Jump to content

Sell the 35 summilux fle for 28 summicron?


Mr.Q

Recommended Posts

Advertisement (gone after registration)

I picked up a 35 Summilux FLE about 2 months ago and I thought I'd instantly fall in love with it but I have not. After reviewing all of my images today (around 1500 shots with FLE), I prefer the images from my CV 35/1.2, 50 LUX, and Leica Q. I feel like it's hard to get a grasp of what to expect out of this lens. Some of the images are great but a lot of them look very average aesthetically (all are sharp btw)  The CV35/1.2 for example, may be softer at open apertures, but it is much more consistent and predictable with how it draws. In terms of focal length, I prefer 35mm (over 28mm) by a hair, but sometimes I want a bit more in my frame. (I really enjoyed the RX1 which was like a 32mm FL) I shoot digital so I could always crop with a 28mm, and I like shooting close and adding distortion sometimes. So I really don't have a preference. I could shoot with either. I don't wear glasses either so the 28mm frame lines don't bother me.

 

Having said all that, would it be wise for me to sell the 35 fle for the 28 cron v1?  A lot of people compare the rendering and aesthetics of the 28 cron to the 50 lux, which I absolutely love. I'm a bit scared that I'd regret my decision because the 35 FLE also has it's share of raving reviews and I question if I should just shoot more to find it's appeal. I'm wondering if there are people like me that hasn't hit if off very well with the 35 FLE and come to appreciate it later on.

 

Before anyone asks btw, I can not afford keeping both, and I definitely can not afford the 28 lux.

  • Like 1
Link to post
Share on other sites

Matter of tastes a usual. To me 50/1.4 asph and 35/1.4 FLE have pretty well the same kind of rendering i.e. sharp at all apertures with a bit of harshness in OoF areas around f/2.8. 28/2 v1 & v2 are also sharp at all apertures with less OoF harshness probably but those three lenses are all contrasty anyway. Before deciding to buy or sell such expensive lenses, i would loan a 28/2 or buy a cheaper 28 and use it extensively. Some people do like that focal length but others prefer 35 or 24.

Link to post
Share on other sites

I picked up a 35 Summilux FLE about 2 months ago and I thought I'd instantly fall in love with it but I have not. After reviewing all of my images today (around 1500 shots with FLE), I prefer the images from my CV 35/1.2, 50 LUX, and Leica Q. I feel like it's hard to get a grasp of what to expect out of this lens. Some of the images are great but a lot of them look very average aesthetically (all are sharp btw)  The CV35/1.2 for example, may be softer at open apertures, but it is much more consistent and predictable with how it draws. In terms of focal length, I prefer 35mm (over 28mm) by a hair, but sometimes I want a bit more in my frame. (I really enjoyed the RX1 which was like a 32mm FL) I shoot digital so I could always crop with a 28mm, and I like shooting close and adding distortion sometimes. So I really don't have a preference. I could shoot with either. I don't wear glasses either so the 28mm frame lines don't bother me.

 

Having said all that, would it be wise for me to sell the 35 fle for the 28 cron v1?  A lot of people compare the rendering and aesthetics of the 28 cron to the 50 lux, which I absolutely love. I'm a bit scared that I'd regret my decision because the 35 FLE also has it's share of raving reviews and I question if I should just shoot more to find it's appeal. I'm wondering if there are people like me that hasn't hit if off very well with the 35 FLE and come to appreciate it later on.

 

Before anyone asks btw, I can not afford keeping both, and I definitely can not afford the 28 lux.

Why not try out the 35mm Summilux ASPH pre FLE.   It's sharp, but still softer. I prefer it over the CV 1.2 and the FLE... You save around $€1000 as well ... and wit a bit of luck you might even be able to get the 28 cron and the 35mm lux asph for the money of the FLE.... 

Link to post
Share on other sites

Personally I've never understood this 'rendering' talk but that's just me. Everyone sees different things in a picture.

 

I have the 35 FLE and use it on film (I don't shoot digital). It is naturally a superlative lens technically and optically, virtually flawless.

 

What I dislike about it doesn't have so much to do with the lens itself as the focal length.

