pedaes Posted May 22, 2015 Share #41 Posted May 22, 2015 Advertisement (gone after registration) If anyone is seriously interested but unsure would be worth reading (through subscription) Sean Reids revue of prototype which includes accurate size data and viewfinder blockage % with and without hood. It is tested against 28 Summicron in the review. It would not be fair to publish this information without supporting Sean. Quote Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Advertisement Posted May 22, 2015 Posted May 22, 2015 Hi pedaes, Take a look here Summilux 28 now out!. I'm sure you'll find what you were looking for!
cirke Posted May 22, 2015 Share #42 Posted May 22, 2015 (edited) I'd like to see a full review by Diglloyd on the M240 Edited May 22, 2015 by erick Quote Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
rosuna Posted May 22, 2015 Share #43 Posted May 22, 2015 (edited) The English technical document (PDF) I saw tonight has several mistakes. It does not show MTF curves for f1.4, but for f2.0, there is an "aspherical surface" mark in the place of the diaphragm in the optical layout drawing and the drawing with the longitudinal "cut" of the lens lacks the last lens element: The last lens element is not here: Edited May 22, 2015 by rosuna Quote Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
MarkP Posted May 22, 2015 Share #44 Posted May 22, 2015 (edited) If anyone is seriously interested but unsure would be worth reading (through subscription) Sean Reids revue of prototype which includes accurate size data and viewfinder blockage % with and without hood. It is tested against 28 Summicron in the review. It would not be fair to publish this information without supporting Sean. I've have a subscription to his site for a few years and have read this review of Sean's when it was released. I have a lot of respect for the rigour with which he does his lens comparisons (albeit maybe a bit too much fruit ), however I was not impressed with that particular review with respect to the comparison wiht the 28 Summicron ASPH. The lens performed terribly and Sean himself wrote that he may have had a compromised Summicron. This should have definitively resolved one way or the other before publishing. Therefore, unfortunately I think little can be made of his comparison between the 28 Summilux and Summicron. Edited May 22, 2015 by MarkP Quote Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
rosuna Posted May 22, 2015 Share #45 Posted May 22, 2015 It is surprising the low distortion of this lens... It is well below 1% at the maximum... a 28mm with f:1.4 max aperture! This was the most surprising point of the Technical Data PDF... The MTF curves look very well but I see a great separation of sagittal and tangential curves, every where, at all apertures in all the image circle. I am not an optical expert... how this translates to image quality? Quote Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
lct Posted May 22, 2015 Share #46 Posted May 22, 2015 [...] I have a lot of respect for the rigour with which he does his lens comparisons (albeit maybe a bit too much fruit ), however I was not impressed with that particular review with respect to the comparison wiht the 28 Summicron ASPH. The lens performed terribly and Sean himself wrote that he may have had a compromised Summicron. This should have definitively resolved one way or the other before publishing. Therefore, unfortunately I think little can be made of his comparison between the 28 Summilux and Summicron. +1. Reminds me Tim Ashley. These guys are very nice but they should refrain from reviewing faulty lenses like that. http://www.l-camera-forum.com/topic/210636-tim-ashley-on-m240-and-28-cron/ 2 Quote Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
MarkP Posted May 22, 2015 Share #47 Posted May 22, 2015 Advertisement (gone after registration) +1. Reminds me Tim Ashley. These guys are very nice but they should refrain from reviewing faulty lenses like that. http://www.l-camera-forum.com/topic/210636-tim-ashley-on-m240-and-28-cron/ I had a lot of fun on that thread with my Boricron! 1 Quote Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
luigi bertolotti Posted May 22, 2015 Share #48 Posted May 22, 2015 Just a typo in the english Technical data no? In the datasheet indeed is simply a typo... the differences about the data on the instructions are much stranger.... 1 Quote Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
matlep Posted May 22, 2015 Author Share #49 Posted May 22, 2015 I won't be selling my 28 Summicron any time soon, unless the new lens really shows that it can totally replace it. I have three 50s and this will be my second 28 - an indication of my preferred focal lengths. The 81mm length of the lens kind of puts me off a bit... 1 Quote Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
