Comparing latest versions of the 35mm Summicron (2016) and Summarit (2.4) ?

[larksky]

Advertisement (gone after registration)

Have been trying to decide between either of these as my 1st lens which ideally would last me a while before having to purchase a new one. I realize there have been numerous threads comparing the summicron and the summarit 35s but haven't actually seen sample photos directly comparing the two at the same apertures. I was hoping to compare the out of focus qualities wide open as well as sharpness at various apertures. To confuse me further, I have only been reading conflicting opinions on different forums on the lenses' sharpness and contrast!

 

I was leaning towards the summarit because I wanted the lighter weight however not at the expense of lens "quality" . As the summicron isn't that much larger and the weight , while heavier, is not a big deal compared to DSLRs! I do know I want to purchase the latest version of either lens and there haven't been many reviews really on the latest cron.

 

(Note: I know there are amazing non Leica lenses but since it will be my first I prefer to stick to Leica. Planning to use this on an M262 -- since there's too long a wait for the M10). I have a Leica Q but end up always cropping to 35 and do not enjoy using the EVF. I loved the look & images from it though, thus wanting to move to the M system.

 

So: any thoughts or opinions on this??

 

Thanks in advance and if there IS a discussion on this already please do just point me in the direction of the thread!

[Advertisement]

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

[oldwino]

Both are great lenses. It really comes down to how much you want to spend.

If you do more low light photography, then the summicron might be a better bet. Or the summilux.

[lct]

With Summarit 35/2.4 i don't know but we've been doing comparos between Summicron 35/2 asph and Summarit 35/2.5 on the LUF if memory serves. In a nutshell the 35/2.5 is softer in borders and corners below f/5.6 but it is less prone to flare than the 35/2 asph. OoF renditions are close with a bit more contrast out of the 35/2 asph. For landscapes better choose the 35/2 asph if you shoot below f/5.6 due to the softness i referred to above but i don't see significant differences above. Couple of snaps on my M8.2 below. Same general feeling on my FF cameras (M240, Sony A7s mod).

https://photos.smugmug.com/Other/Samples/i-hRDkJdG/0/44c9c9c2/O/3520a_f25_140402_labe.jpg

https://photos.smugmug.com/Other/Samples/i-mvJxTQS/0/a75047f8/O/3525_f25_140402_labe.jpg

[don daniel]

I own the Summarit 35/2.4 and the M10. I once owned the Summilux 35 FLE but I sold it because I wanted to buy the Summicron 28mm. Sometimes I regret that I have sold the SL but somehow I do not want to buy it again because of its price and because it seemed bulky to me. A few days ago I tried one again on the M10 and because of the thinner body the combo with the SL seemed okay to me. Since the M10 has an increased capability in shooting under low light conditions I thought, I would like to try a Summicron. So I went to my dealer and tried two different copies of the latest Summicron 35mm with the metal hood. Now this is what I found: I have not compared the results of the Summicrons to the Summarit, but to the Summilux. The two copies of the Summicron rendered exactly the same way and the results were equally sharp. So there were no differences between the two copies of the same lens. Sharpness seemed okay to me, but the results were not as sharp as the ones from the Summilux. The overall performance of the Summilux was better: more pop, more sharpness in the centre and on the edges and more contrast. The new Summicron seems to have a little glow, it just does not perform as clinically like the latest Leica lenses, for example the Apo-Summicron 50 or the latest Summicron 28 (with the metal hood). Edges on the Summicron seem soft, whether open or stopped down. So I think Leica has not improved the optical performance of the Summicron in the latest version. They only have given more aperture blades to it and offer a metal hood now. It seems to me that the Summarit renders in a more modern way. Nevertheless I consider the Summicron 35 asph. as an attractive option for an allround lens: It is almost as tiny as the Summarit, but it offers more speed, probably enough to use it on a M10 in any situation, and it is just such a classical Leica lens. There is also an emotional element in this debate.

[lct]

Besides at f/2 in edges & corners, where the FLE looks sharper, i don't see significant differences re sharpness between my 35/1.4 FLE and 35/2 asph. Just a bit more harshness in backgrounds with the FLE. I mean at the same apertures of course. The smoother bokeh remains that of the Summarit anyway. Sujective matter though. YMMV.

[tom0511]

I feel the Summarit 35/2.4 renders a little less contrasty compared to Summicron Asph (previous version).

The Bokeh of the Summarit is also slightly smoother. My 35/2.4 seems even slightly sharper than the SUmmicron in the corners. I am torn between both.

In the end I find a half stop of speed (2.0 vs 2.4) and 0,1 m smaller minimum focus distance advantages for the Summicron.

[Kwesi]

Advertisement (gone after registration)

Have been trying to decide between either of these as my 1st lens which ideally would last me a while before having to purchase a new one. I realize there have been numerous threads comparing the summicron and the summarit 35s but haven't actually seen sample photos directly comparing the two at the same apertures. I was hoping to compare the out of focus qualities wide open as well as sharpness at various apertures. To confuse me further, I have only been reading conflicting opinions on different forums on the lenses' sharpness and contrast!

