For the same money: 35mm Summilux v1 or Summicron v3?

[philipus]

Advertisement (gone after registration)

Well I'm looking for a 35mm lens and have the option of buying the 35mm Summilux v1 and the 35mm Summicron v3 for about the same money.

 

I've read here and elsewhere about how the Summilux suffers from coma, but I'm not so sure how the Summicron fares in this department. f1.4 does appeal to me but I'm having trouble deciding which one to go for.

 

I'm only using film, if that matters.

 

cheers and thanks in advance

Philip

[freusen]

...........I'm looking for a 35mm lens and have the option of buying the 35mm Summilux v1 and the 35mm Summicron v3 for about the same money...........

My vote goes to the 35mm Summicron v3.

___________

FrankR

[Advertisement]

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

[stunsworth]

The old Summilux is rather ropey wide open, but stopped down a little it's fine. Be aware that not all examples will work on an M8 without minor modification.

 

I'd go for the Summilux for sentimental reasons.

 

If you really can't decide flip a coin.

[bocaburger]

For me the 35 Summilux wide open was disappointing. I suppose if it's the same cost as a Summicron it doesn't matter if you only shoot it from f/2 on down. I'm biased toward the Summicron because I own one. I can't tell the shots from the V.4 I have also.

[adan]

I've used both. For the same money, I'd pick the Summilux v.1 - except for one factor: close-focus distance. One meter just didn't get me close enough.

 

I found the v.3 Summmicron to be sort of "limp" - it had neither character nor especially great resolution. I dumped mine as soon as I ran across a v.4, which was much sharper at most apertures. (unfortunately, v.4s have moved into a different price league today).

 

The Summilux has both, depending on the aperture chosen.

 

At f/1.4, it is "dreamy", with the coma overlaying blur everywhere. By f/2 that cleans up a lot. In the middle apertures its resolution is at least the equal of any other Leica-M 35.

 

In effect, it becomes a v.4 Summicron from f/2 on down - except for that pesky 1-meter limit.

 

If you're using film, it is sort of by-the-way that neither lens can be 6-bit coded.

Edited February 8, 2012 by adan

[stunsworth]

I think Malcolm Taylor can mill the pits for 6 bit coding.

 

I never bothered when I used mine with an M8 and didn't notice any problems with colour castes.

[adan]

Advertisement (gone after registration)

Once the pits are milled - what pattern of white and black filling denotes a "Summicron v.3" or a "Summilux v.1?"

 

None, actually.

[stunsworth]

No none, but its easy enough to experiment with the various 35mm settings. Prob starting with those for a Summicron made around the same time.

[01af]

Once the pits are milled—what pattern of white and black filling denotes a "Summicron v.3" or a "Summilux v.1?"

 

None, actually.

For the Summicron 35 mm (any non-Asph version), the 6-bit lens code is 6 = 000110. For the Summilux 35 mm, there indeed is no 6-bit code, so you'll have to resort to picking it from the camera's manual lens selection menu.

 

For film shooters, all this is irrelevant.

[lars_bergquist]

The Summilux is a dog. It is soft and flarey and comatose wide open, and IQ does not become decent until you have stopped the lens down to f:4. The Summicron is a better working lens.

 

The old man from the 35mm Age

[lct]

No experience with the Summicron v3 but the Summilux rendering at f/1.4 is unique with a very special glow (halos around highlights). Flares a lot though so better choose a late version. Mine is from 1989 and flares less than the CV 35/1.4 "SC" but more so than the Summicron v4.

[tobey bilek]

The Summilux is a dog. It is soft and flarey and comatose wide open, and IQ does not become decent until you have stopped the lens down to f:4. The Summicron is a better working lens.

 

The old man from the 35mm Age

 

Agreed.I understand there are early and late models, the late being better but still not great. Any of the ASPH 35 are fare better.

 

It also requires a special shade that takes drop in ser 7 filters.

 

Go for the Summicron.