algrove Posted May 22, 2015 Share #50 Posted May 22, 2015 All this convinces me that the 28/2.8 is the lens for a Leica with its diminutive size and decent image quality. Remember we are talking Leica lenses here so are we not over the top sometimes in comparing Leica lenses? Ever since getting the APO50 I am liking smaller, not bigger, Leica lenses. 3 Quote Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
hiepphotog Posted May 22, 2015 Share #51 Posted May 22, 2015 Lou, one does need his fix of Lux nonetheless . For a 28 shooter, this might be it. From Jono's short review, this lens is no-where near 81mm long, it's just a bit longer than the Lux 35 FLE. Quote Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
sarav Posted May 22, 2015 Share #52 Posted May 22, 2015 To me it's like the 24lux in size and so it's too big for a 28mm lens. I own the 24 lux and I'm very very happy with it but I always wanted a 28lux as second standard lens (standard in my perspective; I normally use a 35mm). I've waited so long for this lens and suddenly it's too big. These new lenses are marvelous but they aren't of the right size for a Leica M body. APO50 is not little but it's not big and performances are stellar, is the right size of modern era. A 28mm/1.4 in the same size would be surely possible and with 2000-3000$ more Leica would sell them in the same numbers, because it's already is in a high-price class. Actually I don't know if I'll buy it or if I'll go with the summicron. Quote Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
lct Posted May 22, 2015 Share #53 Posted May 22, 2015 (edited) 81mm is with the hood on but 67mm w/o hood remains too bulky a 28 for my tastes, on a RF body at least, and i've decided to postpone my M purchases as long as i don't know if the M mount will be retained for the next bodies anyway so i will stick to my 28/2 and 28/2.8 asph for now. Edited May 22, 2015 by lct Quote Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
matlep Posted May 22, 2015 Author Share #54 Posted May 22, 2015 (edited) Lou, one does need his fix of Lux nonetheless . For a 28 shooter, this might be it. From Jono's short review, this lens is no-where near 81mm long, it's just a bit longer than the Lux 35 FLE. The data sheet says 81mm? What gives? Edited May 22, 2015 by matlep Quote Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
cbretteville Posted May 22, 2015 Share #55 Posted May 22, 2015 I'm sure its a cracking lens. It looks very contemporary Leica. However it is not a lens I crave. I'm perfectly happy with my 28/2 and ColorSkopar 28 ltm. Like Jaap I really like the Summicron, I learned to love it on the M8. Much better for me that Leica launches lenses like the wide 'luxes which I don't want. Cheers, Carl 3 Quote Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
lct Posted May 22, 2015 Share #56 Posted May 22, 2015 The data sheet says 81mm? What gives? 81mm is with the hood, 67mm bare. 2 Quote Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
jonoslack Posted May 22, 2015 Share #57 Posted May 22, 2015 81mm is with the hood, 67mm bare. But I don't think it really works bare - it's clearly designed to be used WITH the lens hood - like the 35 FLE I sold the 24 'lux because it was too big . . . . . . but I don't find this to be a problem Perhaps these snaps help? 8 Quote Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
lct Posted May 22, 2015 Share #58 Posted May 22, 2015 Thanky you Jono. There is a screw-in ring to replace the hood on the 35/1.4 FLE if memory serves. Do you know if the 28/1.4 has a ring like that? Quote Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Ellie Posted May 22, 2015 Share #59 Posted May 22, 2015 I think the proportions is more like this, 81mm? 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! 7 Quote Link to post Share on other sites Simply register for free here – We are always happy to welcome new members! ' data-webShareUrl='https://www.l-camera-forum.com/topic/245340-summilux-28-now-out/?do=findComment&comment=2820445'>More sharing options...
jonoslack Posted May 22, 2015 Share #60 Posted May 22, 2015 I think the proportions is more like this, 81mm? sx24-28-35.jpg Excellent Ellie: Too Big Bigger than one would wish (but okay) Just Right (but the wrong focal length ) 3 Quote Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Join the conversation
You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.
Note: Your post will require moderator approval before it will be visible.