kiemchacsu Posted July 9, 2015 Share #1  Posted July 9, 2015 Advertisement (gone after registration) Well, actually I always can take the Summicron back because this is a trade with a friend. What's your opinion? I've been shooting the "King of Bokeh" for 6 years now with fantastic output. I'd say that I was a little bit sentimental when making the deal. However, I do think that the Summaron matches my M2 better. ahhhhhh, choices, I hate to do so.  Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Advertisement Posted July 9, 2015 Posted July 9, 2015 Hi kiemchacsu, Take a look here Downgrade from 35/2 IV to 35/2.8; Am I crazy?. I'm sure you'll find what you were looking for!
enboe Posted July 9, 2015 Share #2 Â Posted July 9, 2015 If you enjoy B&W the majority of the time, I think you'll be happy. Â I personally prefer the color rendering of more modern designs. Â Shoot for awhile and see what you like. Â Eric Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
philipus Posted July 9, 2015 Share #3  Posted July 9, 2015 Hi Trung, I think you should let image quality and whether you need the extra stop (I know I would), not how well a lens matches the camera, be decisive. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
jaapv Posted July 9, 2015 Share #4 Â Posted July 9, 2015 It rather depends on the purpose of the camera. Is it for use or for display? Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
wattsy Posted July 9, 2015 Share #5  Posted July 9, 2015 I've been shooting the "King of Bokeh" for 6 years now with fantastic output. ... However, I do think that the Summaron matches my M2 better.  Not sure if you are pulling our collective leg  but, assuming you are serious, I think you have answered your own question. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
ayewing Posted July 9, 2015 Share #6 Â Posted July 9, 2015 You obviously need both lenses. One to look at and admire and the other to use. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
kiemchacsu Posted July 9, 2015 Author Share #7  Posted July 9, 2015 Advertisement (gone after registration) Oh to be clear, I am using my gears, not put them on the shelves. In addition, I am not justify to keep two lenses with same focal length. I've always had to make decision which one to keep, from 2 50mm Summicron, 2 35mm Summicron and this time a Summaron and a Summicron. I do agree with Philip that the key point here is one stop slower of the Summaron that could prevent me enjoying fully this wonderful lens. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
kiemchacsu Posted July 9, 2015 Author Share #8  Posted July 9, 2015 I just looking through my Flickr stream and find out that most of the time I shot with f5.6 or so. However, some of my top favorite were shot with F2, maximum aperture of the Summicron. Now, the question is: Do I need a Summicron if I only use it's maximize aperture  about 5% of the time? Some photos taken with the Cron at F2. Do you think that the Summaron would handle these situations as well as the Summicron?  waiting for the rain by Trung Nguyen, on Flickr  Early morning in the fish market by Trung Nguyen, on Flickr  '1409 Fruit seller by Trung Nguyen, on Flickr Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
enboe Posted July 9, 2015 Share #9 Â Posted July 9, 2015 I think you may find the lower contrast, not that the Summaron is low contrast, just lower than the newer, Mandler design, will give a more vintage look to your B&W images. Â The subjects in these two photos would benefit from that difference. Â The Summaron was calculated and manufactured when B&W was king, so it may well better match your style. Â The good news is both lenses are readily available on the second hand market, so if you go a different direction in a few years, you can always buy the other. Â Enjoy! Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
james.liam Posted July 9, 2015 Share #10  Posted July 9, 2015 A shot like "Waiting for the rain" (absolutely wondrous and evocative, by the way) could not have been accomplished with an f/2.8 lens. The additional stop of the IV will prove more useful to you than anything else; at f/5.6, where you say you primarily shoot, these lenses start converging in their performance and other characteristics such as color rendition and control of chromatic aberrations become greater differentiating issues.  From the look of your work above, your talents outweigh any subtle difference in lens rendition Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
james.liam Posted July 9, 2015 Share #11  Posted July 9, 2015 On the other hand, a better trade for you would be for an 8-element Summicron if you primarily shoot B&W film. From a market value the Summaron is 1/2 the price of the IV while the v1 goes for the same or slightly more than the IV.  IIRC, unlike the v1 Summicron, the Summaron 2.8 is not a Mandler design--if anyone out there can verify this. Image contrast at the wider apertures is somewhat higher than the v1 Summicron. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
