Summarit 35 - Sean's Review

[Paul Hart]

Sean's review of the 35 Summarit is now online - thanks, Sean, for a helpful account of what is clearly a very good lens. I have my name down for a 90 when it comes in.

How would you say it compares with the 35 Summicron v4?

[lct]

Interesting indeed but what are Sean's conclusions?

[cme4brain]

Originally Posted by Paul Hart

Sean's review of the 35 Summarit is now online - thanks, Sean, for a helpful account of what is clearly a very good lens. I have my name down for a 90 when it comes in.

How would you say it compares with the 35 Summicron v4?

I think the overall message here, lost on LeicaNuts, is that the $210 Voigtlander Skopar out-resolved the $1800 Summarit wide open and at f/4, and bettered the Summicron. Now you know why I, at least for some of my lenses, have no need for Leica glass- a lens one tenth the cost is as good or better.

[guy_mancuso]

Originally Posted by Paul Hart

Sean's review of the 35 Summarit is now online - thanks, Sean, for a helpful account of what is clearly a very good lens. I have my name down for a 90 when it comes in.

How would you say it compares with the 35 Summicron v4?

Very well I ran that comparision against the Version IV. Several threads on it here and on my site as well. Some folks just the difference in bokeh alone will chose the smoother Summarit. After doing all my test i bought the 90mm myself and actually waiting for Fed-X today.

Summarit Series 35,50, 90 Sharpness Test - The GetDPI Workshop Forums
Summarit Series 35,50,90 Ugly Test - The GetDPI Workshop Forums
http://www.l-camera-forum.com/leica-...sharpness.html

http://www.l-camera-forum.com/leica-...0-90-ugly.html

You have some reading to do but the Ugly test is pretty revealing.

I read Seans review last night and once again he did a nice job on it , even posted a couple of my grab shots with the 35mm for the color part. he asked for some 50's and 90's as well for his continued review on the lenses.

[guy_mancuso]

Originally Posted by lct

Interesting indeed but what are Sean's conclusions?

I think he left that for you to decide but both of us really liked the performance of it. If i did not have the version IV cron which i like for other things and did not need the speed i would get one. These are not bargain basement or begineer lenses. Do not let the price fool you there. making a 2.5 is a lot easier and less costly than making a 1.4 or F2 lens

[lct]

Originally Posted by cme4brain

I think the overall message here, lost on LeicaNuts, is that the $210 Voigtlander Skopar out-resolved the $1800 Summarit wide open and at f/4, and bettered the Summicron. Now you know why I, at least for some of my lenses, have no need for Leica glass- a lens one tenth the cost is as good or better.

I don't know what Sean thinks precisely about this as i asked him the question once and he responded very shortly but the bokeh of the Skopar looks so harsh to me that i simply don't understand how it can be compared to any Leica lens of any focal length and any age frankly.
http://www.l-camera-forum.com/leica-...tml#post366665
http://www.l-camera-forum.com/leica-...tml#post366697

[sean_reid]

Originally Posted by cme4brain

I think the overall message here, lost on LeicaNuts, is that the $210 Voigtlander Skopar out-resolved the $1800 Summarit wide open and at f/4, and bettered the Summicron. Now you know why I, at least for some of my lenses, have no need for Leica glass- a lens one tenth the cost is as good or better.

Hi Lloyd,

The overall results are, thankfully, more complex than that. Please don't throw me in the fire like that. <G> That said, those tests were very rigorous and I was amazed at how well that little CV did. However, it's really more of a 36 mm so on tests like that the slight magnification difference may have been important.

However, *each* lens in that test had its pros and cons and the Summarit performed very well. I liked the lens very much and would happily use it for my own work.

I am emphatically against the "Superbowl" approach to camera and lens testing (one champion, fans, etc.). *Every* lens has its own pros and cons and its own ways of drawing. My job is to try to describe what those are, not to rank lenses or over-simplify how they compare to each other.

Cheers,

Sean

[guy_mancuso]

Just to show the Bokeh between the Version IV 35 cron and the 35mm summarit. I stole these images from my Ugly test. Which i did intentionally to show bad light , ugly background and contrast . But as you will see a pretty big difference in the bokeh . Both shot at 2.5


Cron first. Also notice how the specular highlights held better on the Summarit for portrait shooter a very nice feature. Now i can recover a lotof this but this is what comes off the sensor, no adjustments at all here. Maybe reason I called it the Ugly test. My poor daughter is not though. LOL

This is that Arizona sun light which maybe one the brightest in the world. It's really nasty shooting here with people , normally i would never do this intentional in this light but take them in the open shade

[sean_reid]

Originally Posted by Paul Hart

Sean's review of the 35 Summarit is now online - thanks, Sean, for a helpful account of what is clearly a very good lens. I have my name down for a 90 when it comes in.

