35mm lux or cron?

[Peter H]

Advertisement (gone after registration)

Help please:

 

Having been away from Leica for about 10 years during the dawning of the digital age, I'm about to return with an M9, though goodness knows when I'll actually get one in my hands!

 

The question is which 35 mm lens should I plump for? I know from my M6 days that I love 35mm and even with my D700 it is my most used lens. And to begin with I intend it to be my only lens.

 

So, is there an important difference between the current lux and cron from f2 onwards? I think I can evaluate the benefit of the extra stop for myself, but what I can't do, and you may be able to help here, is to evaluate the other differences between two lenses.

 

Any thoughts would be very much appreciated.

 

Peter H

[Advertisement]

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

[chris_tribble]

One's bigger than the other.

 

This isn't a facetious remark. I stick with my old by very trusty 35 Cron mk 1V because I like the results it gives, it's fast enough for my purposes AND it means I can use the M9 as a pocket camera when I want a one-lens kit.

 

The 35 Lux is a splendid thing - but it's big and heavy by comparison...

 

Optically? They do different things - and both are VERY good. For my money I'd go for the Cron as it gives enough speed to be useful, great IQ and wonderful portability. The essence of M photography?

[Shade]

Both are very good lenses. But I just switched to the lux. The shallower dof and handholdability in dim light is what I'm after..

 

Plus the bokeh is more pleasing on the lux..

[noah_addis]

I have and use both.

 

If I had to choose one, without a doubt it absolutely would be the 35 Summilux Asph.

 

The 'Lux has a bit of a smoother look in my opinion, and the extra speed is nice when you need it. The 'Cron has more contrast and slightly more of a modern look. I wouldn't go so far as to say it's harsh, but to me it lacks some of the character of the 'Lux.

 

My copy of the 35 Summicron Asph is black paint, so it's heavy--it feels about the same or heavier than my 'Lux. If course the black chrome version would be lighter. There is a size difference between the two, but it's not all that large of a difference and both are compact compared to SLR lenses. I often leave the hood off of the 'Lux and that helps a bit.

 

Having said that, I'd say with digital and its capability for high ISO and the ability to change ISO on the fly, the faster lens is less important.

 

You really can't go wrong either way. You need to balance the size, the look each lens provides and of course cost of the two lenses.

 

You may want to wait--if the rumors are true and a new 35 'Lux is introduced, you may be able to get a good deal on the old (current) version!

[Ecar]

I use both, depending on the circumstances. I'd say it's a matter of what is your primary use: if it's daylight street at f4-f5.6, then go for the Cron, as the Lux will provide no IQ benefit and is a bulkier lens.

However, if you are planning to work often in poorly lit environments or want to create images where the subject is strongly isolated against a blurred background, then the Lux is a better choice (yes, at the same aperture the bokeh is nicer than the Cron's IMO too, but that's subjective).

[Shade]

I don't find the size of 35 lux to be a burden. It is though somewhat larger than the cron. But besides it's length and larger hood, I didn't notice any weight difference..

[likalar]

Advertisement (gone after registration)

Hi,

 

46mm vs. 39 mm filter size might make a slight difference to you, as the summicron (39mm) filters and lens hoods are more interchangable with other older lenses if you go that route eventually.

 

Larry

[Jamie Roberts]

Another vote for the current 35 Lux ASPH. One of my all-time favourite lenses!

[Symeon]

Go ahead if you can afford it, but remember - Lux lenses were built for night photography or similar low light situations. The f1,4 will definitely allow you to use lower ISO on the M8/M9 but it has its little issues, and it is nowhere near the 1,4/50 ASPH quality. On the other hand the 2/35 Cron (III version and up) is more consistent throughout its aperture range, it is smaller, lighter and extremely user friendly.

 

regards.

[rennsport]

35 Lux for me. It's useful in lowlight when I need it (and quite often I do). It may be bigger than the Cron but coming from a D700 system, this is small by my standard.

[Jamie Roberts]

Go ahead if you can afford it, but remember - Lux lenses were built for night photography or similar low light situations. The f1,4 will definitely allow you to use lower ISO on the M8/M9 but it has its little issues, and it is nowhere near the 1,4/50 ASPH quality. On the other hand the 2/35 Cron (III version and up) is more consistent throughout its aperture range, it is smaller, lighter and extremely user friendly.

 

regards.

 

Um, yes, IMO it is near 50 Lux APSH quality. It's not the same, but it's very close I'm one of those people that doesn't have a focus shift issue with the 35 Lux, BTW, and I use it (with a 50 Lux ASPH) on film and digital. YMMV, of course.

 

The moral is: if you get a Lux, check it first.... some people have reported serious focus shift.

