Leica 28mm Summicron ASPH 2016 #11672-- Owners Thread

[Guest]

Advertisement (gone after registration)

It is not Boricron vs Shiftocron but vs Lemoncron here. I am interested in the new lens to get sharper corners, not to get sharpness on the left and softness on the right of the other way around. At f/2 DoF can explain things like that eventually but not at f/5.6 with a 28mm lens... Unless you've got a faulty body, this lens should not have passed Leica's QC tests if you ask me.

 

At a factory tour to the Leitz Park I had the opportunity to ask Peter Karbe himself, chief designer and director of the optical division at Leica, about the improvements on the new Summicron 28mm.

http://www.l-camera-forum.com/topic/261197-my-visit-to-leica-wetzlar-a-brief-report/?do=findComment&comment=3055994

He pointed to changes at the lens hood and slight improvements in adapting to the M 240.

For owners of a Summicron 28mm 1st version there would be no substantial reasons to change to the new version.

[don daniel]

I am really eager to try my lens again both on the M240 and on the Monochrom as soon as it comes back from service. One of its aperture blades sticks at 2.8. I could no longer use ist wide open. My copy for sure should not have passed Leica's quality control.

[rscheffler]

It is not Boricron vs Shiftocron but vs Lemoncron here. I am interested in the new lens to get sharper corners, not to get sharpness on the left and softness on the right of the other way around. At f/2 DoF can explain things like that eventually but not at f/5.6 with a 28mm lens... Unless you've got a faulty body, this lens should not have passed Leica's QC tests if you ask me.

 

Well, I don't know if the lens is operating to spec. It probably mostly is. Without a number more to try on the same or similar scenes, it's just not possible to say if it's just the way the new lens is, or due to sample variation.

 

As for left vs. right side, etc. Please note that both lenses look softer on my camera on the left side. As I mentioned in one of my comments, it's possible there is a minor problem with either the camera's lens mount or sensor alignment. Therefore please don't take my results as a definitive standard for how the lens performs. Rather, I'm saying this is how mine performs and am hoping for feedback or similar images from others with this lens so that eventually we will all have a better understanding of how it performs and will give those possibly interested in buying one more information with which to make a decision.

[lct]

[...] For owners of a Summicron 28mm 1st version there would be no substantial reasons to change to the new version.

 

I'm just trying to know the facts about the new lens so i cannot draw any conclusion for now. Accordind to Sean Reid, corner performance is improved for both the SL and the M. I can see it clearly on the Leica's MTF graphs so i just want to check this point. YMMV.

Edited June 7, 2016 by lct

[MarkP]

The decision I have to make is whether to send it back to the store (who have informed me there will be a restocking fee because they consider it technically a used lens and can no longer sell it as new - and I can appreciate their point though wish they would reconsider), or send it to Leica for what would likely be a frustrating, drawn-out repair process that may not result in any improvement...

 

 

If the lens is not performing optimally then it is faulty and the store has an obligation to supply you a new one, not charge a restocking fee as it should be returned by them to Leica once they have given you a new one, nor send it off for repairs for you.

 

You could directly call the manager of the store and voice your displeasure and/or contact the head of Leica in your country and insist they replace the lens with a new one they have checked is performing optimally. If you send sample comparison photos they should be able to see the issue. Leica may well just provide you with a replacement lens as they did twice for my new 50 APO-Summicron until the third performed to spec.

Edited June 7, 2016 by MarkP

[Guest]

I'm just trying to know the facts about the new lens so i cannot draw any conclusion for now. Accordind to Sean Reid, corner performance is improved for both the SL and the M. I can see it clearly on the Leica's MTF graphs so i just want to check this point. YMMV.

 

Perhaps Peter Karbe has made more comparisons than all of us to come to his judgment?

Of course everyone is free to decide for himself what might be significant advantages for him.

Leica will be very pleased about more increasing sales.

Also, the second hand market might be very happy if more old Summicrons 28 will change hands.

In the optical field, perhaps there might be only theoretical improvements without affecting the photographic practice.

[rscheffler]

Advertisement (gone after registration)

If the lens is not performing optimally then it is faulty and the store has an obligation to supply you a new one, not charge a restocking fee as it should be returned by them to Leica once they have given you a new one, nor send it off for repairs for you.

 

You could directly call the manager of the store and voice your displeasure and/or contact the head of Leica in your country and insist they replace the lens with a new one they have checked is performing optimally. If you send sample comparison photos they should be able to see the issue. Leica may well just provide you with a replacement lens as they did twice for my new 50 APO-Summicron until the third performed to spec.

