I am not sure how popular it is--it's always been second fiddle to the other more popular 35mm's, even shortly after it's launch despite it offers some things better and worse aspects compared to other fast m 35mm's.
That colors on first one above are just a modded film preset. The 2nd is just tweak for preference with no presets. I do think, if you're in this price of camera and lens, your time and money will be better spent (saved actually) having far more control of your output via post processing rather than hoping the camera + lens output is to your preference.
Are you shooting RAW? Even a couple simple edits can make a large differences--WB, contrast levels via the tone curve, and mixing primary colors (RGB) with some vibrance can really help. I will say, if you not interested in any post really, and depending on your tastes, I would probably not go with the CV 35/1.7--even the new CV's have better color and contrast, and the ZM 35/1.4 and 35 FLE are better yet IMO.
I am talking about this CV 35/1.7 (the m, not the LTM version):
Yeah, I have used the CV 35/1.2 m mount version on Sony and the FE version on Sony. If you really want lots of bokeh or are shooting on film where ISO really matters unlike digital, then it's cool. But beyond those two use cases, I would just look at other 35mm's. It does have more SA and a softer feel. It can give great images though--it's not a super corrected lens. I always preferred the 40/1.2 which is similar, but smaller, a bit but appreciably narrower with smoother bokeh.
