Jump to content

Is the Leica 35mm Summilux-M the quintessential Leica Lens?


thestatesman

Recommended Posts

The quintessential Leica lens... I would have said the Summicron 50 in the past. Has always been the standard M lens since i bought my first copy in the seventies. HCB's favorite lens... Small, light, fast, sharp with no harshness, handy, expensive but affordable, solid like a tank. Today the Summicron 50 is like yours truly, still indispensable :rolleyes: but procrastinating on retirement. The young Summarit 50 does better for less but misses f/2. The 50/2 apo would do it but affordability is not its forte. The 50/1.4 asph is great but yet a special lens like any Summilux, a bit too expensive, a bit too bulky, a bit too heavy, a bit too fragile, a bit too harsh, great lens in low light but quintessential no. So no 50 anymore? My favorite Elmar is not made anymore and is only f/2.8. So yes the quintessential Leica lens is not a 50. Sad for 50 lovers but how many camera brands offer five different 50's actually? We are spoiled by Leica aren't we. So what remains? Summicron 28? Superb but quintessential no. Too wide for that. Summicron 75? Superb but too long for that. So must be a 35 but which one? The Summilux FLE is like the Summilux 50 asph with a bit more harshness, so quintessential no. The Summarit 35 could do it but misses f/2 as does the Summarit 50. So the winner is... the 35/2 asph naturally. Small, light, fast, sharp, handy, expensive but affordable, solid like a tank. A bit too harsh sometimes, a bit too reddish also, a bit too bulky compared to the 35/2 v4. I don't use it much as i prefer the ZM 35/2.8 in good light, the 35/1.4 FLE in low light and the 35/1.4 pre-asph for soft portraits. But i see no other quintessential lens than the Summicron 35/2 asph so far. YMMvastlyV 

  • Like 4
Link to post
Share on other sites

I have both the 35 cron v4 and the 35 lux ASPH FLE.

 

Even though the lux is a technically better lens, I use the cron 9 out of 10 times when I need a 35. The size of the cron makes it the perfect walking around lens, it balances very well on the camera and also makes the camera less suspicious in the eyes of strangers.  The lux is too bulky for my taste for a walking around lens.

Link to post
Share on other sites

I do not have the 35 Summicron. In making the choice between purchasing non-aspherical 35 Summicron and 35 Summilux I bit the bullet and chose the more expensive Summilux. At first I was puzzled by the fact that the lens did not perform with great resolution until stopped down quite a bit; I thought there may have been something wrong with my lens. Then, I ran into one of those articles by Thorsten Overgaard (Sp?) advising use of 3X ND Filter with the faster lenses, and started using one. To risk being cliche', it has been the my first, and only, true comprehension of fabled Leica "glow." If I were, for some reason, required to choose only one of my collection of Leica glass, it would be my 35mm non-aspherical Summilux. I base this opinion purely on the magic- because "magic" is the most appropriate word- of viewing the images. I am so happy with the image quality, I am almost glad that I am unable to provide technical analysis of it.

  • Like 2
Link to post
Share on other sites

I agree with other posters that the quintessential lens has changed with changing style, fashion, and technology. As noted in a 1957 issue of Leica Fotografie that traced the evolution of the Leica, the 50 3.5 Elmar was the lens that got Leica accepted as a serious camera, due to its combination of performance, small size (essential for the Leica concept), and usability. It had been the essential lens for over 30 years and was still in production, then just joined by the 2.8 version for the IIIg (which came out after the M3).

Then the Summicron 50 became the lens to have, and most preferred it to the faster Summilux.

But as styles changed, more shifted to 35mm as the normal lens, working closer to the subject. Again,the 35 Summicron was most popular due to size, performance, and cost. (Leica was not yet just a luxury item, and cost was a concern for most users.)

With my M4 In the late 1960s I had both 35 and 50 Summicrons, and used the 50 most as a "stand back" user.

With the M9 I find a 35 mm suits me better, as I can crop to a 50 FOV when needed and keep adequate quality.

I don't think the particular model matters as much - through the years it would just be the latest version of the model that had the combination of size, performance, field of view, and cost.

Because size is for me a major part of traditional Leica concept, I now use the 35 and 50 Summarit most of the time on my M9, even though I have Summicrons in both lengths, and have tried Summilux. Being used to slow film ISO, even with the M9 I find f2.5 fast enough.

I don't care for the design complexity of the FLE lenses

Edited by TomB_tx
Link to post
Share on other sites

Advertisement (gone after registration)

Quintessence? It would be easier to pick up an oiled marble will chopsticks than garner consensus on that. I honestly think it's beyond it, I mean when you look at the hallowed users, HCB, Eggleston . . . better I don't carry on with this list, but my thought is, everyone finds their groove. I will use my 35 'cron asph on my M9-P until the camera is unusable, and the 50 'cron on my M3 until I'm unusable (I suspect that will happen well before the camera). They're my quintessential pairings, and since I finally got this kit together all traces of GAS have vaporised.

  • Like 1
Link to post
Share on other sites

Some time ago I switched from the old 35/1,4 to the new 35/1,4 ASPH FLE. Looking back I miss the "dreamy" rendering of the old lens. But the new is so, so much more versatile, and for me the size is perfect. The improvement should be a working lens cap. The current one is to expensive to replace each week ;) .

Link to post
Share on other sites

Some time ago I switched from the old 35/1,4 to the new 35/1,4 ASPH FLE. Looking back I miss the "dreamy" rendering of the old lens. But the new is so, so much more versatile, and for me the size is perfect. The improvement should be a working lens cap. The current one is to expensive to replace each week ;) .

You use lens caps? I always thought those things weren't meant to be used

Link to post
Share on other sites

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.

Guest
Reply to this topic...

×   Pasted as rich text.   Paste as plain text instead

  Only 75 emoji are allowed.

×   Your link has been automatically embedded.   Display as a link instead

×   Your previous content has been restored.   Clear editor

×   You cannot paste images directly. Upload or insert images from URL.

×
×
  • Create New...