rejo Posted February 27, 2017 Share #21 Â Posted February 27, 2017 Advertisement (gone after registration) Maybe useful maybe not ..... recently tried both the elmarit and the summaron on my 240. Â Loved the retro look of the summaron but was unsure about the slow speed and the physical size of it, I don't have big hands but found it quite fiddly to focus. The elmarit on the other hand just had that feeling that it was made for the M, yes its a faster lens but thats not everything. Â For me it was just easier to focus and gave a good balance on the body. Whichever one you choose you definitely need to "try before you buy". One other thing I noticed ..... I'm using a genuine Leica half case on my M but the focusing wheel on the summaron rubbed against the case making it impossible to focus without removing the case or at least modifying it, so if your using a Leica case keep that in mind. Not knocking either but for me the elmarit suited me better. Â Â Â Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Advertisement Posted February 27, 2017 Posted February 27, 2017 Hi rejo, Take a look here 28MM Question - Elmarit ASPH or Summaron. I'm sure you'll find what you were looking for!
Herr Barnack Posted February 28, 2017 Share #22  Posted February 28, 2017 I have not had a chance to test shoot the Summaron 28, but I can comment on the Elmarit 28 ASPH, which I have been using for about a year now. The 28 Emarit is an outstanding lens and is a screaming good deal when you look at the image quality it produces compared to the price of this lens. It is very small and light and is a great choice for a light weight travel lens on the wide angle end of the M lens lineup.  If you can have only one wide angle M lens, the 28 Elmarit should be it. You just can't go wrong with this little gem. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
stevesurf Posted February 28, 2017 Share #23  Posted February 28, 2017 I strongly recommend following reading before take any decision: http://www.imx.nl/photo/leica/lenses/styled-55/  Matic  One of the best comparison articles I've read; many thanks!  If you would like a little fun, try guessing which is 28mm Elmarit, Summaron or Summilux.   Answers here (original link posted above). Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Dirk Mandeville Posted February 28, 2017 Share #24 Â Posted February 28, 2017 I correctly guessed the Elmarit shot immediately. The other two I wasn't sure which was which. But then the Elmarit is the only one of these lenses I own, and I know it's signature pretty well. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
earleygallery Posted February 28, 2017 Share #25  Posted February 28, 2017 The Elmarit is certainly a fine choice and has advantages that I listed earlier in this thread but I don't recognise your description of the Summaron as a "fun" lens, which to me is something more like a Holga or Lomo lens. The Summaron really is very good indeed and left me deeply impressed when I tested it out late last year.  At £1900 it really ought to be good but that doesn't always follow. I tested the lens a second time after Christmas and seeing the film from that convinced me of its merits. In fact I liked it enough that I seriously considered seeing if I could persuade the Leica shop in Mayfair to sell me their demo lens (not because I didn't want to make an order and wait but because I was concerned that sample variation might mean I wouldn't get such a good one). Fortunately, the one I bought seems as good and I have now sold my 28 Summicron (which answers your second question ). Incidentally, the strong vignetting at F5.6 is really a digital thing – it is not like that with film.  Just to clarify my analogy, I'm not suggesting that the Summaron is inferior in quality, but it is arguably less versatile than a faster option, which offers more possibilities in low light etc. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
wattsy Posted February 28, 2017 Share #26  Posted February 28, 2017 Just to clarify my analogy, I'm not suggesting that the Summaron is inferior in quality, but it is arguably less versatile than a faster option, which offers more possibilities in low light etc.   Yes, of course, the Elmarit has a number of clear advantages. The Elmarit is also more consistent in quality (assuming quality equates to sharpness, etc.) than the Summaron. The latter at F5.6 (which is already 2 stops slower than the Elmarit's widest aperture) does have noticeable softness in the corners. If sharpness right across the frame is your thing, the Summaron is effectively an F8 or F11 lens. Maybe your analogy wasn't so wide of the mark. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
anickpick Posted February 28, 2017 Share #27  Posted February 28, 2017 Advertisement (gone after registration) As 28mm is my favorite focal length, I own the Lux, the Elmarit and the Summaron. The Lux is my favorite lens of all time. If I had to choose between the Elmarit and the Summaron next to my Lux, I would keep the Summaron.  However, if I had to choose between the two as my only 28mm lens, I would choose the Elmarit.  But if you want a special lens, go for the Summaron: It is the perfect lens for street photography in daylight. Beautifully made. I love the way it handles. And it draws most beautifully, especially in backlighting situations. Having said this, it is unusable for low light photography and landscape photography: The very far edges are never sharp, not even at f8 or f11. It also has quite some field curvature. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
