2.0 vs. 2.5 at 35mm and 50mm

[edvatza]

Advertisement (gone after registration)

I am seriously considering selling my Canon kit and moving to a Leica M or M-E (depends on what I can ultimately afford). At the same time I would like to pick up 35mm and 50mm lenses. I have been looking at the Summarit 35 2.5 versus the Summicron 35 2.0. Also looking at the similar choice for a 50mm lens.

 

How do the Summarit 2.5 and Summicron 2.0 lenses compare? I've been reading some reviews that are pushing me in the direction of Summarits in which case I can save some $$$ and possibly go with the M.

 

Your thoughts, please.

 

Thanks.

 

Ed

[Jeff S]

I suggest renting the M-E and some lenses to see for yourself. Of course only you can tell if the extra half stop is needed, but otherwise these are all fine lenses. If you don't have RF experience, this is also an opportunity to see how you get along with it. Small investment for a potentially costly decision.

 

The M may take a long time to hit the shelves. Better to be taking pics sooner than later IMO. Buying the M-E may also allow you to keep the Canon in the meantime in case your shooting style also benefits from a DSLR...different tools.

 

Jeff

[Advertisement]

The Leica Q3 is available for pre-order at B&H Photo Video and Adorama

[edvatza]

Thanks for the advice, Jeff.

 

I have been thinking about this decision long and hard. In the perfect world, i would keep my Canon kit and add the Leica. But the world is not perfect and I can't afford to do that. So I would have to sell pretty much all my Canon gear to be able to buy the Leica camera and lenses that I want.

 

My decision really stems from two things. First my shooting style and preferred genre has changed. Used to be that I shot outdoor, landscape, nature (anything but people) almost exclusively. But these days, my preferred genre is urban street photography (with people, people, people). Much of my shooting is now being done with cameras like my Leica X2, Ricoh GXR, Ricoh GRD IV and Canon G1X. Compact, inconspicuous and well suited for street work.

 

Also I find that as I get older, I am less interested in lugging around a big backpack with a couple of bodies, a half dozen of so L-glass lenses up to a 300 2.8 and so on. I am looking to simplify my life. That's why I am thinking about the M-E with a 35 2.5 and a 50 2.5 to start. And hopefully I can add a longer lens to the kit somewhere down the road.

 

All that said, your advice to try it out with a rental is good advice and I will definitely consider it. Again, thanks.

 

Ed

[earleygallery]

Look up Reid Reviews. It's a subscription site but he has reviews of most of the options you can consider.

 

Also consider s/h lenses - the 50mm Elmar M is highly regarded for example, you could look at s/h Summilux options, and there are other new options such as Voigtlander and Zeiss.

 

There are no bad choices, it comes down to the type of look you prefer and budget/availability.

 

If you're buying a new system it's worth seeing what deals can be done for a body and two lenses - you're more likely to get discounts on s/h lenses, or even ex demo.

[edvatza]

Continuing my due diligence.

 

I've had someone I respect tell me the 2.5s are as good optically as any... but mechanically, they are not quite up to par. Therefore I would be better advised to stay away from the 2.5s.

 

Any comments? Thoughts?

 

Ed

[elgenper]

...I've had someone I respect tell me the 2.5s are as good optically as any... but mechanically, they are not quite up to par. Therefore I would be better advised to stay away from the 2.5s.

....

 

Not true. I own the 50 and 90, and both are quite solid mechanically, with smoothly working controls and accurate focus. Almost no difference in ´feel´ from my Summicron asph 35 and 75 (and I´m quite particular about such things....).

 

Optically, the 50/2.5 is excellent, while I´d say just ´quite good´ about the 90. But this is consistent with Sean Reid´s verdict. The 35/2.5 is said to be even better, but I´ve no experience with that.

Edited May 1, 2013 by elgenper

[MarkP]

Advertisement (gone after registration)

Continuing my due diligence.

 

I've had someone I respect tell me the 2.5s are as good optically as any... but mechanically, they are not quite up to par. Therefore I would be better advised to stay away from the 2.5s.

 

Any comments? Thoughts?