 

I have dealt with the store manager the entire time. He proposed contacting Leica on my behalf to request a replacement and the store did replace the first one I received, which was clearly defective. But if I wanted to simply return the lens, there would be a restocking fee because they would have to sell it as open box, naturally at a lower price. His opinion seemed to be there wasn't conclusive evidence that the lens performed sub optimally. And I did supply a link to high-res examples. 

 

Over the weekend I had a closer look at the images from the first, defective lens. Though the images were severely back focused, I could clearly see evidence of strong field curvature. I also had access to images from a couple other owners of the new Cron. There wasn't enough evidence to convince me my copy was substantially subpar compared to theirs. Rather, it seems the new version's performance characteristics have changed considerably compared to the previous version. I concluded I preferred specific aspects of the previous version's images despite some advantages, both ergonomically and optically, with the new design.

 

I'm not in the mood to get into a prolonged back and forth with Leica and/or their service department. I believe the chances are high they will say the lens is within spec. I've had past experiences like this with other manufacturers where the drawn-out process was a frustrating experience. I would be more unhappy if indeed it was found to be within spec, or replacement copies performed similarly and I felt like I was stuck with a lens I didn't like. I would look to sell it and naturally take a loss on it, despite having potentially gone through a lot of effort to get to that point. Therefore I decided to cut my losses and stay with the previous version while the option to return the lens was still open.

 

 

Maybe my 'pain' will benefit others by providing them more information about the new lens than was previously available.... I'm also open to receiving donations.

[lct]

Perhaps Peter Karbe has made more comparisons than all of us to come to his judgment?

 

Did Mr Karbe write anything about this? Words fly away, writings remain... Please forgive this ugly lawyer... Mr Karbe is the chief designer of a camera brand stating officially that improvements have been made. This is enough for me.

[Guest]

 

Did Mr Karbe write anything about this? Words fly away, writings remain... Please forgive this ugly lawyer... Mr Karbe is the chief designer of a camera brand stating officially that improvements have been made. This is enough for me.

 

 

Of course there have been improvements, as mentioned above.

But at the optical design just not so substantial that immediately an exchange would be necessary.

And it should be an open secret that it becomes increasingly difficult for the advertising department to emphasize still the next-generation improvements to high quality available aspherical lenses.

 

But ask Mr Karbe yourself. Maybe you'll get a similar response - even written.

For me his above-quoted answer is completely sufficient.

 

Besides, he remarked in his excellent lecture few times the theoretical physical-optical differences and its insignificantly implications for the practical photography.

In contrast, he emphasized the enormous technological advances of the M8 and M9 up to the M240 and beyond the M-system far surpassing Leica S with very visible effects.

[lct]

I respect you, Mr Karbe and everybody else mnutzer but i'm the type of guy who trust facts and written commitments more than words, there's nothing i can do against that . Also it's a lens that i use a f/2 mainly and those graphs do interest me:

 

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!

Edited June 7, 2016 by lct

[Rick]

The new Summicron is far superior to the old version on the M.  If, you find side to side differences, then return your lens for exchange.  It is not correct.  Has nothing to do with the new design.  This is a one off complaint.

 

I'm not sure about the Peter Karbe comments, either.  I would not believe Peter made these comments unless they are in print form him.  I will contact him and find out if he said these things about the new lens is not a big improvement on the M over the old lens.  I'm pretty certain he will not agree with this statement from above that he supposedly said.

 

The new lens seems to be quite an improvement from the old version, on the M.

 

Rick

[MarkP]

 

 

In contrast, he emphasized the enormous technological advances of the M8 and M9 up to the M240 and beyond the M-system far surpassing Leica S with very visible effects.

 

 

 

I don't quite understand what you are getting at here. Can you please clarify this statement?

 

Thanks

Mark

[rscheffler]

The new Summicron is far superior to the old version on the M.  If, you find side to side differences, then return your lens for exchange.  It is not correct.  Has nothing to do with the new design.  This is a one off complaint.

 

I'm not sure about the Peter Karbe comments, either.  I would not believe Peter made these comments unless they are in print form him.  I will contact him and find out if he said these things about the new lens is not a big improvement on the M over the old lens.  I'm pretty certain he will not agree with this statement from above that he supposedly said.

 

The new lens seems to be quite an improvement from the old version, on the M.

 

Rick

 

As it was, I was already pushing the limits of my dealer's patience. Should I have to go through several copies in order to cherry pick the best one? What happens to those other 'open box' lenses? Is it fair to others in line to buy one of those copies? Personally I don't care if someone had already handled and did some test shots with a lens while in the store, and I come around and decided I want to buy it. But with it being Leica and expensive, some customers are extremely picking about receiving 'virgin' product. Is that wrong? No, it's their preference, but it can make it difficult to convince a dealer to let a perceived pixelpeeper loose on a set of identical lenses for the purposes of finding the best one.