[pico]

I don't know if you are using an M9, but earlier (v2?) 35mm Summilux does not quite focus smoothly as the back moves into the body. It ever so gently rubs against some part of the M9 - I think it's the area at about 6 o'clock inside.

 

I like the earlier 35 Summilux for the reasons that Lars hates it.

http://www.l-camera-forum.com/leica-forum/members/23965-albums4157-picture7347.jpg

(Tri-x - I think camera shake contributed to the softness)

Edited February 8, 2012 by pico

[philipus]

Thanks everybody. I appreciate your honest opinions.

 

Btw, I'm solely a film user (M3 and M6) and have no plans to get a digital M.

 

As fate would have it, the Summilux I was considering turned out to have the beginnings of lens separation so that's a no-no.

 

Even so, I'm not sure about the Summicron. Perhaps I should wait for a v2 or a v4?

 

Cheers

philip

[adan]

If money is an issue and coding isn't - I'd recommend looking for a Voigtlander 35 f/1.4 as a temporary solution while you continue to explore the differences between the Leica 35s. They are expensive "experiments" even at the lower end of the price range.

 

So use the C/V in the meantime, while taking the opportunity to try the various Leica "generations" as you run across them. It's a nice lens - takes pictures.

 

I've always used Leica, but I was fortunate enough to find lenses before the prices went psychotic, and before C/V offered much competition.

 

On the v.2 or v.4 - v.4 prices are currently 300% of what I paid for mine in 2001 ($795/€600). The v.2 has a funky lever/tab for the aperture ring that I don't like - don't know much about the optics (rumor has it they are the same as the v.3)

[philipus]

Thanks Andy. Yes it is most definitely an expensive experiment to try various versions of the Summicron, one which I'm not really interested to perform at the moment.

 

The Voigtländer seems interesting. I've seen very positive comments about it and will check it out.

 

I realise it is in a completely different league than either the Summicron or the Summilux but perhaps I should consider a well kept Summaron? I've come across an f3.5 (granted not what I want in terms of aperture) with good optics that also has goggles so it would work on both my M3 and my M6.

[adan]

The 35 Summarons I've tried have always been quite sharp. Designing a slow(er) lens requires fewer compromises than designing a fast one, so it is not a given that a slow lens will be inferior to a faster one. Except in low light.

 

I've never liked goggles, but if you have an M3, at least they serve a purpose. Shoot a test roll just to check the optical alignment. I've never actually run across a "bad" goggled 35, just 135s - but you never know.

[Ralf]

Thanks everybody. I appreciate your honest opinions.

 

Btw, I'm solely a film user (M3 and M6) and have no plans to get a digital M.

 

As fate would have it, the Summilux I was considering turned out to have the beginnings of lens separation so that's a no-no.

 

Even so, I'm not sure about the Summicron. Perhaps I should wait for a v2 or a v4?

 

Cheers

philip

 

You won't regret getting the Voigtländer as an interim, this is what I did to overbridge the waiting time for my 50 Summilux asph. It is rather small, well built and has a very classic rendering, especially the sc version and surprisingly sharp even at 1.4. If you consider the price on top of everything, it is a fantastic deal. I kept mine and still take it out, when I want something very small and unobtrusive. You may want to try a few as there could be significant sample variations.

[lct]

My CV 35/1.4 "SC" flares a lot i must say. More so than my Summilux 35 pre-asph from 1989. Also the CV (at least mine) suffers from focus shift at f/2.8 and on. It is less visible with film though i've been told. Now the CV has not the famous glow of the Summilux but it is a bit sharper than the latter at full aperture and it has the same smooth bokeh.

[Advertisement]

Hallo,

Look here: Leica M

[freusen]

..........the 35 Summarons I've tried have always been quite sharp............

The f2.8/35mm Summaron is a very fine lens and a good alternative for the f2.0/35mm Summicron. I bought one twenty years ago and never regreted it.

____________

Frank R