50/1.4 III, 35／2 summicron which one would you keep

[leica1215]

Advertisement (gone after registration)

I have 50/1.4 pre asph, and 35/2 black paint made in 2001, if you only want to keep one, which one would you keep? 

 

I know these two are different in nature, but I only want to keep one, so wondering which one is worth to keep.

 

thanks

[Advertisement]

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

[AceVentura1986]

IMHO, this really just depends on your shooting style: do you prefer a wider more cinematic and documentary field of view or a narrower more intimate view? The 35 is a perfect lens for capturing everything at arm's length as well whereas the 50 enables you to stand back a bit and be more of an observer. The 50 also can double as a reasonable decent lens in portrait orientation, something the 35 can't do except for 3/4 body shots.

 

Finally, the 35 in theory can be handheld at a slower shutter speed than the 50 but that's offset by the one stop advantage that your 50 has, i.e., f/1.4 v f/2.

 

Really, it depends on your shooting style. Although I have a 50 summicron and a 35 Voigtlander, I've developed my eye toward the 50 and so use that unless I know I'll be in a tight environment and would benefit from a wider field of view.

 

Of course, YMMV.

[NB23]

I have 50/1.4 pre asph, and 35/2 black paint made in 2001, if you only want to keep one, which one would you keep?

 

I know these two are different in nature, but I only want to keep one, so wondering which one is worth to keep.

 

thanks

To the people that own fine lenses but don't seem to have a clue on how to use them or which to sell or keep, I usually recomend what's best for them: a Nikon D50 + 18-70.

[spydrxx]

No hesitation on my part...the 35. I used one exclusively for several years and have never regretted not owning something else. I did have access to other Leica lenses owned by a close friend during that time & occasionally tried them out for special purposes.

[Belle123]

I have 50/1.4 pre asph, and 35/2 black paint made in 2001, if you only want to keep one, which one would you keep? 

 

I know these two are different in nature, but I only want to keep one, so wondering which one is worth to keep.

 

thanks

Both excellent and worth keeping. I WISH had your Summilux instead of my newer one that is Aspherical that I am not too crazy about. I probably would keep that one.

[lct]

Depends if you prefer 35 or 50mm. Two different ways of seeing the world. If you don't know yet i would buy into the focus length you use the most.

[dpitt]

Advertisement (gone after registration)

Sorry for asking, but why do you only want to keep one?

I am asking this because they are very different in weight, size focus length, ...

So if it has to be only one, you are the only person who can choose.

[jdlaing]

Keep them both.

[Dan Bachmann]

For me, when I find a lens I'm happy with, I want to keep it for a good part of my life - perhaps all of it. Since you can part with either, sell both and get another lens. Maybe you will fall in love and stay together forever.

[4X5B&W]

I would say the Ver 3 50 Lux is the more unique lens, it is the best of the pre-asph 50 luxes, and a very classic "look" that is different to modern lenses.

 

The Ver 4 Summicron's characteristics are duplicated (sharp in the centre wide open, softer at the edges, creamy Bokeh) by the current 35 Summarit at a fraction of the price.

 

As fabled as the Ver 4 35 Cron is, I personally think it's overpriced in today's market, while the Ver 3 50 Lux is a truly unique lens.....VMMV. 

[Mute-on]

I'm a one lens per body kinda guy. So if you have one body, keep the 35. If you have two, keep both.

If it was me, I'd keep both and buy a second body if I didn't already have it.

 

I travel with 2 Ms, a 35 Summaron on one and a 50 Summicron on the other. A wonderful, versatile and very enjoyable combination

 

Good luck.

 

J

 

 

Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

[michaelwj]

I have a 28v1 elmarit on an M4 and a 85/1.4 AIS on a Nikon F2.

 

I'm not going to tell you anything about me. Which one should I keep?*

 

 

 

 

 

 

*none of this is true.

[michaelwj]

I have 50/1.4 pre asph, and 35/2 black paint made in 2001, if you only want to keep one, which one would you keep?

 

I know these two are different in nature, but I only want to keep one, so wondering which one is worth to keep.

 

thanks

Sell them both.

I'd recommend an iPhone and a holiday for the proceeds. You'll get tons of nice pictures when your on holiday. I'm not going to recommend the D70 as above, it's too hard to get your photos to Facebook etc...

 

[anindyo]

Maybe sell both and get a 40 mm lens?
Voigtlander 40/1.4 or Summicron-C/M-Rokkor 40/2

[leica1215]

I would say the Ver 3 50 Lux is the more unique lens, it is the best of the pre-asph 50 luxes, and a very classic "look" that is different to modern lenses.

 

The Ver 4 Summicron's characteristics are duplicated (sharp in the centre wide open, softer at the edges, creamy Bokeh) by the current 35 Summarit at a fraction of the price.

 

As fabled as the Ver 4 35 Cron is, I personally think it's overpriced in today's market, while the Ver 3 50 Lux is a truly unique lens.....VMMV. 

 

Thanks, its been a long time i haven't use both lens, and I am not good at analysis the differences as others, that why I come up with this question.  thanks for reply, I will keep the 50 V3 as you recommended.

[Mute-on]

Thanks, its been a long time i haven't use both lens, and I am not good at analysis the differences as others, that why I come up with this question. thanks for reply, I will keep the 50 V3 as you recommended.

You are mislead. The 35 Summicron asph was introduced in 1996. You have the asph not the version IV.

 

 

Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk