lct Posted April 3, 2012 Share #21 Â Posted April 3, 2012 Advertisement (gone after registration) I have not used them for a long time but i don't see significant differences flare wise between the Summicron 35/2 asph and the Summarit 35/2.5 so far. The Summicron 35/2 v4 is somewhat showing its age from this viewpoint. Otherwise, the Summicron asph is a bit more contrasty than the Summarit in my experience, the latter having a slightly smoother bokeh. See my pics here. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Advertisement Posted April 3, 2012 Posted April 3, 2012 Hi lct, Take a look here Need Help with a Leica 35mm Lens Purchase. I'm sure you'll find what you were looking for!
dmorris Posted April 4, 2012 Author Share #22  Posted April 4, 2012 E. Puts rates the 35 Summarit slightly above the 35 Summicron asph optically in this review. For instance, black paint surfaces near rear elements contribute to marginally better flare resistance. Speed requirements, naturally, are personal.  Best thing to do is to find a friendly dealer and try them, or rent them as here.  Ignore those who dismiss the Summarits, especially the 35.  Jeff Jeff thanks for pointing me to Erwin's review. In addition, I also had the chance to try both the Summicron and the Summarit on my M9. To my eye I liked the Summarit a bit better. I can't really define why, it's just a bit softer. It reminds me of my fathers old Rollei Twin Lens Reflex which just took these nice warm pictures. So I decided to go with the Summarit. I'm almost certain that at some later date I'll probably pick up a lux. Thanks to everyone for their input. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
bpalme Posted April 4, 2012 Share #23 Â Posted April 4, 2012 Don't forget the Voigtlander F1.2 . I don't have one but I really like what I see. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Jeff S Posted April 4, 2012 Share #24 Â Posted April 4, 2012 Congrats on your decision; good to know that you decided the old fashioned (and unfortunately rare) way...you actually tried it. Even if Puts hadn't reviewed it, trust your judgment. Â Now use it and enjoy it and don't worry about the next best thing. The fact is that most Leica lenses are more capable than we. Â Jeff Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
LeicaPassion Posted April 4, 2012 Share #25 Â Posted April 4, 2012 +1Â Excellent advice, and I love my 35 Summilux FLE, but if budget were an issue it's best to remember that there are no bad Leica lenses. However some (35lux FLE) are truly magical. Since acquiring that lens my 35 Summicron ASPH has been spending most of it's time in the cabinet. Â Could you elaborate on how the lux performs vs the cron? Is it the speed difference mainly, or is the lux better overall? Thank you. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
wizard Posted April 4, 2012 Share #26  Posted April 4, 2012 I am contemplating the purchase of a Leica 35mm lens and am a bit torn as to whether I should go for the 2.0 Summicron or the 2.5 Summarit. I shoot outside during the day and inside with light, but sometimes outside at dusk or at night with ambient street lighting. Any thoughts?  You can't go wrong with either one, really. If you want to save some cash, go for the Summarit, if saving cash is no issue, go for the Summicron. In my experience, if the light is so low that the Summarit won't bring you there, the Summicron won't either. After all, the difference between these two lenses is just about half an f-stop.  Andy Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
01af Posted April 4, 2012 Share #27 Â Posted April 4, 2012 Advertisement (gone after registration) If you want to save some cash, go for the Summarit, if saving cash is no issue, go for the Summicron. This bad advice suggests that the Summarit was only good as a stop-gap for those who cannot afford 'a real lens'. Which is rubbish! There's a lot of good reasons to prefer the Summarit over the Summicron, and the lower price is just one out of many. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
StephenPatterson Posted April 5, 2012 Share #28 Â Posted April 5, 2012 Could you elaborate on how the lux performs vs the cron? Is it the speed difference mainly, or is the lux better overall? Thank you. Â The 35 Summilux ASPH FLE has a completely different drawing style to the 35 Summicron ASPH. The lux has more detail and micro contrast, whereas the cron has a more classical rendering, softer with less contrast. The 50 Summilux ASPH has the same characteristics as the 35 lux, just in a different focal length. IMHO these two lenses are unique and special in the Leica inventory. Â The speed advantage of the Summilux is nice, but far from the whole reason of why to choose it over the Summicron Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
IWC Doppel Posted April 5, 2012 Share #29 Â Posted April 5, 2012 I agree the later FLE and 50 lux asph have a unique way of rendering. They are bitingly sharp in focus with a quick transition in to out of focus, that is very 'creamy' and soft. The only thing I have seen with older lenses like the pre asph 50 lux is a more gradual transition between sharp and out of focus which can look more easy on the eye for certain shots. Â I do wonder if one could plot the unfocus to out of focus the FLE would have a more 'spikey' bell curve, so to speak. Â I can see why some would still choose the older glass over the later and visa versa. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Lwisher Posted April 5, 2012 Share #30 Â Posted April 5, 2012 What I wouldn't give to locate a 35mm FLE stateside. If anyone knows of an available one, will you please PM me. Â Thanks. Â Andy Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
