Lens dilemma - which 28?

[huwge]

Advertisement (gone after registration)

This might be a reasonably well-ploughed furrow but I can not quite make my mind up between the 28 'cron and the new elmarit. I am experiencing some framing problems with the 24 and finding the 35 not wide enough on the M8.

 

What is the ultimate benefit of f2 vs. f2.8 given the acceptable ISO range when shooting digital? I am considering a new elmarit + a 2nd hand 75 'lux at the same price as a new 28 'cron.

 

I shoot a mix of wide and long, so there is no preference for wide. My 24 has been my principle walkaround, but the framing for street shots is beginning to irritate. I have not enjoyed using an external viewfinder, even if that would have been the most obvious solution.

 

Thanks for any advice,

Huw

[Advertisement]

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

[luigi bertolotti]

If I had to make this choice fro myself, no doubt for 2,8, expecially considering the price comparision related to the 75: 1 stop more is not so significant when you can easily play with the ISO setting of a M8, and the search for OOF with a 28 is, in my opinion not a real issue

[huwge]

Thanks Luigi - this, and a little internet surfing has me coming off the fence somewhat in favour of the elmarit. It's just that the 35 'cron was my walkaround with film and I did tend to favour wide open with it.

[Jager]

I wrestled with this very same dilemma a few months ago, HUW. When the M8 was first announced, along with the new 28 Elmarit and WATE lenses, I immediately knew I'd have to pick up a 28 (my most-used focal length on my film M's had been my 35 Lux). And, like many, I reasoned that the ISO flexibility of the M8 made the one-stop difference in speed between the Cron and the Elmarit much less of an issue than it might have been on film. The "nice price" and the tiny size of the Elmarit didn't hurt that rationalization, either.

 

But after I had used my M8 for a few weeks I concluded that fast lenses still very much have their place - especially for a lens which I expected to be using a lot.

 

That revision in my thinking, along with the almost impossible-to-find availability of the new Elmarit, led me to buy the 28 Cron. It was quite a bit more money, but it was a decision I've never regretted. It is an exceptional lens.

 

Bottom line - I think good arguments can be made for either lens.

 

Jeff

[lct]

Difficult to get OOF at f/2.8, easier at f/2 obviously.

The 28/2 is a bit less contrasty with a smoother bokeh. Indoor i use it mainly at f/2. Great lens indeed.

Outdoor the 28/2 is great as well but i like much the 28/2.8 too. Just beware of blown highlights due to its high contrast.

You cannot go wrong with either lens anyway.

[Shootist]

Well I think everyone battles with this question.

I went with the f/2.8 Elmarit when I could find it and I'm very happy with it.

It's not often I would need the extra 1 stop on digital and I sure could use the savings of about $1700.

[marknorton]

Advertisement (gone after registration)

Well I think everyone battles with this question.

I went with the f/2.8 Elmarit when I could find it and I'm very happy with it.

It's not often I would need the extra 1 stop on digital and I sure could use the savings of about $1700.

 

I don't have the Elmarit, I do have the Summicron and it's a great lens but, truth be told, I don't think you'd go far wrong with either lens. The compactness of the Elmarit appeals too.

[huwge]

Thanks guys - I'm going to think it over.

 

The other option I have is to get a 35'lux to complement the 24 and forget about the 28. I will shoot some frames and see whether I really do find a gap between 24 and 35. I am quite keen on 75 'lux so anything that helps me towards that has to be good. The difference between 'cron and 'lux was noticeable on film, so my net benefit may be to increase the stop on my current lens rather than add another to the bag. I have a 50 'lux so might be nice to cover 35 through 70 at 1.4 and keep the wide stuff at > 2.8

 

Then again, I could forget about lenses altogether and go out and enjoy the weather and a nice glass of something cool.

[carstenw]

The difference in focal length from 28mm to 35mm on the M8 is large enough that I think both lenses have a place. The gap between 50mm and 75mm is perceptually much smaller, even though the magnitude of the difference is larger. I have the 35/2 Asph and plan to get the 28/2 Asph as well. This lens has lower contrast, i.e. it holds on to more dynamic range, and the look wide open is something else. One of the real classics in the current lineup. It is also the better lens on film, i.e. the corners are stronger, in case this is important to you.

[huwge]

So, no easy choices here.

 

I can almost not afford to not pull the trigger on the 75 'lux as it is in good nick and a great saving over new price. Same applies to a 35 'lux as well. If I buy both then I use up my current budget, but can then use time to think about 28 and perhaps then use my 35 'cron as a trade towards one of the 28s.

 

And yes, Carsten, film is still important.

 

Thanks guys.