wattsy Posted February 28, 2017 Share #28  Posted February 28, 2017 Having said this, it is unusable for low light photography and landscape photography   Oh no, I'd better sell mine then. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Dirk Mandeville Posted February 28, 2017 Share #29 Â Posted February 28, 2017 Oh no, I'd better sell mine then. Why the snark? He is just trying to give O.P. an accurate description of the pros and cons of the lens. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
pop Posted February 28, 2017 Share #30 Â Posted February 28, 2017 Why the snark? He is just trying to give O.P. an accurate description of the pros and cons of the lens. There is the small difference between an accurate description and an "accurate" conclusion. Wattsy is just trying to give O.P. an accurate description of one of the pros of the lens. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
wattsy Posted February 28, 2017 Share #31 Â Posted February 28, 2017 Why the snark? Â Â Because he is drawing a conclusion that I don't agree with. No lens capable of projecting an image is "unusable for landscape photography". Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Dirk Mandeville Posted March 1, 2017 Share #32 Â Posted March 1, 2017 Because he is drawing a conclusion that I don't agree with. No lens capable of projecting an image is "unusable for landscape photography". I guess I don't take people so literally. I took him to mean it is rather poorly suited for landscape photography compared to the other options available. He explained his reasoning for the statement and it makes sense (at least to me). It's certainly not the lens I would pull out of my bag for landscape photography, given the other options. Â If you disagree, that's fine. But an explanation of why you disagree is a lot more cordial, not to mention helpful to the O.P., than a snarky comment. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
wattsy Posted March 1, 2017 Share #33  Posted March 1, 2017 If you disagree, that's fine. But an explanation of why you disagree is a lot more cordial, not to mention helpful to the O.P., than a snarky comment.   I think you rather overestimate the snarkiness of my comment to anickpick. I also think I have already been quite helpful to the OP throughout this thread.  I find rules about sharpness and other internet mantra a little wearisome and I see anickpick's conclusion in that vein. He/she is perfectly correct in the various observations – particularly the point concerning the pleasing way this lens handles a contre-jour situation and that kind of characteristic (drawing, call it what you may) is, for me, far more important than how sharp the corners might be. I happen to think that a Leica is suited to a certain kind of smaller scale landscape photography that isn't based on image qualities like sharpness and resolution. After all, if those characteristics are important objectives, there are other cameras using larger formats that will prove more successful. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Dirk Mandeville Posted March 1, 2017 Share #34 Â Posted March 1, 2017 Wattsy, thanks for the in-depth explanation. I appreciate it and I expect the O.P. does as well. Personally, I think the Leica is quite versatile for all types of landscape photography, depending on the lens used. Certainly all three 28's discussed in this thread will give you very different looks as shown in the example photos posted earlier. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
anickpick Posted March 1, 2017 Share #35  Posted March 1, 2017 Don't worry, I do not take any offense by Wattsy's comment at all. My "absolute" comment about the "unusability" of the Summaron for landscape photography might have triggered Wattsy. So what?  This is a forum. I do not take much time to double check whether what I write is perfectly appropriate. And the nuances in a language can be tricky. I would do better in French or German. So some of my phrases and use of words are a bit off at times. I actually don't worry about it, but let me say I do not intend to offend anyone.  Again, personally, I do not consider the Summaron an appropriate lens for landscape photography, where I want: - as consistent resolution as possible across the whole frame - a plan field of focus - no vignetting If those aspects are not important to you, go ahead and use the Summaron even vor landscape photography. And yes, I do use my Leicas (M and SL) for landscape photography, and there are a bunch of M lenses that are very well suited for this.  However, for what I do most in my photography, the Summaron works wonderfully. It has a special kind of signature that I cannot achieve with any other lens (even in post). What makes it so special? (The beautiful colors and the vignetting can easily be replicated with other 28mm lenses in post): - Extreme high contrast in the central half of the frame combined with (almost) no flare make it perfect for contre-jour situations - Field curvature: If your subject is 5 to 8 feet away, the background right behind the subject will be blurred (at f5.6). But the field of focus will move towards infinity towards the sides of the frame. All those aspects of the Summaron together lead to an extraordinary, in my eyes very pleasing, way of rendering an image.  Cheers! Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