 

35mm is neither here nor there, neither close enough nor wide enough. It's, effectively (and to my mind, I hasten to add), a "meh" focal length. So I'm also considering selling mine, but for slightly different reasons.

 

I know I wouldn't miss it at all and the lens I would most likely buy instead would be a 28mm lens to separate further from my 50mm lenses.

 

Since you have - and like - the CV 35 I see no reason to keep the 35 Summilux. Put the money to a 28mm lens instead.

 

Philip

  • Like 1
Link to post
Share on other sites

Why not try out the 35mm Summilux ASPH pre FLE.   It's sharp, but still softer. I prefer it over the CV 1.2 and the FLE... You save around $€1000 as well ... and wit a bit of luck you might even be able to get the 28 cron and the 35mm lux asph for the money of the FLE.... 

I have considered that option too but shooting with a rangefinder is already a challenge for me and I do not need another obstacle (focus shift) to make photography more difficult.

Link to post
Share on other sites

Advertisement (gone after registration)

Personally I've never understood this 'rendering' talk but that's just me. Everyone sees different things in a picture.

 

I have the 35 FLE and use it on film (I don't shoot digital). It is naturally a superlative lens technically and optically, virtually flawless.

 

What I dislike about it doesn't have so much to do with the lens itself as the focal length.

 

35mm is neither here nor there, neither close enough nor wide enough. It's, effectively (and to my mind, I hasten to add), a "meh" focal length. So I'm also considering selling mine, but for slightly different reasons.

 

I know I wouldn't miss it at all and the lens I would most likely buy instead would be a 28mm lens to separate further from my 50mm lenses.

 

Since you have - and like - the CV 35 I see no reason to keep the 35 Summilux. Put the money to a 28mm lens instead.

 

Philip

 

It could be the rendering or my technique but what matters to me is that the images aren't interesting. I agree that technically there is very little to fault with this lens.

 

Your reasoning for replacing the 35 FLE with a 28mm is very logical.  I'm a bit more confused because I like both focal lengths.

 

The CV35/1.2 does have it's quirks like finder blockage and weight.  I was hoping to sell it if I liked the FLE more.

Link to post
Share on other sites

I feel like it's hard to get a grasp of what to expect out of this lens. Some of the images are great but a lot of them look very average aesthetically (all are sharp btw)  The CV35/1.2 for example, may be softer at open apertures, but it is much more consistent and predictable with how it draws.

I'm not clear: is it that the lens doesn't draw in a way you like, or that the lens draws in different ways and you don't know how to anticipate the results?

 

If you don't get along with how it draws, definitely sell it. The 35 FLE is my favorite lens, but I can see why others wouldn't get along with it. My impression is that the Summicron 28 has rather complementary rendering to the FLE; the Summicron renders like a rather relaxed lens, while the FLE is tense. So that might indeed be a good choice for you.

 

On the other hand, one thing I am rather fond of with the FLE is how much it varies in rendering between aperture, distance from subject, and distance from axis. The largest effect is in field curvature, where the corners push toward infinity at f/1.4, the plane becomes wavy but flat-ish around f/2.8, the corners pull toward the camera around f/4, and depth of field flattens thing out by f/8. To my eye, pushing out the corners contributes to 3D pop, using a wavy plane gives a sense of relationship among subjects at a modest distance, and pulling the corners enhances isolation at moderate aperture (and does so with striking resolution). So, no, you can't just set the FLE for exposure and depth of field, expecting all images to look alike. But you can achieve many different subtleties once you learn its patterns.

 

I doubt most folks who look at lens rendering this closely would care for that relatively high degree of variability. That's fine. For me, though, using the FLE almost exclusively for a year has been quite a delightful experience, if with a bit of a learning curve.

 

Cheers,

Jom

  • Like 2
Link to post
Share on other sites

What's with this lens rendering bs?

 

Since when does the 28 summicron "draw" like a 50 summilux asph?

 

Newbies jump into the leica world and spit all kinds of nonsene such as this and then other folks pick it up as "truth".

