24mm Summilux versus Elmarit

[skimmel]

Advertisement (gone after registration)

I just got each of these lens to test from Dale Photo as a Test Drive (highly recommend Dale!).

 

I don't yet have an M9, so tested on my M8 and posted on the M8 forum. Linking here in cases anyone is interested:

 

http://www.l-camera-forum.com/leica-forum/leica-m8-forum/107842-24mm-summilux-versus-elmarit.html

[Advertisement]

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

[yanidel]

Interesting tests, clearly two different renderings.

 

I always thought the 24mm Elmarit is the best overall Leica lens (of the ones I have tried). It is simply gorgeous on the M8. Great colors, crispy, sharp and contrasty. I experimented a bit on the M9 this weekend, and it is also great though the 24mm FF is much more challenging.

 

As per the Lux vs Elmarit question, my feelings are the following :

- on the M9, you need to be very close to your subject, probably at 1-1.5 meters, otherwise they look very small. Therefore I am not sure Dof really matters there. Be it on the Elmarit at 2.8 or Lux at 1.4, you can have significant background blur or you will stop down to avoid focusing errors anyways.

- that means the real advantage of the Lux is for low light. Now, how often one will use 24mm in low light is the question. Because obviously, subjects keep moving at same speed in low light, so at 1-1.5m, I doubt you can have enough speed to freeze movement, enough Dof for accurate focus and sound composition.

- final consideration is size, weight and price. I used the 24mm Elmarit on the M9 with or without external finder. Both work pretty well. I guess that with the Lux the only way to go is probably with an external finder. As for weight, we are talking almost the double. Price ... obviously if you are considering both, this does not seem to really be an issue for you but was for me.

Obivously, these comments apply mainly to street. For landscaping, it is basically a consideration of rendering and low light capability. In terms of rendering, I see two main families :

- 24 Lux, 35 Lux and 75 Lux

- 24 Elmarit, 35 Cron, 75 Cron.

So I guess it also depends about your other lenses and the look you are after. In my case, I used a lot 24mm Elmarit, 35 Lux and 60 Hex on the M8. The Elmarit was always the little black duck. You could spot straight away pictures taken with it due to its rendering, which was bothering at times. On the M9, I might go for 24mm Elmarit, 35 Lux and 75 Cron. But I don't expect to use the 24mm Elmarit as much.

Not sure this helped

[Baptiste]

Hello,

 

Thx for posting this bench!

 

I don't have so much time to comment, the only thing I'd like to stress out is that your outdoor-tree test clearly shows how different the DOF is between 1.4 & 2.8. This is, to me, not so much visible on the other pics (y, well, it is as well on the low light pics...).

 

Anyway... I love that low DOF, and this is something that attracted me when I decided to go for a M9. I don't have the budget to get a 24 Lux now, but this is definitely the next lens I target to buy (maybe with an 24 Elmarit intermediate step).

 

Best Regards,

Baptiste

[skimmel]

Yes, DOF differences are more clear than I thought they would be, especially when close up to the subject.

 

In terms of speed, 2 stops can make a big difference for me given the low lighting I usually shoot under.

 

But, I do like the rendering and size of the elmarit. I could always, if I felt the need, blur background in PS (not ideal, I know, and time consuming, but do-able).

 

If money were not an issue: I'd go for the lux as it is simply more versatile and has a very unique rendering at 1.4. However, if I do go for the elmarit, I won't be unhappy! (And that lens isn't cheap either, so will have to see how much I can get for my M8 and 18mm super elmar which I plan to sell when the M9 comes in).

[tappan]

Hello from the future. Time to resurrect this 2009 post :-).
I think I may be one of not too many that uses a 24mm Elmarit. I bought it years ago for an M9 from Ken Hansen, may he rest in peace.
Now, with the new cameras (M10-M11) does anyone who uses these 24mm have a preference or thoughts on how they react/respond/render on the newest bodies?
Thx

Mark

[newtoleica]

On 1/10/2024 at 12:10 AM, tappan said:

Hello from the future. Time to resurrect this 2009 post :-).
I think I may be one of not too many that uses a 24mm Elmarit. I bought it years ago for an M9 from Ken Hansen, may he rest in peace.
Now, with the new cameras (M10-M11) does anyone who uses these 24mm have a preference or thoughts on how they react/respond/render on the newest bodies?
Thx

Mark

It lives..... my goodness. There are a number of threads on this comparison. I've used both quite a lot as 24mm is my preferred focal length for street photography. You'll see a lot on my website. The recent gallery of Nyugati rail station in Budapest is shot with the 24 Summilux (and M10-P). The primary difference is the way the lenses render (apart from the obvious 1.4 v 2.8). The elmarit is quite flat but the Summilux has a degree of field curvature and produces a very cinematic feel with the OOF areas exaggerated by the curvature.  Its a lovely look, but quite characteristic of this lens.

[villavi3]

Advertisement (gone after registration)

I recently got the Elmarit after years of using the Zeiss 25. The Zeiss is sharper and has more contrast, the Elmarit is two lenses in one, from 2.8-4 its soft and low contrast, after 5.8 its just as sharp and contrasty as the Zeiss. I haven't used the summilux 24, but I would assume is has more in common with the Zeiss than the Elmarit when I comes to rendering, its just ultra modern.  Both of them are more than capable with my M11M, beautiful files from both lenses!