philipus Posted July 9, 2015 Share #12  Posted July 9, 2015 It's an interesting question whether an extra stop will make a difference to a film photographer. It is something I've thought quite a bit about, being myself also only film.  An aspect is how well one handles one stop longer shutter speed. This assumes of course that you wish to have the same DOF as you get with the Summicron in similar photos. And the relevance of this assumption, in turn, depends on whether the decreasing difference in DOF as the distance increases is of importance to you and how you want your pictures to come out.  I would say that for daytime shooting the difference will likely be of little difference and things like rendering, contrast etc will be more important. For indoors photography, however, you may find that stop will make a bigger difference. Personally, though I have become better with experience at shooting indoors with my Summicron at slow speeds, I don't think I would use an f2.8 lens as my only 50mm lens.  I saw those photos on your Flickr earlier and think they are really good, in particular the first one which is truly exceptional. You have one as well with the Summicron called "In slum beside Red river 3" which I think would have turned out differently with the Summaron. The background would have been less smooth and this would have drawn the attention away from the main subject. So that's a situation where the Summicron would (imho) be the better lens.  Another aspect is also how each lens is in use, handling-wise. It's all very personal and situationally-dependent of course.  BrPhilip Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
4X5B&W Posted July 9, 2015 Share #13  Posted July 9, 2015 On the other hand, a better trade for you would be for an 8-element Summicron if you primarily shoot B&W film. From a market value the Summaron is 1/2 the price of the IV while the v1 goes for the same or slightly more than the IV.  IIRC, unlike the v1 Summicron, the Summaron 2.8 is not a Mandler design--if anyone out there can verify this. Image contrast at the wider apertures is somewhat higher than the v1 Summicron.  The ver.1 Summicron and Summaron look the same physically but the image "look" is somewhat different. The Summicron is slightly lower contrast, with a nice Bokeh wide open than the ver. 4 for instance.  The Summaron is not a Mandler design, optically very nice though. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
tobey bilek Posted July 9, 2015 Share #14 Â Posted July 9, 2015 My Summaron was good 5.6 to 11. Â Â Not all that pleased and traded it for a IV. Â Â Pretty happy and it now lives on my M8. Â The M9 has a 35 2.0 ASPH. Â That said, Â the Summaron is a better period match. Â Â But if appearance is that important, Â look for a 8 element 35 2.0, a much nicer lens. Â Â Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
kiemchacsu Posted July 10, 2015 Author Share #15  Posted July 10, 2015 It's an interesting question whether an extra stop will make a difference to a film photographer. It is something I've thought quite a bit about, being myself also only film.  An aspect is how well one handles one stop longer shutter speed. This assumes of course that you wish to have the same DOF as you get with the Summicron in similar photos. And the relevance of this assumption, in turn, depends on whether the decreasing difference in DOF as the distance increases is of importance to you and how you want your pictures to come out.  I would say that for daytime shooting the difference will likely be of little difference and things like rendering, contrast etc will be more important. For indoors photography, however, you may find that stop will make a bigger difference. Personally, though I have become better with experience at shooting indoors with my Summicron at slow speeds, I don't think I would use an f2.8 lens as my only 50mm lens.  I saw those photos on your Flickr earlier and think they are really good, in particular the first one which is truly exceptional. You have one as well with the Summicron called "In slum beside Red river 3" which I think would have turned out differently with the Summaron. The background would have been less smooth and this would have drawn the attention away from the main subject. So that's a situation where the Summicron would (imho) be the better lens.  Another aspect is also how each lens is in use, handling-wise. It's all very personal and situationally-dependent of course.  Br Philip I do agree that one stop would be critical for low light shooting. Regarding the DOF, I do believe that one stop in 35mm lenses would not create significant differences, in contrast to those of longer focal length. The photo you mentioned, I guess this below one was actually taken with 50mm Summicron IV (which I also sold after the battle which one to keep with the Rigid) I think the most difficulty that I have to overcome is I do HATE the infinity lock of the Summaron, and much prefer the smooth focus mechanism of the IV. I guess the Summaron should need a CLA due to its age.  