 

Ed

 

Do you mean Ken Rockwell?

 

At some time or another I've had to send in my 1.4/21 Summilux, 1.4/35 Summilux ASPH (FLE), 1.4/50 Summilux ASPH (FLE) and 2.0/75 Summicron ASPH in for service/adjustment.

 

I have never had a problem with the 2.5/35 Summarit. It's not a 35 Summilux FLE regarding image quality but then it's a third of the price. Lovely little lens.

 

Puts & Reid rate the Summarits very highly.

[earleygallery]

Continuing my due diligence.

 

I've had someone I respect tell me the 2.5s are as good optically as any... but mechanically, they are not quite up to par. Therefore I would be better advised to stay away from the 2.5s.

 

Any comments? Thoughts?

 

Ed

 

These are Leica lenses you're talking about.

 

Your someone is talking out of their backside.

[01af]

It's not a Summilux-M 35 mm Asph (FLE) regarding image quality ...

Umm—what you actually wanted to say is, it's not a Summilux-M 35 mm Asph (FLE) regarding lens speed. Right?

[MarkP]

Umm—what you actually wanted to say is, it's not a Summilux-M 35 mm Asph (FLE) regarding lens speed. Right?

 

 

 

Umm-what I wanted to say is, that that although I really like the rendering of the Summarit I still think the Summilux-M 35 ASPH (FLE) image quality is 'better' at equivalent apertures.

Edited May 1, 2013 by MarkP

[TheMM]

Try to find out what lenses you really need and then buy the best you can get for your money. The lenses will most likely last for the next few generations of M-bodies, so you can get a cheap used M-body now and upgrade to any current model later. But the lenses will remain the same, and if you have the one you need, there will be no need of selling or upgrading later. Digital bodies are outdated every few years (despite the fact that I love my M9 and do not see any reason to let it go for the new M), so if you have the best body now or in a few years does not make any difference...

Just my 2 cents.

Marc

[01af]

Umm—what I wanted to say is that although I really like the rendering of the Summarit I still think the Summilux-M 35 ASPH (FLE) image quality is 'better' at equivalent apertures.

Well ... I have—and use—both lenses, the Summarit-M 35 mm and the Summilux-M 35 mm Asph (FLE), because I bought the former as a temporary stop-gap while waiting for the delivery of the latter. When the Summilux eventually arrived after a 15-month wait, the Summarit has grown on me so much that I kept it. While they do render slightly differently, I absolutely don't feel the the Summilux's image quality was any "better."

 

Sure—if I wanted to keep only one 35 mm M lens and money was no object then I'd choose the Summilux. Because it's super-fast yet fairly compact, with excellent image quality. But the Summarit is an alternative which offers basically the same image quality in a smaller, lighter, and far less costly package, at the expense of lens speed. And I particularly like the Summarit's unobtrusiveness and bullet-proof flare resistance; I definitely prefer it over the Summicron-M 35 mm Asph.

 

So telling someone who is looking for advice about 35 mm M lenses that the Summarit was "okay for the money but not quite up to the more expensive M lenses in terms of image quality" is really bad advice and does the wonderful Summarit-M 35 mm no justice. The same is true, by the way, for the other three Summarit-M lenses. I also prefer the Summarit-M 50 mm over the Summicron-M 50 mm, and it's on par with the Summilux-M 50 mm Asph except in terms of lens speed, just like in the 35 mm focal length. I even prefer the Summarit-M 75 mm over the Apo-Summicron-M 75 Asph, for several reasons.

Edited May 1, 2013 by 01af

[edvatza]

Do you mean Ken Rockwell?

 

Puts & Reid rate the Summarits very highly.

 

No not Rockwell. I was referring to a friend who I respect greatly and shoots Leica.

 

But no problem. Glad to hear to Summarits are rated highly since it is probably the direction I will go.

[RoySmith]

If purchasing the Summarits permits the purchase of a Leica M, then the improved high ISO shooting of the M will more than make up for the 1/2 stop slower speed of the 2.5 Summarits vs. the 2.0 Summicrons.

[almoore]

How do the Summarit 2.5 and Summicron 2.0 lenses compare?

