Summarit Lenses

[ammitsboel]

Hmm... I think the lux looks like there's applied some kind of smoothing filter. The summarit is more natural but cold as you say.

Are there any processing differences?
What's the difference between the two types of light?

[Kittyphoto]

Ah! I remember now why color balance is so much different.
I think Octabox is a bit yellow because of the old diffuser.
While Strip softbox has no diffuser.
Lucky I search found Summarit with Octabox.
All files process in C1 v.4 White balance 5500k.

kitty

[Shootist]

Originally Posted by Kittyphoto

Ah! I remember now why color balance is so much different.
I think Octabox is a bit yellow because of the old diffuser.
While Strip softbox has no diffuser.
Lucky I search found Summarit with Octabox.
All files process in C1 v.4 White balance 5500k.

kitty

It seems your first post of the Lux is a bit out of focus. especially when shot @ f/8.
I've never owned this lens so maybe that just the way it is.

[Kittyphoto]

Originally Posted by jimleicam3

this was the feedback I was looking forward to. I use my M8 for fun, I will not quit my day job because of the M8. I am one of those guys that should not own an M8 but can do it, I love my M 8 an am looking forward to the Cron 35 mm. Thanks

This one is from 35mm cron v.4.

Kitty

[ammitsboel]

Originally Posted by akiralx

I too use the 35 Summarit and like it a lot. Apart from the CV 40/1.4 it is my only lens between the 28 and 50 Summicrons. Small and light and easy to handle - the only issue I have is that the metal hood often starts to unscrew off.

The lines in your photos look processed, did you do any sharpening and/or noise remove?

And yes, the lux look almost overly soft.
The cron is very intersting.

I know I've said this before, but it really does my head in to see people that looks like dead wax models.
She looks too "distant" and her eyes are dead, I think that might be the C1 processing.

Sorry to go off like that.

[akiralx]

Originally Posted by ammitsboel

The lines in your photos look processed, did you do any sharpening and/or noise remove?

No NR, some sharpening, but they don't look so good at this reduced size.

[jamriman]

I just got a 75 summarit from a forum member. I love this lens. Ergonomics are perfect. Light compact. Do a search on this forum for comparisons to 75 lux and cron. An instant winner in my book.

[gesper]

Have and love the 75. Also have the CV 75, but haven't touched it since I got the Summarit. Also, have a 35 cron, but would have bought the Summarit if it had been available when I first bought my M8.

[psss]

got all CV lenses at first to go with my m8 (after reading sean's reviews) got a 35, 50 and 90....when i found that i really needed a 75, i was hesitant about getting the CV and looked at the summarit75....i have since sold all CV lenses and got the summarit 35....
first: i never shoot wide open....f4 or 5.6 is usually the widest, i mostly shoot at 8-11....the DR seems quite a bit better on the summarits, especially the highlights....not only do they hold them better, they draw the transitions much better....also a much better grip (contrast, whatever you want to call it...) on shadow detail and "washed out" high key areas.....
the files can handle more post production.....
i tried a 35 apo (not sure which version) and it was a little too contrasty for me....
i really recommend checking the lenses out to test....a friend of mine just got a m8 with all 4 summarits for a week (for less then 100$)....reading sean's reviews helps but it does not substitute testing them yourself.....
i have started looking at older (and newer) leica lenses....i find the older ones more interesting then the newer ones....imo the "best" lenses are made with film in mind and don't necessarily work as well with the limited DR of the digital sensor.....
so much also depends on the postproduction and which developer is being used (just like in the old days with film!)

[sean_reid]

Originally Posted by psss

got all CV lenses at first to go with my m8 (after reading sean's reviews) got a 35, 50 and 90....when i found that i really needed a 75, i was hesitant about getting the CV and looked at the summarit75....i have since sold all CV lenses and got the summarit 35....
first: i never shoot wide open....f4 or 5.6 is usually the widest, i mostly shoot at 8-11....the DR seems quite a bit better on the summarits, especially the highlights....not only do they hold them better, they draw the transitions much better....also a much better grip (contrast, whatever you want to call it...) on shadow detail and "washed out" high key areas.....

Or, in other terms, the Summarits you are using may be lower in contrast than the three CV lenses you chose. It's that drop in contrast that makes its easier for a sensor to record the contrast range of an image cast by a lens. Of course, all of these lenses will show some diffraction at F/8 (and certainly at F/11) but lens contrast, as I've been saying for a few years now, is very much a matter of personal preference. If you prefer lower contrast lenses, the CV 50/1.5 or Leica 50/1.4 ASPH will likely not seem right to you at all.

Lenses, of course, can only reduce the dynamic range in a subject. Most lens designers I've spoken with have a technical ideal of 100% subject contrast transmission (though that never is reached). So high contrast lenses, with exceptional coatings, etc., are a technical ideal for some but not a practical ideal for many others.

Most of the Zeiss ZM lenses show high contrast. Some of the Leica M lenses are higher contrast and some are more moderate (the Summarits tend to be the latter). CV makes some higher contrast lenses, some moderate contrast lenses and some lower contrast lenses.

-------------------------

In response to a comment made above by another poster, I'd argue that (contrary to popular myth) there is no such thing as a singular "Leica look" from lenses. Different Leica lenses (different ages, models, etc.) have different looks. A picture made with a Zeiss lens can look more like one made with a Summicron ASPH than one made with a Summarit. A Summarit picture can look more like one made with a CV than would a picture made with a different CV.
Many of the Zeiss lenses have a somewhat similar high-contrast character (because their coatings are so effective) but there's certainly variation in those lenses as well. Certain families of lenses, sub-groups of Leica lenses for example, can share certain "family characteristics", however.

