charby57 Posted May 9, 2012 Share #1  Posted May 9, 2012 Advertisement (gone after registration) I am following with great interest the thread about the virtues of slow lenses. I have visited New York during the last weekend, and I have used almost exclusively a recently acquired 50 Elmar M, instead of my Summilux Asph. Which I did not miss at all....  Actually, I have enjoyed the lightness, the quality and compacteness of the Elmar more than the speed and ûbersharpness of the Summilux.  At least for this little trip:   Un weekend à New York Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Advertisement Posted May 9, 2012 Posted May 9, 2012 Hi charby57, Take a look here About slow lenses, in NYC; Elmar vs Summilux. I'm sure you'll find what you were looking for!
sblitz Posted May 10, 2012 Share #2 Â Posted May 10, 2012 nice shots -- what did you shoot these with? Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Messsucherkamera Posted May 10, 2012 Share #3 Â Posted May 10, 2012 Having a fast lens sure is nice - but not having one is far from a deal-breaker, as your images so abundantly illustrate. Â Very nice images - are they digital or film based? Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Fgcm Posted May 10, 2012 Share #4  Posted May 10, 2012 Even if I own a summilux 50 asph, I use more Summarit 50 and Elmar M 50 than summilux.  More compact and light.  Summarit and Elmar have a different rendering and performs better at 2,8  Nice shoots  Fgcm Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
lars_bergquist Posted May 10, 2012 Share #5 Â Posted May 10, 2012 Again, pictures well seen and well taken. Â Now if you do often work in available darkness, which for half of the year is all that we in Sweden have available, lens speed is often an advantage. Or if you want to or have to cover a stage or circus performance. Still, the reason I dumped my 50mm Summicron in favour of the Summilux ASPH was not mainly the speed, but its greater resistance to flare. By the way, Thorsten Overgaard's latest addition to his M9 review does unwittingly demonstrate why I made that decision. Â I do very much appreciate a lighter camera bag, but I cannot afford to own both heavy and light versions of a focal length just because of that. So my mainstay lenses, 50 and 35mm, are Summiluxes. On the other hand, the 21mm Super-Elmar is really super. But it is nearly as bulky as a 35mm Summilux, current version, and not that much lighter. Â The old man from the 1:4,5 Age Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
LeicaBraz Posted May 10, 2012 Share #6 Â Posted May 10, 2012 Mr. Berquist, you mails are always interesting. I think in this case you are dodging the question. So let me put it this way: if you could afford to own both heavy and light versions of the same focal length, would you? For that other half of the year in Sweden. Thanks. Â Â On the way to becoming an old man Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
lars_bergquist Posted May 10, 2012 Share #7  Posted May 10, 2012 Advertisement (gone after registration) Well well. A 'winter lens' and a 'summer' lens of the same length? I do have a 'legacy' 35mm Summicron v.4 that was too good, stopped down to f:4, to get rid of. Also a 1960 collapsible 50mm 2.8 Elmar but this is just a fun lens I got for a song long ago. But yes, possibly, also a 50mm Summarit if I could justify the expense. That is what it is all about.  Except when the fast lens breaks all limitations of bulk and weight and general unhandiness. Examples are the 21 and 24mm Summiluxes (the last one is not optically very brilliant, either), the current Noctilux and the 90mm Apo-Summicron ASPH. An important part of the Leica Ethos since 1925 has been the camera's handiness, so this is definitely not a case of sour grapes. If the Tooth Fairy or someone donated one of these lenses to me, I would gratefully accept it – and sell it discreetly. Maybe to help finance a M10.  The old man from the Age of 1:4,5 Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
IWC Doppel Posted May 10, 2012 Share #8 Â Posted May 10, 2012 Nice shots and nice colours. Did you desaturate and cool a little ? Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
01af Posted May 10, 2012 Share #9 Â Posted May 10, 2012 I don't like the heavy vignetting everywhere ... Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Fgcm Posted May 10, 2012 Share #10 Â Posted May 10, 2012 Errata corrige: Summarit performs better than Elmar at 2,8 Â Sorry Fgcm Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