 

I don't disbelieve your statement that the new lens is better than the old one. I did see signs of that with the one I received. Unfortunately it was not a sufficiently clear-cut case with my copy. I would really, really like to see some full-rez files from other 28 Cron v2 owners confirming Leica's statements about improved optical performance.

 

In other words, prove my results were not the norm. Show that massive forward field curvature was an anomaly. Show that at infinity, edge sharpness is on par with the center of the frame. Not just at or near wide open, but also at f/5.6 and f/8. Those were the characteristics I disliked about the images from my copy.

 

If there is sufficient evidence that my copy was substandard, I would reconsider if I could be assured of receiving a copy representative of proper performance. In the meantime, I've set my sights on the 28 Lux.

 

I think it's also worth reiterating that we all have certain criteria and preferences when we test new lenses. What didn't work for me might not be a problem for others. But I hope I made it clear the aspects of the lens with which I was unhappy and that my tests were done in such a way to reveal aspects of lens performance that were relevant to my needs. YMMV.

Edited June 8, 2016 by rscheffler

[Guest]

I don't quite understand what you are getting at here. Can you please clarify this statement?

 

Thanks

Mark

 

Let me try:

Unlike the lower optical improvements of Summicron 28 there have been significant technological advances from M8 to M9 and in particular to M240, although it does not matter what type of sensor has been installed.

- Of course it would be better, if this lecture by Mr. Karbe - he had already held elsewhere previously - could be shown as an official video of Leica.

However, his remark about the two versions of Summicron 28 he answered on separate demand, as he referred to Leica's outstanding aspherical lenses.

[Rick]

rscheffler - You pm'd me and I returned to the forum to answer your question only to have you respond with another multi-paragraph dissertation of how you feel the lens has massive field curvature and is not sharp in the corners at certain apertures, and on and on about trying your dealers patients.

 

I have both lenses here and all I can add, again, is that the new lens is much superior in all of the areas you find deficient.  Perfect?  I don't have that measure on my scale.  Good enough that I am very satisfied?  Yes, the lens is once again one of my favorites.  

 

By the way, Jono has told me he likes the lens so much he is deciding if he is going to now sell his 28 Summilux... which he loves for the extra stop and I think he still believes the Summilux is a little better in some other areas.

 

My suggestion to you:  There are many photos from the new Summicron on the internet and reviewers seem to find universally that the lens is quite an improvement in contrast, edge smearing, color, flare and field curvature.  Maybe, you could post some photos from your lens that displays massive field curvature and unsharp corners and the other issues you see?

 

I regret I will not be here to answer your posts.  I am very happy with the new lens and for me, that is that. 

 

I'm taking a "moderate" summer sabbatical from the forum,  

 

Rick

[rscheffler]

Rick, I appreciate you taking the time to respond. On the previous page in one of my long-winded posts, I included a link to a Google Photos gallery in which there are images illustrating field curvature and the weaker edges of my copy of the new lens vs. the old once stopped down a bit:

 

https://goo.gl/photo...7VWD2n5SZW8V1g7

 

In my earlier comments, perhaps lost in the sea of words, is my acknowledgement that there are indeed improvements with the new lens, but that I didn't find them sufficient for MY needs to offset the field curvature and poorer edge characteristics compared to the previous version.

 

I have found online sources of image crops from the new version of the lens, but I have not found any high resolution examples of entire uncropped images. I saw that Lloyd Chambers has looked at the lens, but I'm not subscribed to his service. Besides, I believe he has only done a few cursory tests that wouldn't warrant the $90 subscription. My understanding is Sean Read only shows center and corner crops. Maybe i'm mistaken? I spent a good part of the end of last week and weekend trying to track down examples to help conclude whether or not my copy was performing as should be expected.

 

As this has been a learning process, I've learned that we all have different priorities about lens characteristics.

 

I'm glad your lens is working for you. The crop you posted earlier, which was the reason for my PM, looked excellent. I would love to see a few high-rez uncropped examples, though regret to read you will not be available to do so.

[pechelman]

My understanding is Sean Read only shows center and corner crops. Maybe i'm mistaken? I spent a good part of the end of last week and weekend trying to track down examples to help conclude whether or not my copy was performing as should be expected.

 

Reid's review of this lens only contains the crops as you noted. I was a little disappointed in subscribing to his website, specifically for this review, then to only see these crops. I am still hopeful he'll do an update and complete his usually quite good review of these 2 lenses. 

 

I also asked Jono for his full images, but he seemed to think they werent relevant and only posted a very small downsized image of one scene from one lens.

