What to expect with the combination of Leica M10 and older version 28mm Summicron ASPH (Version 11604)?

[uhoh7]

Advertisement (gone after registration)

To be honest, I don't shoot the 28/2 often WO. It has a whole different look there. I love the look stopped down. Look at the Chart. Why would I shoot a landscape WO?

 

So people love to shoot it all fast as possible. Sometimes that's fun. But HCB lived at F/8. Nobody complained. 

 

Where are the fuzzy noses, dammit?

 

Karbe? Where is his portfolio?
 

He makes great lenses, but I'm not sure he is the best judge of how to use, them. However, I'm open to learning

Edited February 1, 2017 by uhoh7

[jmahto]

I do shoot 28 cron WO sometimes. When I do, it is mostly for close up portrait with gentle out of focus background but sometimes I use it for evening/night time shooting in the city.

 

I have no problem with the sharpness on M240.

 

Montesanto, Piazza Del Popolo, Rome

M240, 28 cron ASPH Wide Open

Welcome, dear visitor! As registered member you'd see an image here…

Simply register for free here – We are always happy to welcome new members!

[Advertisement]

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

[Rick]

I don't see many landscapes or architecture shooting at F/2. Edges and corners on V1 are great at the normal apertures. Few lenses have a perfectly flat field at F/2

 

Tell me a better DSLR 28 technically than the 28 cron v1 ?

 

Rick is adamant the new version is far better than the old. I only have the old. You can see how it works.

 

He may well be right. It's an extra 2k. The old one is fantastic to me, and I have quite a few lenses to compare it to. I shoot many landscapes, so edges are important.

 

28 cron v1 has great edges. As Puts describes in his review, and is normal, they are best at 5.6 and F/8. In fact the cron seems to behave just as he describes for me on M9.

 

Karbe's idea we should be shooting WO always? Whatever. I guess if you hate DOF, it's a great idea. LOL

 

My advice would be to ignore what everyone "says". My fulls are right on flickr. You can see the edges perfectly well. They are good enough for you or they are not. In the end it's best to be your own judge. Listen, sure so you can see what different people like and use. Then use your own judgement. Never go by single examples, such as the "test" shots in the other thread.

 

The 28 cron v1 is a famous lens on the M9, no matter what any one here says, loved by alot of fantastic photographers. Some have said it's their favorite lens period. Maybe it's that way for you, maybe not.

 

Let your eyes tell you in real images. If you don't like the shot, you should be skeptical about relying on what it tells you, look further.

 

Here is a test album and you can see the v1 as Puts says, starts to get good at f/4 infinity on the edge and excellent at 5.6 and fantastic at f/8

 

https://flic.kr/s/aHsku8ZfrL

 

That's what I would expect. Let's see some good true infinity samples from the new one. Further, let's see it in real action. The we can see if there are trade offs or it's just 2 thousand bucks better

 

 

Your pictures are shot at f11-f16.  I can tell this because of all of the dirt on your sensor which is evidenced at small apertures.  The lens is fine at these stopped down apertures.  Smearing in the mid and corners is ok.

 

But, at f2-f8 the corners suck.  That is why the lens was redesigned.

 

Having said that, I rarely shoot 28mm wide open, I like to stop down like you.  Creatively, I like to create depth in a photo by having many elements superimposed and in focus.  That is why I liked the old 28 Summicron.  That is why I said it was fine.

 

But, it still doesn't obviate the fact that wide open the edges smear, badly.  So, I let the lens go and took a hit on it.  I did it because I love the 28 Summicron and shoot it (like you) most of the time.  I wanted the best f2.0 28mm lens at this focal length, even though I usually shoot it stopped down.  See how silly that is.  That is why I said the old version is fine. 

 

RickSilly

Edited February 2, 2017 by Rick

[jmahto]

I am sure there are many examples of how 28 cron ASPH behaves on M240 wide open. I guess Sean Reid also has it.

 

I have done my own tests and the results are ok for my usage. The following is comparison of the crops in two pictures at f/2. Near corner vs not corner. Note that it is f/2. At f/8 or f/11 there is no difference except distortion due to camera angle.

 

There are exposure differences between two shots that I equalized in PP.

Welcome, dear visitor! As registered member you'd see an image here…

Simply register for free here – We are always happy to welcome new members!

 

and 1:1 crop (f/2)

 

 

and this is at f/5.6 which I use most of the time outdoors. It is as good as it gets.

 

Edited February 2, 2017 by jmahto

[a911s]

The old 28 Summicron is not "really good" on the M9 or the M240.  It has terrible edge and mid-field performance.  Lower contrast and less vivid color.  That is why it was redesigned.hoh7 posted, it has to be stopped down to f11-f16 to become fine on the M240 or M9.  If, you are ok shooting at these stopped down apertures why not get the Elmarit?  

 

Rick

 

 

Here's a photo I made with my "not really good" V1 28mm Summicron wide open on my M9-P. Hand held, unsharpened. Fantastic lens in the way it draws - not perfect, not clinical. For $2K used I'll take it any day of the week - must have got a good one!

