Leica Summaron-28 -image thread

[animalhairs]

Advertisement (gone after registration)

I am excited Leica is moving forward with the retake/reissue line. I put my order in yesterday. I shoot film, b&w and color, but mostly b&w with a 28mm.

Edited October 26, 2016 by animalhairs

[Rick]

I see that the "anti-creative" reviewer of Leica product is at it again.  I am talking about, Sean Read, the vegetable and collage-board photo testing reviewer.  A gut that wouldn't know creativity if it hit him in the head.  Possibly, the most technical of non-technically trained photographic reviewers I've ever read.  http://www.reidreviews.com

 

Anyway, he has just posted a review of this lens.  I'm not really sure how a reviewer that looks at vegetables and leaves against bright backgrounds to determine noise levels and contrast and chromatic aberration is going to help anyone decide why they would purchase a lens like this.  This is going to be an art lens.  

 

I believe this lens is going to inspire more creative photographs than technical ones.  If, you have to do a technical review of this lens then, you really don't get this lens.  This lens is for the creativity of it all... just for the fun of it all. 

 

Oh well, let the veritable vegetable quandary of photographic evaluation begin!

 

Rick

Edited October 26, 2016 by Rick

[JonPB]

In defense of Mr. Reid, that's expressly why the article posted today is composed primarily of "virtual contact sheet" samples, without a vegetable platter to be found. I find it amusing how you seem to criticize his work by agreeing with it.

 

Cheers,

Jon

[Rick]

In defense of Mr. Reid, that's expressly why the article posted today is composed primarily of "virtual contact sheet" samples, without a vegetable platter to be found. I find it amusing how you seem to criticize his work by agreeing with it.

 

Cheers,

Jon

 

Ironic isn't it?

 

Rick

[IkarusJohn]

I understand the defence of Mr Reid, but the mockery of him as the fruit & vege man should not be taken literally.  The point is that he goes to great lengths to describe his methodology and the fine detail of what he observes without realising that, to many (Rick and me, anyway) it is all completely and utterly meaningless.  I'm very sure your opinion and the opinions of many others differ - I'm very happy for you.

 

I'm interested in his conclusions, largely to see if there is anything he has found that is wrong with a lens or camera, and his conclusions on the SL (particularly with lenses like the 28 Summilux) were instructive.  BUT, in the main, his images of the backs of people's heads in crowds tell me nothing, and his detailed analysis is largely worthless to me.  Adam's examples of the original lens in use are far more instructive.

 

Hence the mockery.

[MarkP]

And isn't black and white the ultimate "retro"? Colour is some sort of fancy new invention.

Black and White is the New Black!

[Rick]

Advertisement (gone after registration)

I understand the defence of Mr Reid, but the mockery of him as the fruit & vege man should not be taken literally.  The point is that he goes to great lengths to describe his methodology and the fine detail of what he observes without realising that, to many (Rick and me, anyway) it is all completely and utterly meaningless.  I'm very sure your opinion and the opinions of many others differ - I'm very happy for you.

 

I'm interested in his conclusions, largely to see if there is anything he has found that is wrong with a lens or camera, and his conclusions on the SL (particularly with lenses like the 28 Summilux) were instructive.  BUT, in the main, his images of the backs of people's heads in crowds tell me nothing, and his detailed analysis is largely worthless to me.  Adam's examples of the original lens in use are far more instructive.

 

Hence the mockery.

 

 

John,

 

You know, through the years we, you and I, started so far apart and somewhere along the line, we have come together.  I really like what you wrote here.

 

And, I agree, that Sean has a methodology that is constant and predictable and many resect what he does on that account, Jono is one that does.  But, it really is both interesting and meaningless.  I agree.

 

I always post his web link because, you (he) may believe that I mock him, but I understand that even mockery is a form of press.  Sean is well able to defend himself.  I want folks to read him and take out of it what they want.  He does provide a review site that many, including Jono respect.  

 

But, in this case, the 2.8/5.6 Summaron is more a lens of imagination than, perfection.

 

I believe creativity and art is found not in perfection, but in the imperfections.  The brush strokes set our minds free to fill in the missing spaces, to creatively interpret what is missing or vague.  The imperfection of lenses do much the same, I believe.  Which, explains why so many on this forum post that their non-asph versions are their favorite lens.  

 

Photography is not always seen as art.  Maybe, striving for perfection is the  antithesis of art and creativity.  Michelangelo's David was deliberately not perfect.  