 

I still remember the days when the 50 Summilux asph wad despised because of its "clinical" rendition. Now it's suddenly a warm lens? What happened in the mean time? I'll tell you what happened: newbies come and go.

 

The BS is oozing from all over the place.

 

what's important to look after is color rendition. This is the extremely important part. This is also where lower companies can't keep up with Leica, Nikon, canon. extreme homogeneity in colors from one lens to another is what we have to search for. Not some extremwly elusive lens signature where supposedly a 28 cron would match a 50 Lux asph. That's just too much bs.

Edited by NB23
  • Like 5
Link to post
Share on other sites

I'm not clear: is it that the lens doesn't draw in a way you like, or that the lens draws in different ways and you don't know how to anticipate the results?

 

If you don't get along with how it draws, definitely sell it. The 35 FLE is my favorite lens, but I can see why others wouldn't get along with it. My impression is that the Summicron 28 has rather complementary rendering to the FLE; the Summicron renders like a rather relaxed lens, while the FLE is tense. So that might indeed be a good choice for you.

 

On the other hand, one thing I am rather fond of with the FLE is how much it varies in rendering between aperture, distance from subject, and distance from axis. The largest effect is in field curvature, where the corners push toward infinity at f/1.4, the plane becomes wavy but flat-ish around f/2.8, the corners pull toward the camera around f/4, and depth of field flattens thing out by f/8. To my eye, pushing out the corners contributes to 3D pop, using a wavy plane gives a sense of relationship among subjects at a modest distance, and pulling the corners enhances isolation at moderate aperture (and does so with striking resolution). So, no, you can't just set the FLE for exposure and depth of field, expecting all images to look alike. But you can achieve many different subtleties once you learn its patterns.

 

I doubt most folks who look at lens rendering this closely would care for that relatively high degree of variability. That's fine. For me, though, using the FLE almost exclusively for a year has been quite a delightful experience, if with a bit of a learning curve.

 

Cheers,

Jom

 

 

To answer your question, I'd say the latter is more accurate --- that I am having a hard time anticipating the results.  I appreciate your insight on the FLE.  I was expecting magic right out of the gate but if there is a learning curve I'm willing to give it a couple more months. 

Edited by Mr.Q
Link to post
Share on other sites

What's with this lens rendering bs?

 

Since when does the 28 summicron "draw" like a 50 summilux asph?

 

Newbies jump into the leica world and spit all kinds of nonsene such as this and then other folks pick it up as "truth".

 

I still remember the days when the 50 Summilux asph wad despised because of its "clinical" rendition. Now it's suddenly a warm lens? What happened in the mean time? I'll tell you what happened: newbies come and go.

 

The BS is oozing from all over the place.

 

what's important to look after is color rendition. This is the extremely important part. This is also where lower companies can't keep up with Leica, Nikon, canon. extreme homogeneity in colors from one lens to another is what we have to search for. Not some extremwly elusive lens signature where supposedly a 28 cron would match a 50 Lux asph. That's just too much bs.

 

I'm not sure what you're referring to but not once has anyone mentioned "warm" or "cold" lenses. What does that mean anyway?

 

Rendition of contrast, clarity, details, oof drop-off, bokeh, etc etc will give lenses a certain "look." Is the Leica or Zeiss signature elusive and BS as well? 

Link to post
Share on other sites

I'm not sure what you're referring to but not once has anyone mentioned "warm" or "cold" lenses. What does that mean anyway?

 

Rendition of contrast, clarity, details, oof drop-off, bokeh, etc etc will give lenses a certain "look." Is the Leica or Zeiss signature elusive and BS as well?

As elusive as can be.

 

A few months ago Someome explained with very scientific terms (such as "footprint", "fingerprint", "microcontrast", "clinical" and "unclinical", hence "warm" and "cold"... and so on) that if one wanted a Leica look one should use Zeiss lenses, and if one was after the Zeiss look then one must use Leica lenses.

Something to do with Karbe switching looks and whatever.

Link to post
Share on other sites

If you need and prefer a 28, just go for it. You've already said you don't like your Summilux 35 FLE.

I consider myself a 32mm shooter. I value a 28mm and 35mm equally. No preference. And I have not concluded that I dislike my 35 FLE. I'm trying to determine if this is lens is the right lens for me.