 

P.S. On the full size file you can see detail in the wine glasses on the tables mid-field...

Welcome, dear visitor! As registered member you'd see an image here…

Simply register for free here – We are always happy to welcome new members!

Edited February 2, 2017 by a911s

[Rambot-M]

Thank you all for your input. I just need to check my lens out on M10 when i get hold of it. Looking forward to it.

[Rick]

Advertisement (gone after registration)

Here's a photo I made with my "not really good" V1 28mm Summicron wide open on my M9-P. Hand held, unsharpened. Fantastic lens in the way it draws - not perfect, not clinical. For $2K used I'll take it any day of the week - must have got a good one!

 

P.S. On the full size file you can see detail in the wine glasses on the tables mid-field...

 

 

I really can't tell anything from this photo.  Could you post the DNG?  What was the f-stop?  It is not a very challenging photo.

 

The ver. 1 lens isn't good at all on digital cameras in the mid and corners, especially when the lens isn't stopped down.  Sorry, it just isn't good.  It is too retro focus..

Rick

Edited February 3, 2017 by Rick

[uhoh7]

Your pictures are shot at f11-f16.  I can tell this because of all of the dirt on your sensor which is evidenced at small apertures.  The lens is fine at these stopped down apertures.  Smearing in the mid and corners is ok.

 

But, at f2-f8 the corners suck.  That is why the lens was redesigned.

 

Having said that, I rarely shoot 28mm wide open, I like to stop down like you.  Creatively, I like to create depth in a photo by having many elements superimposed and in focus.  That is why I liked the old 28 Summicron.  That is why I said it was fine.

 

But, it still doesn't obviate the fact that wide open the edges smear, badly.  So, I let the lens go and took a hit on it.  I did it because I love the 28 Summicron and shoot it (like you) most of the time.  I wanted the best f2.0 28mm lens at this focal length, even though I usually shoot it stopped down.  See how silly that is.  That is why I said the old version is fine. 

 

RickSilly

Yes I need to clean that thing

 

this morning WO:

L1056900 by unoh7, on Flickr

 

It's not the greatest shot, but look on the right side. I don't doubt it softens, as the charts show, but not terribly distracting. Hey, the new one should be better, else why change it....but they should have claimed f/1.9 in the Summarit tradition.

 

What I'm just saying: the v1 is a great lens on digital. Perfect? No. Just better than everything else, except a good copy of the V2

[brill64]

the v1. may not be as great as the v2. but image quality is improved by keeping the lens hood in place. without it there's a noticeable drop in contrast at the edges.

[jmahto]

the v1. may not be as great as the v2. but image quality is improved by keeping the lens hood in place. without it there's a noticeable drop in contrast at the edges.

Not so sure... This is shot by V1 at f/8 into the Sun without hood (on M9). Sun was just outside the frame. It is sharp enough everywhere to cut eyeballs.

 

Welcome, dear visitor! As registered member you'd see an image here…

Simply register for free here – We are always happy to welcome new members!

 

and this is 1:1 crop from the right most edge. There is no loss of contrast.

 

Edited February 3, 2017 by jmahto

[uhoh7]

Here is v1 WO also this morning no edit

 

L1056895 by unoh7, on Flickr

 

Certainly can't tell everything here, but there are edges even at F/2

 

Corners no way to tell here, I would not expect them, but there is no distracting edge smear anyway. Note lettering on lift base on left.

 

So, I would not dispute v2 should be better. But real world, this is good.

Edited February 3, 2017 by uhoh7

[a911s]

I really can't tell anything from this photo.  Could you post the DNG?  What was the f-stop?  It is not a very challenging photo.

 

The ver. 1 lens isn't good at all on digital cameras in the mid and corners, especially when the lens isn't stopped down.  Sorry, it just isn't good.  It is too retro focus..

Rick

 

 

Now why would anyone engage you with that attitude?  The V1 is great for me (200% mid-field crop of unsharpened DNG at f2 below) . You're free to disagree - but I think you just got bad samples.

Welcome, dear visitor! As registered member you'd see an image here…

Simply register for free here – We are always happy to welcome new members!

Edited February 3, 2017 by a911s

[Malvolio]

I picked up my M10 last week and am thoroughly impressed. I owned the M9, M240 previously and hands down the 28 Cron version 1 has mated perfectly with the M10. Beautiful colors and no complaints whatsoever.

 

 

Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

[Rambot-M]

Thank you! Could you please share some photos if possible?

 

 

Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

[Adam K]

I don't (yet) have my M10, but I have tried a demonstrator.

The shop had thoughtfully fitted a new 28mm Summicron as they knew that many people would be interested in the improved viewfinder with wide-angle lenses, and I had, equally thoughtfully, taken my first-series 28mm Summicron for the same reason.

I only took a few pictures, but I took interiors and some out of the door of the shop - not at anything like infinity, but across the street.

I used f2 and f5,6 for both lenses.