 

Rick

Edited October 26, 2016 by Rick

[michaelwj]

  Michelangelo's David was deliberately not perfect.  

 

Rick

 

 

And that's what makes it perfect.

[wlaidlaw]

Apologies if others have pointed this out but if you compare the MTF graphs of the Summaron with the new 28 ASPH Summicron at f5.6, the Summicron is slightly better than the Summaron. So if in theory, Leica have designed the Summaron on the basis that they did not need to make any compromises with a maximum aperture of f5.6, they don't appear to have succeeded. Its only real benefit is size, against which you trade off the additional flexibility of wider apertures. Give me the Summicron every time. 

 

I wonder if Leica have succeeded in curing the self-dissassembly (front section only held on by three tiny grub screws) on the new revised version of the 28 ASPH Summicron. 

 

Wilson

[jaapv]

I see that the "anti-creative" reviewer of Leica product is at it again.  I am talking about, Sean Read, the vegetable and collage-board photo testing reviewer.  A gut that wouldn't know creativity if it hit him in the head.  Possibly, the most technical of non-technically trained photographic reviewers I've ever read.  http://www.reidreviews.com

 

Anyway, he has just posted a review of this lens.  I'm not really sure how a reviewer that looks at vegetables and leaves against bright backgrounds to determine noise levels and contrast and chromatic aberration is going to help anyone decide why they would purchase a lens like this.  This is going to be an art lens.  

 

I believe this lens is going to inspire more creative photographs than technical ones.  If, you have to do a technical review of this lens then, you really don't get this lens.  This lens is for the creativity of it all... just for the fun of it all. 

 

Oh well, let the veritable vegetable quandary of photographic evaluation begin!

 

Rick

Errr... Since when is creativity part of a technical review? I personally couldn't care less whether a reviewer is a brilliant artist or not. Sean is thorough and reliable, rather more desirable qualities for evaluating a lens (or camera for that matter).

People have been asking for photographs; the  article contains ninety - not one of a vegetable or contrasty leaf by the way- Extremely useful for those of us who want to know what the lens is capable of.

 

And noise levels - for a lens??? Some critics have weird notions.

 

Actually I am convinced that you haven't even read the article.

After a short discussion of the lens it only touches briefly on corner sharpness and vignetting with a couple of example images after moving on to dozens of photographs in various situations, there are no curves, no technical tests,  just an evaluation of the lens as an image-making device, exactly what you are asking for.

[jaapv]

 

I understand the defence of Mr Reid, but the mockery of him as the fruit & vege man should not be taken literally.  The point is that he goes to great lengths to describe his methodology and the fine detail of what he observes without realising that, to many (Rick and me, anyway) it is all completely and utterly meaningless.  I'm very sure your opinion and the opinions of many others differ - I'm very happy for you.

 

I'm interested in his conclusions, largely to see if there is anything he has found that is wrong with a lens or camera, and his conclusions on the SL (particularly with lenses like the 28 Summilux) were instructive.  BUT, in the main, his images of the backs of people's heads in crowds tell me nothing, and his detailed analysis is largely worthless to me.  Adam's examples of the original lens in use are far more instructive.

 

Hence the mockery.

If his conclusions are useful to you, how can you disagree with his methodology?

[pedaes]

As a subscriber and having now read Sean's review I agree with Jaap. I think Sean totally gets this lens (and this is obviouus in his opening paragraph), and this review is totally different from his normal reviews. I find some of the shots stunning, and would say it well demonstrates what we have to look forward to, and will be a great help to anyone unsure of what it is all about.

[IkarusJohn]

John,

 

You know, through the years we, you and I, started so far apart and somewhere along the line, we have come together.  I really like what you wrote here.

 

And, I agree, that Sean has a methodology that is constant and predictable and many resect what he does on that account, Jono is one that does.  But, it really is both interesting and meaningless.  I agree.

 

I always post his web link because, you (he) may believe that I mock him, but I understand that even mockery is a form of press.  Sean is well able to defend himself.  I want folks to read him and take out of it what they want.  He does provide a review site that many, including Jono respect.  

 

But, in this case, the 2.8/5.6 Summaron is more a lens of imagination than, perfection.

 

I believe creativity and art is found not in perfection, but in the imperfections.  The brush strokes set our minds free to fill in the missing spaces, to creatively interpret what is missing or vague.  The imperfection of lenses do much the same, I believe.  Which, explains why so many on this forum post that their non-asph versions are their favorite lens.  