In slum besides Red river 2 by Trung Nguyen, on Flickr  I think you may find the lower contrast, not that the Summaron is low contrast, just lower than the newer, Mandler design, will give a more vintage look to your B&W images.  The subjects in these two photos would benefit from that difference.  The Summaron was calculated and manufactured when B&W was king, so it may well better match your style.  The good news is both lenses are readily available on the second hand market, so if you go a different direction in a few years, you can always buy the other.  Enjoy! I have to confess that despite of having shooting different 35mm lenses, includes: Summicron I, III, IV and Summaron, I have seen quite subtle differences in my pictures. That said, among the listed lenses, for me the IV has the best IQ and best all around lens. The point you said is really a big excuse for me to make the decision. As I mentioned earlier, I've been using the IV for 6 years in some ways I feel sentimental to part with it. Anyway  A shot like "Waiting for the rain" (absolutely wondrous and evocative, by the way) could not have been accomplished with an f/2.8 lens. The additional stop of the IV will prove more useful to you than anything else; at f/5.6, where you say you primarily shoot, these lenses start converging in their performance and other characteristics such as color rendition and control of chromatic aberrations become greater differentiating issues.  From the look of your work above, your talents outweigh any subtle difference in lens rendition Thanks James for kind words, what you said has concrete my intention to take the Summaron as a challenge and see if it could serve me well as the IV did. @all: Thanks for your fruitful input despite of an old school question. Best to all of you. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
250swb Posted July 10, 2015 Share #16  Posted July 10, 2015 Trung you have some great pictures on Flickr and you would be doing yourself a disservice to make the camera itself a 'challenge'. You don't need to question the camera for what it can or can't do, you need to concentrate on what you can already do and develop that. Please don't get into absurd discussions about 'rendering' and the look of a particular lens, it will drive you straight into a dead end. Most of the time 'rendering' etc. are questions for when you have nothing left to say in your photographs and you need to concentrate on what you are saying, develop some specific projects and make you photographs cogent, so a story, a travelogue, character driven, work, play, etc.  A quote from this thread that sums it up comes from James "From the look of your work above, your talents outweigh any subtle difference in lens rendition"  Steve Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
philipus Posted July 10, 2015 Share #17  Posted July 10, 2015 Seeing your last reply, I think you've answered your own question now. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Leica Frog Posted July 11, 2015 Share #18 Â Posted July 11, 2015 YES You're crazy a little bit like me, I don't like 35 Summicron V.4 as much as V.1 or Asph version but I think the Summaron is limit for low light shooting situation for a film photography, so I suggest you to choose V.1 to match with your M2 more than Summaron if you can next time. Â Enjoy Leica frog Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
TomB_tx Posted July 11, 2015 Share #19  Posted July 11, 2015 Well, I have both a v1 Summicron and a 2.8 Summaron, and I do prefer the Summaron on my M2. (But then I also use  a 50 2.8 Elmar on it.) Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
kiemchacsu Posted July 11, 2015 Author Share #20  Posted July 11, 2015 Trung you have some great pictures on Flickr and you would be doing yourself a disservice to make the camera itself a 'challenge'. You don't need to question the camera for what it can or can't do, you need to concentrate on what you can already do and develop that. Please don't get into absurd discussions about 'rendering' and the look of a particular lens, it will drive you straight into a dead end. Most of the time 'rendering' etc. are questions for when you have nothing left to say in your photographs and you need to concentrate on what you are saying, develop some specific projects and make you photographs cogent, so a story, a travelogue, character driven, work, play, etc.  A quote from this thread that sums it up comes from James  Steve  Dear Steve,  Thanks for your encouragement. If you are interest, please take a look at thread I started, dedicated to Hanoi and Leica M. I will update that thread with photos taken with the Summaron  http://www.l-camera-forum.com/topic/229545-hanoi-viewed-through-leica-m/   Seeing your last reply, I think you've answered your own question now. Yes, Philip. Now I am committed. Cheers. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Archived
This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.