On my monitor, looking at the corners (there was a tree, no leaves, in a roof garden top left in the image) I note that neither the old, nor the new lens produced a 'crisp' tree at full aperture. At f5,6, both were very much better.

The centre of the image (brickwork) was acceptably crisp, though slightly better stopped down, with both lenses.

The interiors were good in the centre - it's in the nature of many casually-taken interiors that the corners will be at a different distance from the centre, so all I can say is that both were good in the centre at full aperture and at f5,6; but both would have been better if there had not been a couple of inches of back-focus.

My comments? Firstly, I was only taking hand-held shots, quite quickly, so my 'tests' are hardly definitive.

Secondly, when I use full aperture it's either because I want a 'plane of focus' which will rarely need to include the corners - I'll be wanting the viewer's attention somewhere more central - or because the light is very poor. In poor light, the subject is again usually more central.

Thirdly (and you may not like this, it upset me slightly), my Leica Q produced much sharper corner results than either lens at full aperture. The tree looked like a tree.

 

Personally, I won't be changing my present 28mm Summicron for the new model, certainly not until I have my own M10 and have tried both lenses much more seriously. On my monitor at 100% the Q is so much better at f1,7 than either of the Summicrons at f2, that if I really need to use full aperture with a 28mm angle-of-view I'll be using the 'compact camera'.

[microview]

Thirdly (and you may not like this, it upset me slightly), my Leica Q produced much sharper corner results than either lens at full aperture. The tree looked like a tree……....

 

A couple of handheld shots both at f2 from same position: I don't see an appreciably better resolution with the Q lens and – on an M262 (still awaiting M10   ) the latest 28 Summicron, although colour rendition is very different. Of course one would need compare tripod-mount shots of brickwork to verify but in the 'real world'?

Welcome, dear visitor! As registered member you'd see an image here…

Simply register for free here – We are always happy to welcome new members!

Edited March 2, 2017 by microview

[microview]

and the 28 Summicron (with some adjustment of 'temperature' in LR5)

Welcome, dear visitor! As registered member you'd see an image here…

Simply register for free here – We are always happy to welcome new members!

Edited March 2, 2017 by microview

[uhoh7]

You certainly won't tell anything from a shot like that. 

 

I have been doing some testing lately on new prototype mods for Sonys, with M9 as benchmark. 

 

M9_28cron_F28 by unoh7, on Flickr

 

That's my preferred testing area. Such a shot does not tell everything, it just tells the most possible information about performance across the frame in the most demanding scenario: infinity, when the rear element is closest to the sensor. A such speed even slight variations in focus skew results. Usually soft corners are not soft at all. They are out of focus due to FC. 

 

Now others would test like this:

 

M9_ZM35-2_F56 by unoh7, on Flickr

 

You do get some nice distant corners, but I get ill, and am unable to follow the lens performance across the frame as well.

 

The old 28 cron may not be as flat as the new one at f/2.8, but it smokes the ZM 35/2 at such speed.

 

M9_ZM35-2_F28 by unoh7, on Flickr

 

A great meter is very distant trees. Note the ridge line at about 2 miles. 

 

M9_ZM35-2_F28edge by unoh7, on Flickr

 

You don't need to study any corners. The story is clear, and more useful, since real people seldom study corners, but edges are a but more obvious. 

 

The MTF for the ZM predicts the performance pretty well:

ZM 35/2 Mtfs by unoh7, on Flickr

 

It's funny how few bother with a proper infinity test, which is not really so hard. They shoot bookshelves, brick walls or scenes where the lower corners get very near. Such shots are so mushy and unreliable compared to just getting on a roof or hill and working with true infinity. 

 

Leica Q is not in the league of the 28 crons, either flavor. It has huge native distortion, and huge in-camera corrections. But it's a nice 28 anyway, despite the use of the Lux appellate, which is something you'd expect on a cheap camera. Since a huge amount of light is used up in the corrections, even calling it a 28 cron is being awfully nice LOL

 

But it does AF and has nice manual focus, so hat's off to a great camera overall, the Q

 

I guess I could use this as a test shot to say: the old cron is so good, there are corners WO on the A7:

UT_28cronWO by unoh7, on Flickr

 

On flickr you can zoom to the lower left corner and see nice detail, really. 

 

But to be honest, I would need to add the Sony has a very thin filter, and corners can really lie in shot like this

Edited March 3, 2017 by uhoh7

[wattsy]

and the 28 Summicron (with some adjustment of 'temperature' in LR5)

 

 

Interesting to see the different field of view between your two photographs. Did you change position as well as cameras?

[Advertisement]

Hallo,

Look here: Leica M

[01af]

The original Summicron-M 28 mm Asph is a wonderful lens even though the re-designed version is even better. In a wide area around the frame's center, there hardly is any difference between the two, but near the edges and right in the corners, the new version is clearly better at wide apertures (i. e. f/2 – f/4).

 

This is true regardless of the camera. I have no idea where this absurd notion that an M lens, old or current, might perform worse on the M10 than on M9 or M (Typ 240) is coming from