WestMichigan Posted October 22, 2011 Share #21 Posted October 22, 2011 Advertisement (gone after registration) Wouldn't it be also accurate to say that Leica optimized the M8.2 framelines for a different shooting distance than the original M8 framelines? The end result being that the narrower field of view of a 40mm lens 'matches' the M8.2's 35mm framelines IF shooting at the distances the M8 framelines were optimized for? RW OK what the M8.2 does is cropping all edges with 35mm frame lines but this cropping effect is more pronounced at long than short subject distances actually. It is just a matter of getting used to it but better be warned about this before filing the lens irreversibly. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Advertisement Posted October 22, 2011 Posted October 22, 2011 Hi WestMichigan, Take a look here 40mm Summicron - The Perfect M8 Lens?. I'm sure you'll find what you were looking for!
lct Posted October 22, 2011 Share #22 Posted October 22, 2011 I don't know RW but my copies of the Summicron-C 40/2 never match my M8.2's 35mm framelines actually. Edges are always cropped more or less. More so at long than short distance where the cropping effect is less disturbing. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Thomv Posted October 22, 2011 Share #23 Posted October 22, 2011 Apart from the frame line discussion, this is indeed an excellent little lens. The only minor drawback is that it lacks some sharpness at f2.0, f2.8 is already much better. I used a black felt tip pen to blacken the 2.0 mark to remind me. And mounting an UV/IR filter takes a little effort. There are other posts dealing with this. This lens was reason for me to sell my 1970 or so Elmar 50mm f2.8 (11 612), which is a lesser offering. 50mm is covered by just stepping forward (nearer to the subject) or using a 50mm f1.4 VC Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Thomv Posted October 22, 2011 Share #24 Posted October 22, 2011 Apart from the frame line discussion, this is indeed an excellent little lens. The only minor drawback is that it lacks some sharpness at f2.0, f2.8 is already much better. I used a black felt tip pen to blacken the 2.0 mark to remind me. And mounting an UV/IR filter takes a little effort. There are other posts dealing with this. This lens was reason for me to sell my 1970 or so Elmar 50mm f2.8 (11 612), which is a lesser offering. 50mm is covered by just stepping forward (nearer to the subject) or using a 50mm f1.4 VC Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
lct Posted October 22, 2011 Share #25 Posted October 22, 2011 Yes compared to current lenses, i find the Summicron-C a bit soft at f/2 (like the Rokkor 40/2 and other pre-asph Summicrons BTW) but i like this for portrait. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Erik Gunst Lund Posted October 22, 2011 Share #26 Posted October 22, 2011 My 40mm f/2.0 Summicron-C Leitz is sharp at 2.0 and very sharp from 2.8 to 8.0 then diffraction starts to kick in on the M8u I would defintely not call it soft. Only the very far corners are not perfect. My 'standard' lens. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
graeme_hutton Posted October 23, 2011 Share #27 Posted October 23, 2011 Advertisement (gone after registration) File, fit, fotograph! My standard of choice for years. G Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Bmorena Posted October 24, 2011 Share #28 Posted October 24, 2011 I LOVE the 40 summicron on the m8 as well. I can't believe this lens is still so affordable. I got my 40 with a CL and the 90 for 670$ about a year ago. Deffenetily my default lens only getting a slight break because I'm loving my new VC 35 1.2 v2. I also modified to bring up 35 lines, I just couldn't come up with a compelling reason not to. The frame lines match much better and the CL 40 line are always there so still completely functional on that camera. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Thomv Posted October 24, 2011 Share #29 Posted October 24, 2011 My 40mm f/2.0 Summicron-C Leitz is sharp at 2.0 and very sharp from 2.8 to 8.0 then diffraction starts to kick in on the M8uI would defintely not call it soft. Only the very far corners are not perfect. My 'standard' lens. Indeed a very fine lens at great value. I did a little test which shows that f2 is not bad but 2.8 is much better. Soft/sharp at 2.0 is the same to me (blunt Dutch guy:-)) Attached are 100% crops f2.0 and f2.8 A great little lens! Highly recommended when still not fully appreciated! 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! 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/164506-40mm-summicron-the-perfect-m8-lens/?do=findComment&comment=1825471'>More sharing options...