01af Posted May 10, 2012 Share #11  Posted May 10, 2012 Errata corrige: Summarit performs better than Elmar at 2.8. It does!? That's interesting—I have a Summarit-M 50 mm 1:2.5, and I like it. It's light and small and very sharp. It can definitely hold the water to the mighty Summilux-M 50 mm 1:1.4 Asph ... except in terms of lens speed, of course. Still I was contemplating to pick up a used Elmar-M 50 mm, to compare it to the Summarit and to see if I'm missing something. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
rosuna Posted May 10, 2012 Share #12 Â Posted May 10, 2012 Examples are the 21 and 24mm Summiluxes (the last one is not optically very brilliant, either) Â I disagree. The 24mm Summilux is a superb lens. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Fgcm Posted May 10, 2012 Share #13 Â Posted May 10, 2012 Still I was contemplating to pick up a used Elmar-M 50 mm, to compare it to the Summarit and to see if I'm missing something. Â You are missing some grams and some space into the bag and a softer rendering at 2,8. Elmar-M is great starting 5,6 and I mainly use it when skying or walking on the alps. At 4.000 meters above sea level, the lighter the better. Belive me. And at 4000 meters the aperture is always above 5.6, so no problem. Â At 2,8 Summarit is more contrasty and Elmar is a bit soft. So, if you need a softer rendering, Elmar-M is what you need at 2,8. But just there. Closing at 4 or 5,6 the lens is perfect as all Leica lenses and much better than the old Elmar. Â Ciao Fgcm Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
stuny Posted May 10, 2012 Share #14 Â Posted May 10, 2012 Pierre - Â A terrific set, and it's nice to see a visitor's view of NYC. Your wife or companion is most lovely. I wish I knew you were here so we could meet. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
charby57 Posted May 10, 2012 Author Share #15 Â Posted May 10, 2012 nice shots -- what did you shoot these with? I have used an M9. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
charby57 Posted May 10, 2012 Author Share #16 Â Posted May 10, 2012 "Now if you do often work in available darkness, which for half of the year is all that we in Sweden have available, lens speed is often an advantage...." Â I do agree with you; living in Montreal, where the natural light in winter doesn't last very long... Then I use the summilux. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
charby57 Posted May 10, 2012 Author Share #17 Â Posted May 10, 2012 Nice shots and nice colours. Did you desaturate and cool a little ? Â Correct! I did that. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
charby57 Posted May 10, 2012 Author Share #18  Posted May 10, 2012 You are missing some grams and some space into the bag and a softer rendering at 2,8.Elmar-M is great starting 5,6 and I mainly use it when skying or walking on the alps. At 4.000 meters above sea level, the lighter the better. Belive me. And at 4000 meters the aperture is always above 5.6, so no problem.  At 2,8 Summarit is more contrasty and Elmar is a bit soft. So, if you need a softer rendering, Elmar-M is what you need at 2,8. But just there. Closing at 4 or 5,6 the lens is perfect as all Leica lenses and much better than the old Elmar.  Ciao Fgcm  Interesting!  For maybe the wrong reasons, I have felt in love over the years with many 50mm lenses more for the handling and other physical traits than maximum sharpness.  The current Summilux is indeed a optical wonder, quick to handle and compact, but the Elmar is so un-assuming if I may say so... I have used it a lot wide open during this last weekend, and frankly, it is very good at 2,8. At least, for my candid snaps.  Pierre Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
charby57 Posted May 10, 2012 Author Share #19 Â Posted May 10, 2012 Pierre -Â A terrific set, and it's nice to see a visitor's view of NYC. Your wife or companion is most lovely. I wish I knew you were here so we could meet. Â Thank you Stu! Â I have transmitted your very nice words to the lady; she is flattered! Â I must add that you are living in a most fantastic city. I have been visiting NYC 5 times in my adult life, which is far from enough... Looking forward going back there! Â Kindest regards, Pierre Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
charby57 Posted May 10, 2012 Author Share #20 Â Posted May 10, 2012 I don't like the heavy vignetting everywhere ... Â I may have indeed a bit of a heavy hand on that.. Thank you for your comment, I will revise my process. Â Pierre Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Archived
This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.