 

Echoing others, the Summarits are almost certainly the optical equal of the Summicrons. The only real downside that I can see to these lenses is that they don't focus quite as close as their Summicron equivalents.

[MarkP]

So telling someone who is looking for advice about 35 mm M lenses that the Summarit was "okay for the money but not quite up to the more expensive M lenses in terms of image quality" is really bad advice and does the wonderful Summarit-M 35 mm no justice.

 

I DID NOT SAY THAT!

 

But I do agree with your other comments regarding the 2.5/35 Summarit!

 

Well ... I too have—and use—both lenses. I had the 1.4/35 Summilux ASPH (FLE) first and later bought the Summarit as there were times that I wanted a lens that was smaller and lighter, and with a more 'gentle' rendering. Although I considered the Summicron I thought the Summarit a 'better' lens and to be outstanding value for the money. I really like the 2.5/35 Summarit, and have used it as much as the Summilux - it is an excellent lens but I feel that I prefer the rendering Summilux. I have both lenses so I think I can voice my opinion too . If you read my earlier post I also praised the build quality and rendering of the Summarit.

 

Stating that I thought the image quality of the 35 Summilux was superior to the 35 Summarit which is a third of its price was NOT running down the Summarit or giving bad advice as I was very positive about the Summarit!

Edited May 2, 2013 by MarkP

[pgk]

I have had 35 Summarit, Summicron Asph and Summilux Aph (pre-FLE). I have retained the Summilux because I DO use it at full aperture. If I didn't I would have kept the Summarit. A lovely lens, as 01af says, very flare resistant, and with good pre-aspheric rendering, as well as being very well made and small. If you don't need a fast aperture lens you cannot go too far wrong with it.

[wizard]

... Better to be taking pics sooner than later IMO. ...

 

Well, he's got his Canon kit to take pictures. I'd wait for the M instead, it is the more modern camera and will keep value better than the ME.

 

And you should have no hesitation at all in buying the Summarit lenses. They are fabulous optically and mechanically, so saving money does not mean sacrificing quality here. The only downside they have is less speed, but if you do not really need all that speed, there is no downside.

 

Andy

[Jeff S]

I'd wait for the M instead, it is the more modern camera and will keep value better than the ME.

 

The only value I consider is personal value and reward from taking pics and making prints, nothing to do with dollars and cents after the fact. YMMV.

 

That's why I suggested renting the camera first; some people enjoy the RF experience, some don't. Hard to achieve any value if the experience isn't enjoyable or useful IMO, regardless of cost to buy or sell.

 

Different strokes.

 

Jeff

[Advertisement]

Hallo,

Look here: Leica M

[mkrzyzow]

I would recommend the combination of 35 Summarit and the current (pre-APO) 50 Summicron.

 

On the 35s, I have used most of the current Leica and Zeiss M-mount 35s, and while there are a number of great choices, in my view the Summarit provides the most consistently attractive rendering of all, despite its lower price. It is also small, particularly without the hood, and almost never flares. The camera+lens combo feels quite light, almost toy-like (in a good way), and you will have fun using it.

 

On the 50s, I will say that I appear to be in the minority, but FWIW I used the 50 Summarit extensively and did not find its rendering particularly attractive. I wanted to like it because of its size, and continually gave it another chance, and another chance, but simply did not like it. The current Summicron is roughly the same weight, only slightly longer, and actually appears smaller to the subject when both lenses have hoods deployed. More importantly, I find the rendering of the 50 Summicron to be more subtle and pleasant than the 50 Summarit (particularly in low light), and I prefer it for people shots; note that it does flare sometimes with strong overhead light. Many people like the 50 Summarit, but I think there is just something missing and you should try to go for the Summicron--which is the opposite of the case with the 35mm, where I think the Summarit is distinctly more attractive in its rendering than the ASPH Summicron.

 

This combination also gives you both a newer lens (though based on older design concepts) and a classic Mandler lens.

 

Of course, good photographers have quite divergent opinions on these lenses, so renting may be a good idea. Except I don't think you need to rent the 35 Summarit -- just buy it.