Link to post
Share on other sites

As elusive as can be.

 

A few months ago Someome explained with very scientific terms (such as "footprint", "fingerprint", "microcontrast", "clinical" and "unclinical", hence "warm" and "cold"... and so on) that if one wanted a Leica look one should use Zeiss lenses, and if one was after the Zeiss look then one must use Leica lenses.

Something to do with Karbe switching looks and whatever.

I disagree but all is subjective anyway.

Link to post
Share on other sites

I'm wondering if there are people like me that hasn't hit if off very well with the 35 FLE and come to appreciate it later on.

I have a love hate relationship with my 35 FLE... I love the lens size and erogonomics and the way it handles in my hands. I can focus it faster than any other lens and it feels nicely balanced on my M. However, the results I get with the FLE are unpredictable - sometimes the rendering and the "look" is just incredible and other times it looks like crap. I can't put my finger on it (even after 3 years and thousands of frames shot with it), but I do know that I don't experience the same with any of my other Summilux lenses. I shoot it mostly at f/1.4 to 2.8, with subjects at 0.7 meters to 3 meters.

Link to post
Share on other sites

I have a love hate relationship with my 35 FLE... I love the lens size and erogonomics and the way it handles in my hands. I can focus it faster than any other lens and it feels nicely balanced on my M. However, the results I get with the FLE are unpredictable - sometimes the rendering and the "look" is just incredible and other times it looks like crap. I can't put my finger on it (even after 3 years and thousands of frames shot with it), but I do know that I don't experience the same with any of my other Summilux lenses. I shoot it mostly at f/1.4 to 2.8, with subjects at 0.7 meters to 3 meters.

Thanks, that's precisely my experience with the FLE thus far, and your shooting style (both aperture and distance) closely matches mine. I love the handling as well (I'm sure it's much better than the 28 cron with it's frakenhood) but I'm sure the inconsistency will drive me crazy down the line....

Link to post
Share on other sites

Personally I've never understood this 'rendering' talk but that's just me. Everyone sees different things in a picture.

 

I have the 35 FLE and use it on film (I don't shoot digital). It is naturally a superlative lens technically and optically, virtually flawless.

 

What I dislike about it doesn't have so much to do with the lens itself as the focal length.

 

35mm is neither here nor there, neither close enough nor wide enough. It's, effectively (and to my mind, I hasten to add), a "meh" focal length. So I'm also considering selling mine, but for slightly different reasons.

 

I know I wouldn't miss it at all and the lens I would most likely buy instead would be a 28mm lens to separate further from my 50mm lenses.

 

Since you have - and like - the CV 35 I see no reason to keep the 35 Summilux. Put the money to a 28mm lens instead.

 

Philip

 

 

The nuances must be lost in the grain  :D

 

But I agree with Philip, you already have a fast 35, no need to have two. Get the 28 and see how you like it.

Link to post
Share on other sites

From what I've seen of the 35 FLE, when it's "on", it's incredible, but it isnt consistent. To echo others, if you dont like it, sell it, even if you dont buy something else.

 

The 28 cron, especially the V1, is an extremely consistent and predictable lens. From what I've seen of the V2, while clearly sharper across the frame, it acts less predictably in terms of field curvature....which is maybe what you're experiencing on the 35 FLE.  The good news is that the V1 is still a great "sharp enough" lens (IMO) and some like myself actually prefer it over the V2 for it's faults, specifically with regard to the slightly lower contrast and maybe more muted color. The other good news is that when you sell your 35 FLE, should you decided to get a V1 28 cron, you'll also likely pocket more than $1K US.

  • Like 2
Link to post
Share on other sites

Join the conversation

You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.
Note: Your post will require moderator approval before it will be visible.

Guest
Reply to this topic...

×   Pasted as rich text.   Paste as plain text instead

  Only 75 emoji are allowed.

×   Your link has been automatically embedded.   Display as a link instead

×   Your previous content has been restored.   Clear editor

×   You cannot paste images directly. Upload or insert images from URL.

×
×
  • Create New...