 

I was leaning towards the summarit because I wanted the lighter weight however not at the expense of lens "quality" . As the summicron isn't that much larger and the weight , while heavier, is not a big deal compared to DSLRs! I do know I want to purchase the latest version of either lens and there haven't been many reviews really on the latest cron.

 

(Note: I know there are amazing non Leica lenses but since it will be my first I prefer to stick to Leica. Planning to use this on an M262 -- since there's too long a wait for the M10). I have a Leica Q but end up always cropping to 35 and do not enjoy using the EVF. I loved the look & images from it though, thus wanting to move to the M system.

 

So: any thoughts or opinions on this??

 

Thanks in advance and if there IS a discussion on this already please do just point me in the direction of the thread!

 

First of all, given that you are moving from a loved Q to an M, i would compare color between the the Q, M10 and M262 before choosing a body. Regarding the 35's, The Summarit with hood probably blocks less of the viewfinder and as such your experience will be more Q like.

[larksky]

Thank you everyone for all this useful info! I think i may lean more towards the Summarit as it seems like i wouldn't be getting a lens of lesser quality necessarily, but that both lenses just have different characteristics to it. As much as I would enjoy the extra half stop, i think i would prefer having a lighter lens. Plus if I end up wanting to add more lenses in the future, i can look forward to a Summilux   as that seems like it would give a significant jump in "quality" & aperture. 

 

With regards to comparing the color between the Q/M10/262, yes definitely makes sense. Unfortunately I figure the M10 will be out of stock for a few months more (I waited a while for the Q too!) and i am going on a trip pretty soon and would like to have time to use & get to know the camera prior to. I did think of using the Q and hold off till the 10 became available, but I just don't enjoy shooting with an EVF and since it isn't weather sealed i always felt like it was more delicate than it probably is.. and my DSLR is just too bulky for travel.

 

I really liked the feel of the M10, by the way, it's just slightly slimmer but i could feel the difference in my hands. Really too bad it's still unavailable. I'm telling myself if i get the 262 i can upgrade to the version that comes out right after the 10!

 

Thanks again!

[larksky]

I own the Summarit 35/2.4 and the M10. I once owned the Summilux 35 FLE but I sold it because I wanted to buy the Summicron 28mm. Sometimes I regret that I have sold the SL but somehow I do not want to buy it again because of its price and because it seemed bulky to me. A few days ago I tried one again on the M10 and because of the thinner body the combo with the SL seemed okay to me. Since the M10 has an increased capability in shooting under low light conditions I thought, I would like to try a Summicron. So I went to my dealer and tried two different copies of the latest Summicron 35mm with the metal hood. Now this is what I found: I have not compared the results of the Summicrons to the Summarit, but to the Summilux. The two copies of the Summicron rendered exactly the same way and the results were equally sharp. So there were no differences between the two copies of the same lens. Sharpness seemed okay to me, but the results were not as sharp as the ones from the Summilux. The overall performance of the Summilux was better: more pop, more sharpness in the centre and on the edges and more contrast. The new Summicron seems to have a little glow, it just does not perform as clinically like the latest Leica lenses, for example the Apo-Summicron 50 or the latest Summicron 28 (with the metal hood). Edges on the Summicron seem soft, whether open or stopped down. So I think Leica has not improved the optical performance of the Summicron in the latest version. They only have given more aperture blades to it and offer a metal hood now. It seems to me that the Summarit renders in a more modern way. Nevertheless I consider the Summicron 35 asph. as an attractive option for an allround lens: It is almost as tiny as the Summarit, but it offers more speed, probably enough to use it on a M10 in any situation, and it is just such a classical Leica lens. There is also an emotional element in this debate.

 

 

Just out of curiosity, what did you decide on? Keeping the summarit or getting a new cron / lux??

 

Sounds like the M10 + Summarit is a pretty good combo with its improved high ISO capabilities. 

[don daniel]

Just out of curiosity, what did you decide on? Keeping the summarit or getting a new cron / lux??

 

Sounds like the M10 + Summarit is a pretty good combo with its improved high ISO capabilities. 

 

The internal dialogue which I tried to put into words is still going on. And it is getting even more complicated, because I consider also a Voigtlander Ultron 35mm 1.7. 

 

But yes, the M10 with the Summarit 35 indeed is a pretty combo, not only a pretty goode one:

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!

[larksky]

The internal dialogue which I tried to put into words is still going on. And it is getting even more complicated, because I consider also a Voigtlander Ultron 35mm 1.7. 

 

But yes, the M10 with the Summarit 35 indeed is a pretty combo, not only a pretty goode one:

 

Yup, i feel the pain in choosing lenses, haha.

 

M10+Summarit looks awesome. 

[i-Leica]

Yup, i feel the pain in choosing lenses, haha.

 

M10+Summarit looks awesome.

 

Looks a bit strange with the small glass in front of it.... summicron would look better on M10 - if the look matters of course.....

[don daniel]

Well, I have decided to buy a Summicron asph, the new version with the metal hood. It just feels perfect on the M10. And it is still a great allround lens.