[DFV]

Right now the CRON 35 is the better lens yet the LUX 35 is about to be reintroduced and maybe even redesigned so to give a recommendation on something that is not out yet is rather difficult.

 

I believe I read somewhere that most Leica lenses are in the process of being redesigned slightly due to the new M sensors and the distance of the last element of the lens to the sensor. The closer the element to the sensor the steeper the angle of light and the more problem you will have on the edges. The CRONs work perfectly since the distance of the last element is farther away from the sensor. Right now I would wait for the new LUX however, the CRON is a safe bet money-vise and quality-vise.

[chris_tribble]

Right now the CRON 35 is the better lens yet the LUX 35 is about to be reintroduced and maybe even redesigned so to give a recommendation on something that is not out yet is rather difficult.

 

I believe I read somewhere that most Leica lenses are in the process of being redesigned slightly due to the new M sensors and the distance of the last element of the lens to the sensor. The closer the element to the sensor the steeper the angle of light and the more problem you will have on the edges. The CRONs work perfectly since the distance of the last element is farther away from the sensor. Right now I would wait for the new LUX however, the CRON is a safe bet money-vise and quality-vise.

DFV - interesting comment.

[Jamie Roberts]

Right now the CRON 35 is the better lens yet the LUX 35 is about to be reintroduced and maybe even redesigned so to give a recommendation on something that is not out yet is rather difficult.

 

I believe I read somewhere that most Leica lenses are in the process of being redesigned slightly due to the new M sensors and the distance of the last element of the lens to the sensor. The closer the element to the sensor the steeper the angle of light and the more problem you will have on the edges. The CRONs work perfectly since the distance of the last element is farther away from the sensor. Right now I would wait for the new LUX however, the CRON is a safe bet money-vise and quality-vise.

 

Do you have a source for this? It's quite curious and I'd love to read more about it.

 

Of course the crons have perhaps better edge to edge performance "wide open," but there's certainly nothing to ask for on the edges of a 35 lux at f2 I've used both and kept going back to the Lux.

 

Having said that, it's "common rumour" that the 35 Lux ASPH is being redesigned; I thought for the slight focus shift people report in some lenses, not for corner performance (which is excellent in any case). Or is this a colour thing due to sensor limitations?

[Ecar]

I believe I read somewhere that most Leica lenses are in the process of being redesigned slightly due to the new M sensors and the distance of the last element of the lens to the sensor. The closer the element to the sensor the steeper the angle of light and the more problem you will have on the edges. The CRONs work perfectly since the distance of the last element is farther away from the sensor. Right now I would wait for the new LUX however, the CRON is a safe bet money-vise and quality-vise.

Now, that would be serious news if it turns out to be true:confused:

Any source for this?

[Shade]

There are reported focus shift issues on 35 lux - but I just got mine yesterday and it worked out perfectly.

 

Now about the redesign.. I'm not very sure, how long ago was the 35 lux asph version? I'd still get one now, if I need it. The moments for taking pictures are irreplaceable..

[JWW]

I've owned and used the 35mm lux ASPH (recently sold), the 35mm ASPH cron, and the 35mm per ASPH cron. In my case, I would have a hard time searching through my lightroom library of distinguishing between the lux and cron ASPH at f2 and above, even though I know theoretically the cron has more contrast. Although the cron ASPH doen't seem much lighter than the lux, it's shorter and balances better on the camera so I tended to use it much more. Of course, the preASPH version 4 feels feather light in comparison.

[4X5B&W]

I recently moved from the Cron ASPH to the Lux ASPH, I would say that the Cron is very sharp edge to edge, at any aperture, and produces a high contrast image.....overall an excellent modern design.

 

The Lux has a very smooth look that I personally prefer.....and is plenty sharp, with slightly lower contrast.

 

I suspect that a new Lux design will have higher contrast and better edge to edge resolution.

 

My guess would be the current Lux ASPH is going to be of great interest to shooters, once the new one is announced.....a classic Leica lens IMO

[Advertisement]

Hallo,

Look here: Leica M

[Maximus]

M cameras are all about portability. They don't do everything well but they do produce high quality images at the 35mm focal length in a very compact package. Unless you need the extra stop go for the 'cron.

[glacierparkmagazine]

IMHO the M9 makes the 50 mm relevant again (after years of 1.x sensors), so I'd suggest a 28, a 50 (cron or lux) and a 90, rather than a 35. I use a 50 cron (non-asph) with great results daily. In fact, none of my lenses are aspherical and they're sharper than any short Nikons I've ever used. My 28 elmarit has no "red edge" issues.

 

I ain't bashing Nikon, either. They make great long glass, but I used a 14-24 more than a year, and it definitely had problems outside of being gigantic.