 

As I noted, I think you're the first to actually test and provide full images from these lenses so we can "get the full picture" as it were.

[uhoh7]

At a factory tour to the Leitz Park I had the opportunity to ask Peter Karbe himself, chief designer and director of the optical division at Leica, about the improvements on the new Summicron 28mm.

http://www.l-camera-forum.com/topic/261197-my-visit-to-leica-wetzlar-a-brief-report/?do=findComment&comment=3055994

He pointed to changes at the lens hood and slight improvements in adapting to the M 240.

For owners of a Summicron 28mm 1st version there would be no substantial reasons to change to the new version.

Wow Raid has really done very well with communications! Would have loved to have been there too, but maybe they would have shown me out LOL

 

"He mentioned several times that for modern Leica lenses, they should be shot wide open and that there was no need to stop down to achieve better quality, only improved depth of field."

 

This totally cracks me up. You see Puts say something like this too, from time to time. He found the ASPH 50 Lux WO beating the pre-asph at 5.6! But Ron and many others show the mid-zone wobbles of that area lens WO. I will say this: my 90 and 75 summarits really do shoot infinity impressively at F/2.5. Not the 28 cron, which is an utterly different lens at f/2, than at f/8. The whole look and feel of the image, beyond just sharpness, is different (on M9). Which is totally normal. I use F/2 rarely in practice. Lower light mostly.

 

Westface by unoh7, 5.6

 

I was surprised to hear a single person assembles one lens. Perhaps this explains some of the copy variations users here are seeing. For the money, I would like to see the lenses tested before they go out. In this modern day with digital sensors and computers, you would think they could have a high tech bench which would verify calibration and centering quickly. But not with one person. The assembler could just mount the finished lens on the bench and let the automated tests be evaluated by a specialist.

 

Ron, really appreciate your experience with the new version. After years of discussion with you, I trust your eye as much as Reid and Lloyd.

 

IMHO the 28 cron v1 is the best 28mm for 35mm format ever made by anyone. It's my favorite lens no matter how much I try the others. It sounds to me as if the 5.6 and f/8 and maybe even f/11 performance of the v1 is as good or better than the v2. Frankly f/11 is more useful to me than f/2, because you can get such UWA type DOF, which a 35 or 50 can never equal. The 28 cron has exceptional performance at f/11. There is no "generic" look to the stopped down images (on M9). They are full of character and color with nothing else I own can make to such a degree.

 

past f/11:

Knee Deep by unoh7, on Flickr

 

Drinking the subtle colors at f/8+:

AirBnB by unoh7, on Flickr

 

maybe 9.5?

Kickstand by unoh7, on Flickr

 

TYG it's so nice to my eye, since it's worth much less than I paid a few years ago The v1 is a steal at the moment.

Edited June 12, 2016 by uhoh7

[archiea]

12589:

01.jpg

 

12588:

02.jpg

 

12466:

3.jpg

 

Hello!

 

Can any of these be used with the NEW 28mm F2 Summicron?   I'm asking because I'm interested in using a clip on hood if I get the new f2 28mm to assist in using circular polarizers on it.; I already have a 46mm cir pol for my 50mm.  The current new hood would require me to rotate the hood along with the filter.  Thanks for the help!  

[Advertisement]

Hallo,

Look here: Leica M

[rscheffler]

Hi Charlie,

 

The interesting thing to my eyes regarding the new 28 tests I did, was that at infinity and wide open, the new 28 was sharp and definitely usable over a wide central sweet spot. My copy of the old 28 Cron seems to have an ever so slightly nearer infinity focus - 400-500m vs. 800-1000m - and this was actually noticeable at full resolution on the M240 with the far infinity focus not as pleasingly sharp as the new version. Corners/edges weren't necessarily critically sharp wide open with the new one, but again it was better than the old. Would I shoot either lens wide open at infinity? Rarely. Maybe only in dawn/dusk situations if I was caught without a tripod. Even with a 28mm you're going to get a fair amount of foreground content where it will make sense to stop down to some degree for better depth of field.

 

As I've stated before, it wasn't until around f/5.6 that the old one had better general across-frame performance when the edges and corners sharpened up comparably to the center, whereas with the new version those areas simply never improved. Had the edges sharpened up comparably to the center and even if it retained some forward field curvature, I probably would have kept the new one.

 

IIRC you picked up the 28 Cron for a great price at the time when used Leica glass was generally at a premium on the used market. A weird thing with the 28 Cron has been the relatively abundant availability of used copies at somewhat lower prices relative to other used M lenses. It remains probably one of the better mid-higher retail price M lenses to pick up at relative bargain prices. I've seen it available for $2000 US retail (vs. private sale) in decent condition.