wattsy Posted March 1, 2017 Share #36  Posted March 1, 2017 Wattsy, thanks for the in-depth explanation. I appreciate it and I expect the O.P. does as well. Personally, I think the Leica is quite versatile for all types of landscape photography, depending on the lens used. Certainly all three 28's discussed in this thread will give you very different looks as shown in the example photos posted earlier. However, for what I do most in my photography, the Summaron works wonderfully. It has a special kind of signature that I cannot achieve with any other lens (even in post). What makes it so special? (The beautiful colors and the vignetting can easily be replicated with other 28mm lenses in post): - Extreme high contrast in the central half of the frame combined with (almost) no flare make it perfect for contre-jour situations   Just to clarify, my comment was meant to be flippant rather than snarky but I appreciate that it could be read that way.  I certainly agree that, if sharpness across the frame is important, the Summaron will be an endless source of frustration. There's no question about it – the corners aren't sharp and the lens vignettes (the latter rather less so with film). However, for me it is the way the lens handles light that is most important and I'm willing to forgo sharp corners to obtain the very non-Karbe look which the Summaron provides. Rather than label it for certain uses it is, for me, a lens that happens to have a certain look.  A landscape (Ilford XP2)     A portrait (Portra 400)  Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Wayne Posted March 1, 2017 Share #37  Posted March 1, 2017 Original (LTM) Summaron 28mm attached to new M-D. I am not certain, the aperture setting, but am pretty confident it was F8 or wider. Please excuse me if this is of no interest. I am a fan of the 28mm focal length and have been following the discussion. As I understand, the new Summaron is pretty much the same lens as the original, but with better coatings. The available light, at the time the photo was taken, was such that coatings may not have played a major role in result. As the discussion had turned toward landscape, I thought the photo may be of some interest. Smite me if I am out of place.  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!  As I am pretty incompetent in PP, the only adjustment to the OOC file is an increase in exposure of approximately one stop. Aside from the exposure increase, this is exactly what the M-D rendered. I will also add that the DNG file seems almost painfully sharp. Link to post Share on other sites Simply register for free here – We are always happy to welcome new members!  As I am pretty incompetent in PP, the only adjustment to the OOC file is an increase in exposure of approximately one stop. Aside from the exposure increase, this is exactly what the M-D rendered. I will also add that the DNG file seems almost painfully sharp. ' data-webShareUrl='https://www.l-camera-forum.com/topic/269791-28mm-question-elmarit-asph-or-summaron/?do=findComment&comment=3224399'>More sharing options...
honcho Posted March 1, 2017 Share #38 Â Posted March 1, 2017 ........However, for me it is the way the lens handles light that is most important and I'm willing to forgo sharp corners to obtain the very non-Karbe look which the Summaron provides. Rather than label it for certain uses it is, for me, a lens that happens to have a certain look. Â A landscape (Ilford XP2) Â Â Â Â Â Â Â Â I've noticed before how flare resistant the summaron seems to be, have you managed to track down filters and did you use a filter here? Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
microview Posted March 1, 2017 Share #39  Posted March 1, 2017 Atmospheric landscape photo, Foreground adjusted in Iridient Developer. 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! Link to post Share on other sites Simply register for free here – We are always happy to welcome new members! ' data-webShareUrl='https://www.l-camera-forum.com/topic/269791-28mm-question-elmarit-asph-or-summaron/?do=findComment&comment=3224416'>More sharing options...
wattsy Posted March 1, 2017 Share #40 Â Posted March 1, 2017 I thought the photo may be of some interest. Smite me if I am out of place. Â Â Definitely of interest, Wayne and IMO no viewpoint is ever out of place. The handy thing about a landscape with the sky in the frame is that there are fewer corners that might look unsharp. Â Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Archived
This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.