Clandrel Posted July 19, 2010 Share #1 Posted July 19, 2010 Advertisement (gone after registration) Hi, I'm looking for a compact and easy to carry lens. I already have the new 35 lux and a 75 cron, but want something a little smaller as an add on, to times when a more discreet set up is needed. I'm looking at either the 28 Elmarit ASPH or the 50 Summarit. I find myself using the 35 the most of the two lenses I have, so leaning against the 28 as an alternative to my 35. Thoughts? Best Claus Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Advertisement Posted July 19, 2010 Posted July 19, 2010 Hi Clandrel, Take a look here M9 lens question.... I'm sure you'll find what you were looking for!
PasMichiel Posted July 19, 2010 Share #2 Posted July 19, 2010 50 collapsible ? But if you like the 35, I wouldn't buy the 28. It's only one step backwards, I'd buy the 24. Hi, I'm looking for a compact and easy to carry lens. I already have the new 35 lux and a 75 cron, but want something a little smaller as an add on, to times when a more discreet set up is needed. I'm looking at either the 28 Elmarit ASPH or the 50 Summarit. I find myself using the 35 the most of the two lenses I have, so leaning against the 28 as an alternative to my 35. Thoughts? Best Claus Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Clandrel Posted July 19, 2010 Author Share #3 Posted July 19, 2010 No, the new 50mm Summarit. Yes, I was thinking about the 24, but it's much bigger and expensive, and that is not what I'm looking for. C Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
horosu Posted July 19, 2010 Share #4 Posted July 19, 2010 Why not a 35 mm lens, as you seem to like that FL the most: a 35 Summarit or a 35/2.8 C-Biogon (which I have and am very satisfied with it)? Cheers, Horea Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Clandrel Posted July 19, 2010 Author Share #5 Posted July 19, 2010 Yes, maybe... But it is tempting to go for a FL I don't have:) Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Nicoleica Posted July 19, 2010 Share #6 Posted July 19, 2010 The 50 Summarit is a lovely little lens, which will give excellent results. It's also very compact and light. (The 35 Summarit is a gorgeous little lens too, in case you wanted an alternative to the size and weight of your 'Lux.) Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Jeff S Posted July 19, 2010 Share #7 Posted July 19, 2010 Advertisement (gone after registration) Erwin likes them all, especially the 35 and 75...Summarit range Not a definitive conclusion, since individual needs and tastes vary, but objectively these little suckers seem way underrated by folks on the forums. Jeff Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Nicoleica Posted July 19, 2010 Share #8 Posted July 19, 2010 Erwin likes them all, especially the 35 and 75...Summarit range Not a definitive conclusion, since individual needs and tastes vary, but objectively these little suckers seem way underrated by folks on the forums. Jeff Hi Jeff. I think that if you ask anyone who owns, or has used one of the new Summarits, they will tell you only good things about them. They don't have one of the 'magic' names, and they are inexpensive by Leica standards, so they tend to be thought of as 'poor relations' by many. But once you use one, especially the 35, you discover that they are little gems. If ultimate speed is not your priority, then I don't think that you can wrong with one. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Jeff S Posted July 19, 2010 Share #9 Posted July 19, 2010 Hi Jeff. I think that if you ask anyone who owns, or has used one of the new Summarits, they will tell you only good things about them. They don't have one of the 'magic' names, and they are inexpensive by Leica standards, so they tend to be thought of as 'poor relations' by many. But once you use one, especially the 35, you discover that they are little gems. If ultimate speed is not your priority, then I don't think that you can wrong with one. I agree, Nicole, which is why I've posted my comment several other times on the forum. Folks here (besides you) generally ignore the Summarits and/or think of them as cheap and poorer quality lenses. I'm not sure if this is ignorance, or arrogance. Promotion by Leica is also less than stellar IMO, probably so as not to cannibalize Summicron sales. And, unfortunately, Summarits have apparently sold quite poorly. If I were just building a lens collection, and didn't already own a 35 Summicron asph, I wouldn't hesitate to consider the Summarit. Jeff Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
michael_b_elmer Posted July 19, 2010 Share #10 Posted July 19, 2010 Hi, I'm looking for a compact and easy to carry lens. I already have the new 35 lux and a 75 cron, but want something a little smaller as an add on, to times when a more discreet set up is needed. I'm looking at either the 28 Elmarit ASPH or the 50 Summarit. I find myself using the 35 the most of the two lenses I have, so leaning against the 28 as an alternative to my 35. Thoughts? Best Claus You have two wonderful lenses. Elmarit 28 asph will be an excellent supplement to those lenses, if you want to go wider. If you want a 50 mm lens, yous should buy the 50 Lux, which is an otstanding lens, perhaps Leica's best. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