WestMichigan Posted October 24, 2011 Share #30 Posted October 24, 2011 Hi ThomV, I'd say that f2 in your test is definitely a big step down from f2.8 in image quality. For no reason beyond my innate curiosity I wonder why the lens, any lens, would be so dramatically different in image quality with less than a full stop's difference in aperture setting? It almost looks like the only difference between the two images could be accounted for by a good lens cleaning! :-) Richard Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Erik Gunst Lund Posted October 25, 2011 Share #31 Posted October 25, 2011 The difference here is too much, something is wrong at f/2.0 And no, a lens cleaning will not do any difference in performance in this situation... Repeat the test, preferably from a tripod and with sufficient shutter speed. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
bill Posted October 25, 2011 Share #32 Posted October 25, 2011 Bill, I can only assume that you are misunderstanding the significance of the 1.3x cropped sensor on the M8. Nope. Regards, Bill Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest diogenes Posted October 25, 2011 Share #33 Posted October 25, 2011 Because it renders it useless on proper cameras. Regards, Bill Could you please elucidate for a newbie? I have just bought one of these lenses and I had heard that the modification was sensible to get the 35mm framelines up. Having said that, I don't want to render the lens useless on other cameras so I'd be grateful if you could explain so I may make an informed decision. Thanks in advance. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
graeme_hutton Posted October 25, 2011 Share #34 Posted October 25, 2011 Could you please elucidate for a newbie? I have just bought one of these lenses and I had heard that the modification was sensible to get the 35mm framelines up. Having said that, I don't want to render the lens useless on other cameras so I'd be grateful if you could explain so I may make an informed decision. Thanks in advance. It is so cheap you could buy two. One filed for convenience on the M8 and one not for analogue M's or the CL. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest diogenes Posted October 25, 2011 Share #35 Posted October 25, 2011 It is so cheap you could buy two. One filed for convenience on the M8 and one not for analogue M's or the CL. It would seem that £350 is a more significant sum of money to me than it is to others. Unfortunately, I can't afford to buy two. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
pop Posted October 25, 2011 Share #36 Posted October 25, 2011 It would seem to me that the simple modification would produce the frame lines suited for a 35mm lens on every M type camera, with the possible exception of the CL which lacks those frame lines. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
graeme_hutton Posted October 26, 2011 Share #37 Posted October 26, 2011 It would seem that £350 is a more significant sum of money to me than it is to others. Unfortunately, I can't afford to buy two. Sorry, mine was £180 but that was a few years ago.......I should have kept it quiet! Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
robert ford Posted October 26, 2011 Share #38 Posted October 26, 2011 Hi I have used this lens on my M8 and had it professional serviced and adjusted to bring up the 35mm frame lines. I can understand why some would object to this, but I felt it better to do so to match the closest frame lines on a leica M. I won't ever use it on a CL and if I ever sell it on I doubt anyone else will. It also matches the frames lines very well. Again it's a matter of choice. Lovely lens though. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
ezc203 Posted October 27, 2011 Share #39 Posted October 27, 2011 WestMichigan - f/2.0 to f/2.8 is a full stop. As for lens characters changing at wide open aperture and being stopped down, this is not an undocumented phenomenon. Most lenses, if not all, are some what different, usually softer wide open than one stop down. The same is true for all the lenses I own (especially the super speed ones - Voigtlander Nokton f/1.2, 24mm Summilux, 90 Summicron) That said, the 40 Summicron being the "BEST" lens on the M8? That's highly arguable. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Dougg Posted October 27, 2011 Share #40 Posted October 27, 2011 I have several M bodies and a Hexar RF and Zeiss Ikon that all have 35mm framelines but not 40, so filing the 40 could be useful on these cameras. But I don't file because I have a pair of well-liked Minolta CLEs on which the filed lenses would bring up only the 28mm frameline... not very useful, in fact ruined. So I put 35mm lenses on those cameras with 35mm framelines, and 40mm only on those with 40 framelines. Just my preference, and I do like 40-ish lenses, having the 40 CLE Rokkor, 40 Nokton, and 43 Pentax-L. BTW, the Voigtlander Bessa R3 has 40mm frames too, though manually selected, so filing the lens would have no effect there. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Archived
This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.