the same build quality of the 35mm f2.5 classic. The 28 f3.5 and 50 f2.5 are of a known higher build standard. The higher build standard is also reflected in their weight being some 30 to 40% heavier as well. So even though the 21 doesnt have the higher build quality, some may like its ligher weight.
Lee Shively , Mar 08, 2004; 09:34 a.m.
My 21/4 is identical in size, shape, etc., to my 35/2.5. I use the 21mm quite a bit. It's held up well and it's sharp. Considering the price comparison to the current Leica 21mm, buy the Voigtlander. You can use it till it falls apart and buy several more for less money than one new Leica lens.