01af Posted July 19, 2010 Share #11 Posted July 19, 2010 You may buy a 28 mm lens to complement your collection but for a one-lens kit, 28 mm is too short in my opinion. I recommend the Summarit-M 50 mm 1:2.5. It's small, light, unobtrusive, affordable—and its specific strength is an incredibly nice and natural rendition of detail that is just slightly out of focus. The Summarit-M 35 mm 1:2.5 is just as nice—if not even nicer—but you already have a 35 mm lens, so the 50 mm would make more sense in your case. With regard to the current Summarit-M line of lenses, I second everything Nicole said. The Summarits are often underrated but those who actually use them inevitably get hooked. The Summilux-M 50 mm Asph of course also is a desirable lens ... but it is neither light nor small—and when you need a fast speed then you can always rely on your existing lenses. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
PasMichiel Posted July 19, 2010 Share #12 Posted July 19, 2010 No, the new 50mm Summarit. Yes, I was thinking about the 24, but it's much bigger and expensive, and that is not what I'm looking for. C 24 is indeed more expensive and bigger. The new 50 summarit is great. But still I don't see the reason if the 35 is good. Really it's only one step back... If going for wide angle go for real: 15 18 or 21mm voigtlander has nice small not expensive ones. need some more light though.... Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
PasMichiel Posted July 19, 2010 Share #13 Posted July 19, 2010 The Summilux-M 50 mm Asph of course also is a desirable lens ... but it is neither light nor small—and when you need a fast speed then you can always rely on your existing lenses. true. voightlander has some nice 50 too, but no leica glass ofcourse... Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
gib_robinson Posted July 19, 2010 Share #14 Posted July 19, 2010 LEICA ELMAR-M 24 mm f/3.8 ASPH. This is a superb lens, although obviously slower than the Elmarit; it's small, light, has better IQ than the f/2.8 and is really an ideal FL companion to the 35mm. I certainly agree with those who think it's a useful step wider. Length: 40.6 / 56.6 mm (without / with lens hood) Largest diamater: approx. 53 mm Weight: approx. 260 g --Gib P.S. Of course all the size, weight information on new lenses is available on the Leica site and older lens spec are available on the Puts site and various books. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Clandrel Posted July 19, 2010 Author Share #15 Posted July 19, 2010 Thanks all for the replies! I'm not sure yet. There is a two months old 28/2.8 for sale. $1500 is quite cheap (at least here). If you all had a 35 and a 75, would you go for a 50 or a 28? My 75 is quite close to the 50, and my 35 is quite close to the 28, so I'm not sure. I like the idea (and that is the whole point) of the 28, cause it's so small and easy to carry around. The 50 Summarit is a bit bigger, but still small. Difficult choice! The 50/2.0 is too big (as I'm looking for a petite lens). The 24 FL is too wide (I don't want to use another VF). The 35 Summarit I've heard is great, but I have that FL. So I'm really stuck with the 28/2.8 or the 50/2.5... /c Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
01af Posted July 19, 2010 Share #16 Posted July 19, 2010 If you're interested in expanding your range then get the 28 mm. This way, you'd upgrade from 35 - 75 mm to 28 - 75 mm. With a 50 mm lens, you'd still be stuck with 35 - 75 mm. 28-35-75 will cover more ground than 35-50-75. If however you're interested in having a particularly small and unobtrusive lens that you can carry as a one-lens outfit then better get the 50 mm. One single 50 mm lens alone will cover more ground overall than one single 28 mm lens alone (in terms of shooting opportunities, that is—not field-of-view). Generally, 35-mm-format rangefinder photography somehow is centered around the focal lengths of 35 mm and 50 mm. I feel when you're shooting a Leica M then you simply have to have a 35 mm lens and a 50 mm lens. Everything else is optional. Some say, 35/50 mm yes but any one out of these two is enough because they're so close to each other. Not so! I feel they are pretty much different, and it clearly makes sense to have both ... but maybe that's just me. Anyway, the difference between 50 and 75 mm clearly is wider than that between 28 and 35 mm. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Jeff S Posted July 19, 2010 Share #17 Posted July 19, 2010 If you all had a 35 and a 75, would you go for a 50 or a 28? What we say doesn't matter; only what your shooting style dictates. Toward that end, that little frame preview lever on your M will let you know. Use it and count the times when you wish you had a wider or longer FOV. In the meantime, use your feet more to zoom, and maybe determine you don't really need either. Jeff Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
tdtaylor Posted July 19, 2010 Share #18 Posted July 19, 2010 I enjoy my 28/2.8, especially for its size and sharpness. But it is not a large change from 35mm, and I usually end up leaving the 35 on the camera. As others have mentioned, if you want to go wider, I would go wider than 28 to make a significant difference. The 50mm represents a larger change. Use the framelimes shift lever to see the difference- I have always found this exercise enlightening when I find myself considering what to take. When I want to go small, I often take the 28/2.8, 50/2.0 and 90 TE/2.8. All 39mm, all small- if can ever get the 35 lux off my camera . Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
luigi bertolotti Posted July 19, 2010 Share #19 Posted July 19, 2010 .. And if you are leaning towards 28... don't forget the ultimate in compactness : old Summaron 5,6 !!! (seriously speaking, I love A LOT my one...) Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Archived
This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.