How would you say it compares with the 35 Summicron v4?

Thanks Paul. Guy's your man for comparisons with the Summicron 4.

Cheers,

Sean

[sean_reid]

Originally Posted by guy_mancuso

I read Seans review last night and once again he did a nice job on it , even posted a couple of my grab shots with the 35mm for the color part. he asked for some 50's and 90's as well for his continued review on the lenses.

Indeed, and thanks Guy for contributing some color examples.

Cheers,

Sean

[sean_reid]

Originally Posted by lct

I don't know what Sean thinks precisely about this as i asked him the question once and he responded very shortly but the bokeh of the Skopar looks so harsh to me that i simply don't understand how it can be compared to any Leica lens of any focal length and any age frankly.
http://www.l-camera-forum.com/leica-...tml#post366665
http://www.l-camera-forum.com/leica-...tml#post366697

I don't agree with Lloyd summary of the results but the 35 Skopar's bokeh is not harsh at all.

Cheers,

Sean

[guy_mancuso]

Originally Posted by sean_reid

Indeed, and thanks Guy for contributing some color examples.

Cheers,

Sean

You bet my friend glad we both had a chance to give these a run. I am very pleased with there performance and as we talked several times on this it is nice to see some glass from leica that price performance does not take a back seat to quality.

Folks please see Seans review and if not a member than be one . You have no idea how hard this stuff is to do and the price paid for his site is chump change for what you get.

[sean_reid]

Originally Posted by guy_mancuso

I think he left that for you to decide

Exactly...

Cheers,

Sean

[lct]

Originally Posted by sean_reid

I don't agree with Lloyd summary of the results but the 35 Skopar's bokeh is not harsh at all....

Would you mind to post any pic showing such a smooth (or not-harsh) bokeh?

[lct]

Originally Posted by guy_mancuso

Just to show the Bokeh between the Version IV 35 cron and the 35mm summarit. I stole these images from my Ugly test. Which i did intentionally to show bad light , ugly background and contrast . But as you will see a pretty big difference in the bokeh . Both shot at 2.5.... Cron first....

Forgive me to ask you this Guy but are you 100% sure that you did not invert your pics?
I mean i had the feeling to know my 35/2 IV by heart after 20+ years use and its the first time i view such an err... disputable bokeh...

[sean_reid]

Originally Posted by lct

Would you mind to post any pic showing such a smooth (or not-harsh) bokeh?

Hi LCT,

One of these days, you'll have to read these articles. I have a prominent Paris attorney discount program. <G> But you and I go back to the days of the Digilux 1 so here you go:

[guy_mancuso]

No it's a great question , I questioned it myself. What part of the issue is the tree itself we call them Palo Verde trees and there not leaves on the branches that you normally would see in a tree. As you can see in the Ugy test the whole series of aperture with it http://www.l-camera-forum.com/leica-...0-90-ugly.html

the tree itself is not sure even how to describe it but a very yellow green at by F8 you can see the type of leaves . It's a weird tree. LOL


When i first moved here thirty years ago i thought i was on a different planet. Strange place from the looks of New Jersey where I grew up

I did say ugly background. I was not kidding. ROTFLMAO

[Daniel Ortego]

Originally Posted by guy_mancuso

Just to show the Bokeh between the Version IV 35 cron and the 35mm summarit. I stole these images from my Ugly test. Which i did intentionally to show bad light , ugly background and contrast . But as you will see a pretty big difference in the bokeh . Both shot at 2.5...

Damn! Not only is the bokeh superior but also the gradient texture of the skin tone is remarkably better on the Summrarit. Sorta makes me rethink the options before me; speed vs. imaging.
Regards,

[guy_mancuso]

That is exactly what i picked up on also. What i noticed in all of this is it seems leica made these for digital they kept the highlights from blowing than spread out the midtones while still retaining good contrast and very nice saturation. It does have a different fingerprint that for me on some shooting i really like a lot. i bought the 90mm , just love the short focus throw on it

[peter_n]

Originally Posted by lct

Would you mind to post any pic showing such a smooth (or not-harsh) bokeh?

Here is one that I don't think is harsh (although you may differ). Not too much of the OOF but there is some. This was taken with the CV 35/2.5 PI, the version that has a proper focusing ring and no tab. It was my very first RF lens, and although I now mostly use a 35/1.4 ASPH I also still use the CV outside when I don't need speed. It's really an excellent little lens.