And the end, its always specific lens models (and generations) that must be considered when we make comparisons. As soon as we begin generalizing about brands, etc., we risk drawing false conclusions.

And, yes, ideally we're able to do personal side by side tests of each lens that we're interested in (preferably with multiple samples). Each photographer's needs and workflow are bound to be different. In practice, this isn't always possible. My hope, in writing the lens reviews, is that they will help people identify which lenses seem, to them, to be worth trying. Then one tries those lenses and refines his or her choices according to how those lenses suite his or her personal work and methods.

Cheers,

Sean

[sean_reid]

Originally Posted by gesper

Have and love the 75. Also have the CV 75, but haven't touched it since I got the Summarit. Also, have a 35 cron, but would have bought the Summarit if it had been available when I first bought my M8.

In some respects, the 75 Summarit is the best 75 I've ever tested.

Cheers,

Sean

[Kittyphoto]

Originally Posted by sean_reid

Lenses, of course, can only reduce the dynamic range in a subject. Most lens designers I've spoken with have a technical ideal of 100% subject contrast transmission (though that never is reached). So high contrast lenses, with exceptional coatings, etc., are a technical ideal for some but not a practical ideal for many others.

Sean

100% agree. I also feel some lens is too sharp, too contrast, too perfect. I can't remember who said before but I like it. "Sometimes perfection is boring."

But I feel new summarit lens is perfectly match with M8.

[jimleicam3]

So what you are saying is that you would purchase a Summarit 35 mm over the Cron 35 mm? Thanks for all your help

[Ozkar]

Originally Posted by jimleicam3

So what you are saying is that you would purchase a Summarit 35 mm over the Cron 35 mm? Thanks for all your help

At one point I owned the 35 CRON ASPH, 35 CRON IV and 35 SUMMARIT.

In the end, I retained the 35 SUMMARIT. It is every bit as sharp as the ASPH and sharper than the IV. I also prefer it's character to that of the somewhat sterile CRON ASPH. And most important, it handles highlights quite a bit better than both the ASPH and IV.

One point that is also worth considering is that the little 35 SUMMARIT is flare free and doesn't demand a hood. This makes for a very compact travel kit. If speed is key, I would skip the CRON and go for a 35 LUX ASPH (providing you can find one that is not afflicted by back focus). But this is a brute size lens by comparison given that it must be used with a hood outdoors.

I also second all the comments regarding the 75 SUMMARIT. It is a wonderful lens.

I have owned all the current SUMMILUXES, SUMMICRONS and SUMMARITS from 28mm to 75mm and, IMO, the 35 and 75 SUMMARITS offer the best balance of performance, size/weight and useability.

O

[leitz_not_leica]

Alex, Is that Trinidad? I worked at WGTL last year.

[j. borger]

Originally Posted by Ozkar

At one point I owned the 35 CRON ASPH, 35 CRON IV and 35 SUMMARIT.
In the end, I retained the 35 SUMMARIT. It is every bit as sharp as the ASPH and sharper than the IV. I also prefer it's character to that of the somewhat sterile CRON ASPH. And most important, it handles highlights quite a bit better than both the ASPH and IV.
O

Same here ..... was in the same boat and sold both: the cron asph & cron iv and just kept the summarit for all the reasons stated.
That whole summarit range is way underapreciated ....

[Kittyphoto]

Originally Posted by jimleicam3

So what you are saying is that you would purchase a Summarit 35 mm over the Cron 35 mm? Thanks for all your help

Very difficult question. I am not thinking for another summarit 35 mm now.
I just feel Summarit lens is very easy to focus with M8, 6 bit coded, light, solid color, small, sharp.

It depends on you taste. I prefer low contrast lens, sharpness is 2nd.
I also love pastel color of some lens.

If I don't already have Cron, I might get summarit.

[Mauribix]

Originally Posted by sean_reid

...In response to a comment made above by another poster, I'd argue that (contrary to popular myth) there is no such thing as a singular "Leica look" from lenses. Different Leica lenses (different ages, models, etc.) have different looks...

This is perfectly right Sean.
Many times, talking with other photographers, they tend to consider this "legendary leica look"(especially if they don't use Leica gears) as something special.
I believe this is not particularly due to the lenses (apart from the fact that they're usually fast), but from the way of taking pictures that an M camera with an M lens involves.
It's maybe something more connected to the way of framing, shooting and selcting the focus plan.
The differences that we, Leica users, tend to see, is often invisible to other's eye, or not so evident in everyday's pictures.
CV, ZEISS, and LEICA lenses draw magnifically for most of the people looking at our pictures. There's not a "second class line" in what we can choose for our cameras, being it a Kobalux or an old elmar 50. That's the luck of this system!
Obviuosly IMHO.

best

[akiralx]

Originally Posted by leitz_not_leica

Alex, Is that Trinidad? I worked at WGTL last year.

No - the top one is from Rhyl, North Wales, and the other one is at Ilkley, West Yorkshire (both UK).

Regards

[stunsworth]

Originally Posted by akiralx

No - the top one is from Rhyl, North Wales...

That must be the first and only time that anyone has confused Rhyl and Trinidad <grin>.

I was there a couple of weeks ago - Rhyl, not Trinidad - very depressing these days.