Summarit review in B&W photography

[Nick De Marco]

Advertisement (gone after registration)

In case you haven't seen it, I just read a quite detailed review by Frances Shultz of the 4 new Leica Summarit lenses in this month's edition of Black and White Photography magazine.

 

Francis, who has, or has used various different lenses in the same ranges, rates these summarits a lot. Having read it I was impressed, but not enough to buy one. I have a 35mm, 50mm and 90mm Summicron. All bought second hand and all for less than a new summarit would cost me. I'm not convinced the summarit would be better in any of these lengths, and I doubt it would. Whilst I don't have a 75mm in any length (and I'm not sure I actually NEED one either) I have heard such good things about the summilux 75mm, and Frances rated the 75mm the least attractive of the 4 new summarits, that I'm not tempted to spend 890 pounds on that either

 

I suppose if you only want to buy a new lens then there is something to be said for these (rather like th 38mm Elmarit I bought for my M8). Otherwsie, I'm not sure if I see the point.

 

Good review anyway.

[cbretteville]

Thanks for the heads up Nic, looking forward to receiving my copy. Francis' articles are a favorite.

 

- Carl

[akiralx]

Yep, I'm looking at a new M8 + one of these (probably the 35 or 50) as part of the £500 off offer, until the end of this month.

[Nick De Marco]

That's a good offer. She liked the 35mm a lot I seem to recall - but you should read the article if you get the chance

[Ecar]

Frances rated the 75mm the least attractive of the 4 new summarits

 

Funny - I'm sure I have seen a couple of other reviews (can't remember where now) that seemed to rate the 75mm higher than the rest and on par with the 35mm?

Anyway, I have ordered one...

[luigi bertolotti]

Funny - I'm sure I have seen a couple of other reviews (can't remember where now) that seemed to rate the 75mm higher than the rest and on par with the 35mm?

Anyway, I have ordered one...

 

Don't worry... I ordered and got my Summarit 75 at Christmas... it's a lot fine as a lens, the only issues, for me, are common to the Summarit line:

- hoods are "stupid" (75 / 90 is the same)

- focus helicoid is a lot short respect to traditional Leica lenses: probably hasn't to be considered a "defect", but a little difficult to get accustomed for people, like me, used to focus lenses like the TE 90 or TE 135, with their "long" helicoid.

[ChrisC]

Advertisement (gone after registration)

Akiralx - I have sent you a Private Message.

 

...................... Chris

[Ecar]

Don't worry... I ordered and got my Summarit 75 at Christmas... it's a lot fine as a lens, the only issues, for me, are common to the Summarit line:

- hoods are "stupid" (75 / 90 is the same)

- focus helicoid is a lot short respect to traditional Leica lenses: probably hasn't to be considered a "defect", but a little difficult to get accustomed for people, like me, used to focus lenses like the TE 90 or TE 135, with their "long" helicoid.

 

Grazie Luigi! Kinda reassuring... at least as far as lens quality is concerned

[Paul Hart]

Sean Reid has just posted his review of the Summarit 90/2,5 on his site. He compares it to the Zeiss 85, Leica 90/2 ASPH, and the CV 90. It makes for surprising reading for those who thought the Leica ASPH was the undisputed king of the hill.

[carstenw]

Paul, I didn't get around to this yet, but I am almost positive that I get much better results with my 90AA than the ones posted in Sean's article. The 90AA is known to be better than the Elmarit at all apertures, quite unlike what Sean observed. I suspect his 90AA is off. I have wanted to take a similar photo to what sean did with my copy and send it to him, to contrast with his lens, but I didn't do it yet.

[innerimager]

Carsten - While I can't pretend to be skilled at testing as Sean is, I may be able to be of help here. I lent Sean my 90 elmarit when he did the testing, and it is a great sample for sure. I still am about to get a used chrome 90 AA, and plan to have it sent to DAG before it gets to me to be sure it's spot on. When I get it, I'll try and do a few simple comparison shots. best....Peter

[Hacker]

The 90AA is known to be better than the Elmarit at all apertures, quite unlike what Sean observed.

 

The 90AA is not known to be good at close distances, <10 ft.

[sreidvt]

Paul, I didn't get around to this yet, but I am almost positive that I get much better results with my 90AA than the ones posted in Sean's article. The 90AA is known to be better than the Elmarit at all apertures, quite unlike what Sean observed. I suspect his 90AA is off. I have wanted to take a similar photo to what sean did with my copy and send it to him, to contrast with his lens, but I didn't do it yet.

 

Hi Carsten,

 

The 90 Summicron did very well in that comparison, even in the resolution testing at six feet. Don't forget that that res. board is very demanding and will often reveal differences we'd rarely, if ever, see in normal use. Still, when one is comparing fine lenses, it's necessary to dig deep in order to see the differences.

 

I doubt the Summicron sample was off at all but I'd be happy to test your lens if you'd like. That Zeiss 85, however, is technically outstanding and I think that what we're seeing in those results may simply be the real differences between those lenses. It's the old battle again - Leica vs. Zeiss.