 

Huw

[lars_bergquist]

I use both the 28 Summicron and also 35 mm lenses – a Summilux ASPH and a 4th version Summicron. These two lengths are my 'short standard lens' and 'long standard lens', respectively. The 28 is normally kitted with a 75 C/V, or sometimes with a 50 mm Summilux ASPH.

 

To my mind, the choice between the two 28 mm lenses is a matter of money only. The 'cron can be proven to be the better lens, optically, though it is moot whether the difference is important in mobile, hand-held work. The 'cron is one stop faster, however, and you can really use that extra stop: The 'cron is pretty close to its maximum performance at f:2! Stopping down is really only for some extra d.o.f. And the lens is really amazingly compact. So if you can afford it, buy it – and the C/V is really surprisingly good, and at that price it is a steal.

 

I am not stinking rich. I walked past my Leica dealer, glanced at the window, and rushed into the store. And yes, I found that some moron had seen fit to divest himself of a mint 28 Summicron! I did of course buy it on the spot. Such opportunities are so rare that one simply cannot miss the chance to sour ones Leicaphile brethren's existence with the tale.

 

The old man from the Age of Un-coated Lenses

[DavidStone]

I use both the 28 Summicron and also 35 mm lenses – a Summilux ASPH and a 4th version Summicron. These two lengths are my 'short standard lens' and 'long standard lens', respectively. The 28 is normally kitted with a 75 C/V, or sometimes with a 50 mm Summilux ASPH.

 

To my mind, the choice between the two 28 mm lenses is a matter of money only. The 'cron can be proven to be the better lens, optically, though it is moot whether the difference is important in mobile, hand-held work. The 'cron is one stop faster, however, and you can really use that extra stop: The 'cron is pretty close to its maximum performance at f:2! Stopping down is really only for some extra d.o.f. And the lens is really amazingly compact. So if you can afford it, buy it – and the C/V is really surprisingly good, and at that price it is a steal.

 

I am not stinking rich. I walked past my Leica dealer, glanced at the window, and rushed into the store. And yes, I found that some moron had seen fit to divest himself of a mint 28 Summicron! I did of course buy it on the spot. Such opportunities are so rare that one simply cannot miss the chance to sour ones Leicaphile brethren's existence with the tale.

 

The old man from the Age of Un-coated Lenses

 

That's odd, I did exactly the same thing just two days ago. I found a brand-new, barely-used mint f2 at a major discount from the new price. Still more expensive than the 2,8, but difficult to resist. I heard that the f2 was temporarily out of production, with all manufacturing resources going to the 2.8, but maybe that's just another Leica myth.

 

David

 

The old man who knew HP5 when it was HP3 (sorry Lars!)

[Guest sirvine]

Don't forget the Zeiss 28/2.8. I use it all the time and have zero complaints, including for a lot of night shooting on the streets of NYC. I think I paid about $1,000 USD new.

[sean_reid]

I tested both the Leica 28s for an extensive review of 28s last year. The Summicron Asph has slightly lower contrast and blocks more of the M8 finder than the Elmarit Asph. Whether the former quality is a pro or a con depends upon one's perspective. I personally prefer the Summicron but it is not, unequivocally, a "better" lens than it's sister. It depends on one's priorities.

 

Cheers,

 

Sean

[fjmcsu]

I have the 2.8 28 & for walkaround , travel it has been great.Tack sharp a bit on the contrasty side but what a performer & for the money can't be beat in Leica land!

[wparsonsgisnet]

The solution is easier than you think: get the 24. None of these lenses is fast enuf. The 24 becomes a 32. Great lens. Absolutely wonderful.

 

Sean's review of it induced me to buy it, Puts' rave only solidified my choice.

[sean_reid]

Yes, the Leica 24 is another great lens.

 

Cheers,

 

Sean

[carstenw]

The 24 is sharper in the middle at almost all stops, but not by much, and the 28 Summicron still has that extra stop, is more compact, and is sharper everywhere else, especially wide open or near wide open. Plus, that wide open look cannot be matched by the 24. The 28 framelines are also more comfortable.

 

Personally I find that the two aren't interchangeable, in spite of being so similar on an M8. The 28 Cron clearly has major advantages for street photography, for example.

[Advertisement]

Hallo,

Look here: Leica M

[huwge]

I have bought a 2nd hand 35 'lux to complement my 24, I will see whether this pair can manage the lack of a 28. My tendency does seem to favour the 'cron.

 

I have decided not to pursue the 75 'lux as I have a 50 and 90 apo. As much as I like the 75, I don't think I would use it so much vs. a 28, if I decide 28 is necessary. Otherwise, funds can be directed towards that second M8 body

 

Thanks for all the comments