Difference in image quality between a Summicron and Summarit.

[steinzeug]

Advertisement (gone after registration)

Hello,

 

I've been shooting with a Summarit 50mm on my Leica MP (my first leica) for a couple of months and am overall very pleased with the overall performance of the lens.

 

I love its compactness, light weight, and overall image quality; despite occasional fuzziness in low light conditions and lacking a little in built quality in my opinion.

 

Now I'm considering to buy a used Summicron 35mm, since I could really use the wider angle for some of my work, as well as the extra stop it will give me.

 

My question is, is there going to be a noticeable difference in image quality from the Summicron compared to my Summarit? I realize the Summarits were marketed by Leica as a more affordable lens series, so I'm expecting the Summicron to perform noticeably better.

 

What do you think?

 

Best regards,

Skov

 

 

Hi, I am trying to get to grips with the summarit 2.5 50,

how serious was the : occasional fuzziness in low light conditions?

[Advertisement]

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

[Xmas]

Hi, I am trying to get to grips with the summarit 2.5 50,

how serious was the : occasional fuzziness in low light conditions?

 

I'd suggest subjective, it is easier to manufacture a good f/2.5 then a good f/2, the performance is substantially encapsulated in the Leica MTF diagrams on their site, e.g. you don't see how they will behave against the light when veiling flare may dominate more.

 

You don't get f/2 with the f/2.5 lens, and you are going to need a 10 kilo tripod and slow film to detect any differences, and they might not be what you would expect, unless you look at MTFs.

 

Noel

[steinzeug]

I'd suggest subjective, it is easier to manufacture a good f/2.5 then a good f/2, the performance is substantially encapsulated in the Leica MTF diagrams on their site, e.g. you don't see how they will behave against the light when veiling flare may dominate more.

 

You don't get f/2 with the f/2.5 lens, and you are going to need a 10 kilo tripod and slow film to detect any differences, and they might not be what you would expect, unless you look at MTFs.

 

Noel

 

i.e its the summarit is a great lens?

[Xmas]

They both are you have to pay more money and make other compromises to get more speed.

 

I'll find the MTF links next, they are not as subjective, as 'web text'.

 

I'd note that Zeiss had CV make a ZM lens and CV make their own (Voightlander badged), and I'd caveat if you are going to have to use the lens the ergonomics may be more critical than the optical performance, e.g. unless you take landscapes and are only waiting for clouds. Weight if you carry it all day as well.

 

Hand and finger size may be more difficult with the wrong lens, demo in shop time, can I learn to use this lens ignoring cost, for the moment, hor and vertical?

 

The ZM lenses do have a following, but some people don't like the slack that some have in their helicoids (and the dot is blue).

 

The leica (i.e. all the 35m cameras) was never about performance it was about immediacy, handling may be more critical.

 

Noel

 

P.S. There is the modern Elmar collapsible to consider as well, if you have large fingers it is nicer ergonomically for some people.

 

[EDIT] here is the link you have to down load the PDF for each lens

http://us.leica-camera.com/photography/m_system/lenses/

[giordano]

i.e its the summarit is a great lens?

 

It's certainly the best 50mm f/2.5 lens ever produced in M-mount. It certainly delivers higher image quality than some lenses that were generally considered "great" in their time. But how can we know what are your criteria for "a great lens"?

[steinzeug]

It's certainly the best 50mm f/2.5 lens ever produced in M-mount. It certainly delivers higher image quality than some lenses that were generally considered "great" in their time. But how can we know what are your criteria for "a great lens"?

 

 

Thankyou (to both of the last posts) points taken!

 

Of course immediacy and ones relationship to the camera and lens in the field are very important factors indeed, I totally agree.

 

I am seriously considering a Summarit 2.5 50mm for these very reasons,

and being a 2010 Leica lens, it must have exceptional/good visual performance.

 

thanks guys!