 

That said, I'd use a current 90 Summicron without hesitation - it's still a great, great lens and, again, it did very well in that test. But my favorite of the 90s (cost and size considered) is the 90 Elmarit. In fact, I'm hoping Peter will send me his copy for Christmas. <G>

 

Each time I publish results that are surprising (ie: a lens does better than a Leica in any respect) I get questions about sample variation, etc. Its always possible but its also possible that the Zeiss is just the current 85/90 king of resolution at that distance (six feet). But, in a sense, who cares? Resolution isn't photography and most of the current 85/90s are excellent and very useable. At least you actually read the reviews carefully and know about the focus bracketing methodology, etc.

 

The longer I test lenses, the more suspicious I become of some of the "accepted truths" about various lenses. For example, when a tester presents his results in a series of scientific looking tables and charts, does anyone remember to ask what his focus bracketing methodology was? So often, when we see numbers we assume precise methodology. The two aren't correlated.

 

Why is it that focus bracketing is not discussed often in lens reviews? Certainly, reviewers can't be trusting something as precise as res. testing to a rangefinder mechanism. Or might they be? When I choose a set of exposures for res. samples it's selected from among perhaps 20 -40 versions wide open. All of those get compared at 100% on screen and only the highest res. one is chosen (to determine the series used for the croppings). The camera's RF accuracy doesn't even come into the picture.

 

And, lastly, it may simply be that some 85/90s do better at six feet, some at twenty, etc. I really do believe that, with this calibre of lenses, those small differences may not mean much for normal work.

 

Cheers,

 

Sean

[innerimager]

That said, I'd use a current 90 Summicron without hesitation - it's still a great, great lens and, again, it did very well in that test. But my favorite of the 90s (cost and size considered) is the 90 Elmarit. In fact, I'm hoping Peter will send me his copy for Christmas. <G>

 

Sean- I'll take that into consideration. ;>) but truly, I agree about the elmarit and plan for mine to get used a lot even after getting the summicron, which I will be using mostly on my M7 where I need the extra stop, and where the 90mm FL is more for portraits. On my M8, the elmarit will remain my 120mm equivalent walk around telephoto, quite happily. best....Peter

[sreidvt]

Sean- I'll take that into consideration. ;>) but truly, I agree about the elmarit and plan for mine to get used a lot even after getting the summicron, which I will be using mostly on my M7 where I need the extra stop, and where the 90mm FL is more for portraits. On my M8, the elmarit will remain my 120mm equivalent walk around telephoto, quite happily. best....Peter

 

That Elmarit of yours is no good Peter. Its best that you send it to a new home where it can rest and where its failings will be understood. <G>

 

Cheers,

 

Sean

[pklein]

Sean:

What is your impression of the focus shift issue with the Summarits, compared to other lenses you've tested? I've been thinking (and hoping) that they might have less such issues than the higher speed lenses if Leica played its design cards right. Any thoughts?

 

A lens that does slightly less well in resolution tests than another, but that doesn't have noticeable focus shift at f/2.8-5.6 might well give better overall results than a lens that is better on the test bench, but where you can't rely on getting that quality at middle stops.

 

I was happy to see that your testing verified my own results with my humble CV 90/3.5. Mine is a stellar lens, and seems ideally matched to the M8. Hard to believe, given how little I paid for it used.

 

--Peter

[sreidvt]

Hi Peter,

 

If there are focus shift problems with a lens, that shows up in res. testing (and then I may do a whole set of focus shift tests). Neither Summarit that I've written up so far shows much focus shift. I also agree with you that focus shift (depending on the degree, etc.) can be bigger problem than minor differences in resolution. So the 35 and 90 are fine in this respect. I have no reason to suspect the problem in the 50 or 75 but I haven't put those reviews together yet.

 

Cheers,

 

Sean

[Paul Hart]

I also agree with you that focus shift (depending on the degree, etc.) can be bigger problem than minor differences in resolution...

 

Cheers,

 

Sean

 

Glad to read that, since I had come to the same conclusion in respect of my MATE when compared with certain faster primes. I have ordered a CV35/1,2 for the same reason - your test gave it a big tick for lack of focus shift, if I recall correctly.

[thrid]

Paul, I didn't get around to this yet, but I am almost positive that I get much better results with my 90AA than the ones posted in Sean's article. The 90AA is known to be better than the Elmarit at all apertures, quite unlike what Sean observed. I suspect his 90AA is off. I have wanted to take a similar photo to what sean did with my copy and send it to him, to contrast with his lens, but I didn't do it yet.

 

The only way to tell beyond a doubt, is to test a few samples of each lens on optical testing equipment and do some scientific trials under controlled, 100% repeatable circumstances. All else is just conjecture.

[Advertisement]

Hallo,

Look here: Leica M

[sreidvt]

Glad to read that, since I had come to the same conclusion in respect of my MATE when compared with certain faster primes. I have ordered a CV35/1,2 for the same reason - your test gave it a big tick for lack of focus shift, if I recall correctly.

 

That's a great lens and its somewhat remarkable that it is so fast and yet shows no detectable focus shift.

 

Cheers,

 

Sean