 

Photography is not always seen as art.  Maybe, striving for perfection is the  antithesis of art and creativity.  Michelangelo's David was deliberately not perfect.  

 

Rick

Yeah ... nah

[Robert M Poole]

I was in Leica Store Manchester yesterday and they let me take the new Summaron out for a play. In fact, they insisted. I was looking at trading up my 50mm Summarit for a cron and we got chatting about the new lens, next thing I know he's putting it on my M9 and sending me out to play. 

 

First impressions, it's tiny. So small that the first couple of pictures my fingers kept getting in the way. It is also gorgeous looking. I shoot a lot wide open so on a gloomy Manchester day f5.6 took a bit of getting used to as did the fiddly focusing. I should point out that I've only ever shot 50mm and 35mm on my m9 so a proper review would mean using it for more than 10 minutes.

 

They describe the Summaron as having a 'signiture' look and that is definitely true. There is visible vignetting (by design) which II quite like and a really nice rendering. It really does have a film like quality.

 

I imported the shots into LR but although it is 6bit encoded it doesn't seem to be recorded correctly one shot says it is shot at f4 rather than 5.6 and the focal length isn't recorded.

 

Most of my shots were rubbish, my fault not the lens. The one below is a mono conversion from RAW with minimal processing in LR just to give you an idea.   

 

Summaron by Robert Michael Poole, on Flickr

[Manoleica]

It's obviously a great lens, strikes me as the lens you might use on a day when you want to go out shooting and just get a diffent view and look.. If you can afford it, buy it & use it..I'm tempted just for the pleasure of ownership..

[wattsy]

This lens is undoubtedly interesting (it certainly has piqued my interest) but I think it is a serious mistake to think there is anything inherently "artistic" or "creative" about it. 

[Manoleica]

This lens is undoubtedly interesting (it certainly has piqued my interest) but I think it is a serious mistake to think there is anything inherently "artistic" or "creative" about it.

 

Inherent or not, all lenses offer the photographer expansion of artistry.. Leica lenses offer that "nth" degree more..L

[ianman]

Thanks for sharing your first impressions.

 

I imported the shots into LR but although it is 6bit encoded it doesn't seem to be recorded correctly one shot says it is shot at f4 rather than 5.6 and the focal length isn't recorded.

 

 

 

Your M9 doesn't know about this lens or its encoding so it's no wonder the exif is not showing the correct info. I suppose there will be a firmware update.

[mmradman]

I was in Leica Store Manchester yesterday and they let me take the new Summaron out for a play. In fact, they insisted. I was looking at trading up my 50mm Summarit for a cron and we got chatting about the new lens, next thing I know he's putting it on my M9 and sending me out to play. 

 

First impressions, it's tiny. So small that the first couple of pictures my fingers kept getting in the way. It is also gorgeous looking. I shoot a lot wide open so on a gloomy Manchester day f5.6 took a bit of getting used to as did the fiddly focusing. I should point out that I've only ever shot 50mm and 35mm on my m9 so a proper review would mean using it for more than 10 minutes.

 

They describe the Summaron as having a 'signiture' look and that is definitely true. There is visible vignetting (by design) which II quite like and a really nice rendering. It really does have a film like quality.

 

I imported the shots into LR but although it is 6bit encoded it doesn't seem to be recorded correctly one shot says it is shot at f4 rather than 5.6 and the focal length isn't recorded.

 

Most of my shots were rubbish, my fault not the lens. The one below is a mono conversion from RAW with minimal processing in LR just to give you an idea.   

 

Summaron by Robert Michael Poole, on Flickr

Thanks for providing link to full size JPG.

 

I don't see anything different from any other 28mm lens shot at small aperture, vignetting is well controlled and sharpness is there.  If i didn't have other 28 M lens for the money being asked and practicality i would go for the latest or previous version of Elmarit ASPH. If on the other hand you like to play with retro toys go for it. To be useful to me it would need 39mm filter thread instead of 34mm - not to be confused with 39mm LSM.  

[Advertisement]

Hallo,

Look here: Leica M

[Ted Lemon]

Placed order for this lens with Red Dot on the announcement day with 10% deposit then, as a true Leica user, put it to the back of my mind as used to the long lead times on new products. Astonished when Ivor called me yesterday to say they had it in from Leica and it was delivered to me today. Bought this as 28mm is my fav focal length (if you have been into Red Dot recently you will have seen my Q images on the wall) and I wanted a classic rendition to my photographs with the M. Will post up some pictures when I get going with it.