40mm Summicron-C + M8 Soft at f/2

[piblondin]

Advertisement (gone after registration)

I really like this combo, for the most part, but I find it too soft at f/2 and need to really treat this lens as an f/2.8 lens to get the results I want. Has anyone else had the same experience with the 40mm?

[lct]

The Summicron-C 40 is indeed a bit soft at f/2, mainly on edges and corners. Hardly more so than pre-asph Summicrons 35 though. To get sharper results at f/2 better use a 35/2 asph imho.

[Advertisement]

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

[jaapv]

Actually mine is not soft at all at 2.0, except for the far corners, and that is on the M9. On the M8 it does even better and in both cases it clearly outperforms lenses like the Color-Skopar and is very similar to the Summicron iv. Check the lens for haze and does it focus correctly? Not all of them do, due to the simpe focussing mechanism.

[tobey bilek]

All the lenses of that vintage are less sharp wide open than stopped down. At least everyone I have ever seen and that is dozens.

 

Do check out the focusing. Leica never claimed it "steep cam" design would focus properly on M cameras. It may or may not depending. It was in the literature. This lens was made only for the CL in addition to the 90 4.0.

[jaapv]

Yes, lt is true, but on this little lens the imprrovement is mainly in the centre which is quite good already wide open.the corners do not benefit that much from stoppng down, so the net result is that the size of the circle of best rendering gets larger at smaller apertures.. On the M8 that means it should produce very good results from wide open onwards. See the MTF curves. For a really better performance one should move on to the Summicron35 asph, but even on that lens the falloff to edges and corners shows the same character, albeit on a higher level.

[jaapv]

This lens often gets slammed for being soft in the corners. I just came along an image (without any artistic pretentions-it was headed for the bin..) that rather contradicts this. (Exif tells us 4.0, but actually it was 2.8) Sharpening for the web the same on all three images.

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!

[lct]

Advertisement (gone after registration)

Nice results on the M9. Mind to crop left corners? Just for info.

[gvaliquette]

I'll have to try my 40 mm f 2.0 M-Rokkor on my M9, just for fun. According to Puts, they are supposed to be identical to the Summicron-Cs in character and performance.

 

Guy

[WestMichigan]

You expressed the qualities and benefits of the 40mm C on the M8 better than I think I could have.

 

R in Mi.

Yes, lt is true, but on this little lens the imprrovement is mainly in the centre which is quite good already wide open.the corners do not benefit that much from stoppng down, so the net result is that the size of the circle of best rendering gets larger at smaller apertures.. On the M8 that means it should produce very good results from wide open onwards. See the MTF curves. For a really better performance one should move on to the Summicron35 asph, but even on that lens the falloff to edges and corners shows the same character, albeit on a higher level.

[piblondin]

Hmm...It's really the center where I notice decreased sharpness. Maybe it's time for a 35 lux. :-)

[wda]

This lens often gets slammed for being soft in the corners. I just came along an image (without any artistic pretentions-it was headed for the bin..) that rather contradicts this. (Exif tells us 4.0, but actually it was 2.8) Sharpening for the web the same on all three images.

Boring subjects, maybe; but excellent images for making the points for your case, Jaap.

[thompsonkirk]

On M9, mine – recently adjusted by DAG – is sharper at f2 than any pre-asph 35 I've owned. That, plus the way it matches the 35mm framelines better than a 'real' 35, is why it's my most-often-used lens.

 

Kirk

[40mm f/2]

I don't have any experience with the M8 only 24x36 film or digital but only the far corners are requiring to stop down past 2.8 if resolution there is critical. I like the angle of 40mm more than 35 or especially 50 mm - more natural.

I wish there would be a modern version

Though the equivalent on the m8 would be more like 28mm.

Edited December 30, 2011 by 40mm f/2

[andym911]

On M9, mine – recently adjusted by DAG – is sharper at f2 than any pre-asph 35 I've owned. That, plus the way it matches the 35mm framelines better than a 'real' 35, is why it's my most-often-used lens.

 

Kirk

i have the same experience albeit on my M8, The 40 cron is on par with the best and so cheap in comparison.

A wonderful companion to any M body IMO.

 

Best

 

Andy