Leicauser7 Posted February 6, 2017 Share #1 Posted February 6, 2017 (edited) Advertisement (gone after registration) I have heard it said that these two lenses are not in the same league from a quality (not build quality but optical performance) standpoint as the new 28 lux. I am wondering if anyone has a view on this particular question. Many thanks for any insights. Edited February 6, 2017 by Leicauser7 Quote Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Advertisement Posted February 6, 2017 Posted February 6, 2017 Hi Leicauser7, Take a look here 21 and 24 Summilux vs. 28 Summilux. I'm sure you'll find what you were looking for!
NB23 Posted February 6, 2017 Share #2 Posted February 6, 2017 I've had a 24 lux from new. Shot it for 5 years and when it was over warranty, I sent it to DAG to fix a severe backfocus issue. Basically I've used it with subpar results all along. Since I don't shoot digital and I have a 5-10 year film backlog, I am presently printing soft negatives from 2010. But I can tell you that after the fix my 24 is absolutely sharp and gorgeous. I don't regret anything but I'll have to plan a new trip to Paris and all over Europe to reshoot a few spots... Quote Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Leicauser7 Posted February 7, 2017 Author Share #3 Posted February 7, 2017 thanks... Quote Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
dritz Posted February 7, 2017 Share #4 Posted February 7, 2017 I recently purchased a used 24 lux, shooting both film and M246. It's a thrilling lens for me. The shallow depth of field that it offers makes it much more versatile for me versus the 21 SEM. I haven't used the 21 lux, so have no opinion. It's a fabulous kit lens for street shooting, along with the 35 lux. Quote Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
JCR33 Posted February 7, 2017 Share #5 Posted February 7, 2017 (edited) I love my 24 Lux from day one and still giving me a lot of pleasant surprises now. Shot from hip and cropped Edited February 7, 2017 by JCR33 1 Quote Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
jaroopaitummai Posted February 7, 2017 Share #6 Posted February 7, 2017 (edited) Here is a picture from 21mm summilux... 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 7, 2017 by jaroopaitummai Quote Link to post Share on other sites Simply register for free here – We are always happy to welcome new members! ' data-webShareUrl='https://www.l-camera-forum.com/topic/269085-21-and-24-summilux-vs-28-summilux/?do=findComment&comment=3206518'>More sharing options...
jaroopaitummai Posted February 7, 2017 Share #7 Posted February 7, 2017 Advertisement (gone after registration) Here is 21mm summilux wide open. I personally think it is a good environmental portrait lens. 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! 3 Quote Link to post Share on other sites Simply register for free here – We are always happy to welcome new members! ' data-webShareUrl='https://www.l-camera-forum.com/topic/269085-21-and-24-summilux-vs-28-summilux/?do=findComment&comment=3206526'>More sharing options...
tom0511 Posted February 7, 2017 Share #8 Posted February 7, 2017 (edited) I have owned a 24lux and really liked it plus found it optically quite good. I found it interesting for the shallow DOF effect in a wide lens one can create. I bought a used 21lux which I found a little soft, Leica said it was to specs but it was not good for my taste so I gave it back. I now own a 21/3.4 which is very sharp (one could say its lacking character). I haven't owned the 28Lux, thought about it but came to the conclusion that the 28/2.0 I have is fast enough for my taste. IMO the difference between focal lengths should be the deciding factor here, not so much If one lens is a little better. I am a long time user of the M system and my way has been more in direction to smaller/lighter lenses and not so much to have them all in a superfast version. First because I think the M is about light lenses, second it is also a question how reliable can we focus and shoot with very shallow DOF, third I started to believe that shallow DOF can be nice but too shallow DOF can be ugly (one example those images with just one eye in focus). My low light lens has become the 35/1.4 FLE, but in case of 21mm,28mm, 50mm,90mm I don't feel to need/want the fastest versions of those lenses. I admit that the combination of shallow DOF in a UWA has some appeal. 24mm would be the most flexible, but I think I prefer the 21mm FOV for UWA. Edited February 7, 2017 by tom0511 Quote Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
BBHewee Posted February 7, 2017 Share #9 Posted February 7, 2017 I really miss my Lux 24... It's a spectacular lens. Quote Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
jrp Posted February 8, 2017 Share #10 Posted February 8, 2017 They are all pretty good (and so they should be for the price) to the extent that I would not pick one over the other on the basis of "sharpness". But they all have slightly different character that is reflected in the MTF charts. The edges can seem rougher, the wider you go. The 24mm has an almost painterly look at longer distances. The 21mm has a beautiful backgrounds, close up. The 28mm has a bit more sparkle / contrast. But it takes time to get to know each lens's characteristics as they vary with distance and subject matter. For absolute performance the slower series of lenses are more perfect, but you lose the special looks available with the faster series. 1 Quote Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
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.