wizard Posted April 5, 2012 Share #31 Â Posted April 5, 2012 This bad advice suggests that the Summarit was only good as a stop-gap for those who cannot afford 'a real lens'. Which is rubbish! There's a lot of good reasons to prefer the Summarit over the Summicron, and the lower price is just one out of many. Â Oh boy, you are truly judging my words out of context. Have a look at my initial remark before alleging that I am giving bad advice. By saying that you can't go wrong with either lens I was implying that both lenses are, generally spoken, equally good. And that is still my position. It is rubbish to say that there a lot of reasons to prefer the Summarit over the Summicron, and it would be rubbish to say that there a lot of reasons to prefer the Summicron over the Summarit. Both lenses are first rate, and you won't usually be able to tell which of these two lenses was used. Â Andy Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
LeicaPassion Posted April 5, 2012 Share #32 Â Posted April 5, 2012 Thank you very much for your comments. I really like the way the 50 lux renders so I will put my name on a 35 lux waiting list today. The long wait begins. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
jsjxyz Posted April 5, 2012 Share #33 Â Posted April 5, 2012 Can someone who own 35lux AA commenf here? Â I had 35 cron asph, which I just changed to 35 lux fle. How differ is the AA with the FLE version. Â Jerry Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
01af Posted April 5, 2012 Share #34 Â Posted April 5, 2012 Can someone who own 35lux AA comment here? A thing named '35lux AA' does not exist. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
StephenPatterson Posted April 5, 2012 Share #35  Posted April 5, 2012 Can someone who own 35lux AA commenf here? I had 35 cron asph, which I just changed to 35 lux fle. How differ is the AA with the FLE version.  Jerry  The 35 double aspherical is a very rare (read expensive) lens that was only produced for a few short years in the late 80s. If you can find one it will set you back more than a new Noctilux, although those who have used the double aspherical do sing it's praises. I cannot comment on this lens' optical qualities as I have never shot with one, however it's rarity and collector value may be at least partly responsible for the astronomical prices. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
StephenPatterson Posted April 5, 2012 Share #36 Â Posted April 5, 2012 A thing named '35lux AA' does not exist. Â Honestly you didn't know which lens he was referring to? OK, so he got the Leicaphile nomenclature wrong, like that never happens around here... Â It was a fair question that didn't deserve a snide comment... Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Bill W Posted April 5, 2012 Share #37 Â Posted April 5, 2012 The 35 double aspherical is a very rare (read expensive) lens that was only produced for a few short years in the late 80s. If you can find one it will set you back more than a new Noctilux, although those who have used the double aspherical do sing it's praises. I cannot comment on this lens' optical qualities as I have never shot with one, however it's rarity and collector value may be at least partly responsible for the astronomical prices. There are several of the AA versions on ebay at double the price of a Noctilux or one at the bargain basement price of $11,500. I cannot see how they would make that kind of difference in your exposures for that kind of money. If you are a collector it might. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
StephenPatterson Posted April 5, 2012 Share #38 Â Posted April 5, 2012 Â So to name things, use their names, don't make up your own fancy names. Â Â Why don't we just require less frequent members to kowtow and learn the secret handshake as well? Your remark contributed nothing except to belittle a member seeking knowledge. You can attack me all you want but I will do everything I can to help those who come here to learn. Why are you here? Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
wizard Posted April 5, 2012 Share #39 Â Posted April 5, 2012 ... Why are you here? Â Good question. A little further up, he accused me of giving a bad advice when the only thing I wanted to be is helpful. Maybe he's got a bad day ... Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
philipus Posted April 5, 2012 Share #40  Posted April 5, 2012 The 50 Summilux ASPH has the same characteristics as the 35 lux, just in a different focal length.  I agree the later FLE and 50 lux asph have a unique way of rendering.  It's funny how threads serendipitously pop up on topics that I'm myself considering at this very moment  Stephen, IWC, the 50 asph is the best lens I've ever used and I love it. So looking for a 35 I read your comments with great interest.  One question, though. Does the previous 35 asph differ significantly in rendering from the new 35 asph and the 50 asph?  cheers philip Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Archived
This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.