Which to buy: newest versions of Summicron-M 35mm or Summilux-M 35mm ASPH

[david.kize]

Advertisement (gone after registration)

Before prices go up on May 1, I would like to buy a new version of the 35mm Summicron or 35mm Summilux ASPH (FLE)  lens.  The cost and weight differences are factors, but not necessarily determinative for me, and I am trying to decide which to buy.  

 

I am buying an M10 camera body plus (I think) a 50mm Summicron (Non-APO), although the 50mm Summilux is a possibility, especially if I decide not to buy the 35mm Summicron.

 

I don't ordinarily take portrait photos; nor do I expect to use the Summilux wide open at f/1.4 very often.  Bokeh is not driving my decision.

 

What I am most interested in is the beautiful and subtle color rendition that draws one into the world of the photo, in a moody sort of way.  For example, Borge Indergaard has posted, in his review of the 35mm Summilux-M ASPH, his low-resolution photo of a waterway at Freya, Norway.  The colors of the reds in boats and buildings, the micro contrast and tones of the clouds, and the overall effects of the photo has led me to use that low resolution version as my desktop wallpaper on my Mac computers.  I could try to post that photo here, but I don't know if it's proper to post someone else's photograph.  If I thought that the Summicron would have matched those colors, I would buy the Summicron due to cost, weight and size.

 

The best thing would be for me to go to a site like Lensrentals.com and rent the lenses, as well as the M10 body before I buy it.  But there is the rental cost plus the May 1 Leica price increase to consider. 

 

My current cameras are a Nikon D800, a Nikon D500, a small Sony RX100 and also the RX100v, and I have prime Nikkor lenses at 28mm, 40mm, 50mm, and 85mm, plus a Zeiss Distagon 21mm and numerous zooms (mostly Nikkor and including the 70-200 f/2.8).  This will be my first rangefinder since I spent 25 years with a Kodak Signet before putting it aside around 1978--but I still have it).  As is apparent from this post, I am not a professional.  Most of my photos these days are of family, boating, and travel.  Every once in a while I will simply look for attractive photo effects, such as a walk recently where I captured beautiful flowers with a 50mm f1.8 prime lens.  In all my photography, if there were one overriding factor, I love colors--moody and magical drawing the viewer into the world of the photo.

 

I welcome all opinions on the 35mm Summicron vs 35mm Summilux as to color rendition especially.

 

[BJohn]

Uff tough question. You can find some sample photographs in my 500px account. I tried both, the SL35 and the SC35 in Wetzlar. A whole day. I could not really see a difference between both. A difference between the SL28 and the SC28 I could see and feel!

 

Well...I decided to take the SC35 and I am very happy with this lens and used it nearly all the time during my last vacation.

[Advertisement]

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

[jaapv]

Given that any Leica lens since 1950 has an excellent colour rendition, albeit different character, I don't see any reason to buy the newest versions for this reason. In fact, if I were pushed for an opinion on this aspect, my preference would be the lenses of the late 20th Century. The Summicrons, both 35 and 50,  of that time, are very subtle .

 

And no, it is not allowed to post anybody else's photograph without written permission. Copyright rules are stricly maintained on this forum.

[a.noctilux]

Hello David,

 

I don't know how are the "color difference" in latest lenses.

As long time Leitz/Leica lens user, I can say that Leica manage the best to have "same color rendering" in their lenses.

 

That said, I do have seen subtle color hues rendering with Noctilux 1.0 and Summilux 75mm.

But in very small margins from other lenses.

 

...

A side note, Summilux-M 35mm asph. protrude in viewfinder (with hood even  worse) much more than Summicron-M 35mm.

[jaapv]

Yes, Leica goes to great lengths to make the colour rendering similar across all their lenses, however, the differentiation and transitions vary. I think the best lens for colours they ever built is the Elmarit 24.

[pico]

Ride the tide. There are no profound difference between later Leica lenses. What you have, for better or worse, has frozen your purchase then you can compare outcomes, which I guarantee one cannot visualize differences. Economics be damned - lenses are not an investment.

Edited April 26, 2018 by pico

[jaapv]

Advertisement (gone after registration)

He's right, you know. The Leica lens world is different from Nikon.

[Jean-Michel]

I cannot help you with your choice, other than to say that whichever way you go you will have a fine lens. I have the current 50 Summicron and the next to latest 35 Summicron. I can say that the images from those two lenses differ from images made with 'rigid' 50 and my 'goggled' 35 Summicron.

 

As to colour rendition: I find small differences between images made with my M9 and my M-P (240). And much more pronounced differences between those and images made with my Canon 5d2. I think that the camera/sensor are what differentiates colour rendition, lenses do but much less. Makes sense: with film, the same scene photographed with the same camera and lens with Kodacolor, Vericolor, Kodachrome, Ektachrome, Agfachrome, Fujicolor, Fujichome, etc. all would show different colours.

 

And, assessing and comparing images from the web is next to meaningless. 

[david.kize]

Uff tough question. You can find some sample photographs in my 500px account. I tried both, the SL35 and the SC35 in Wetzlar. A whole day. I could not really see a difference between both. A difference between the SL28 and the SC28 I could see and feel!

 

Well...I decided to take the SC35 and I am very happy with this lens and used it nearly all the time during my last vacation.

 

BJohn, this is very helpful.  Out of curiosity, I presume that you liked the SL28 more than the SC28.  Is this right?

 

I like photographing with a 28mm lens.  Of my existing (non-Leica) lenses, I probably use the 28mm and 40mm the most.  I incorrectly lumped the 40mm lens in my original post with Nikkor lenses; actually, it is a Voightlander manual focus, which I like very much.

 

I will look for your sample photographs that you referred to.

[david.kize]

As to colour rendition: I find small differences between images made with my M9 and my M-P (240). And much more pronounced differences between those and images made with my Canon 5d2. I think that the camera/sensor are what differentiates colour rendition, lenses do but much less. Makes sense: with film, the same scene photographed with the same camera and lens with Kodacolor, Vericolor, Kodachrome, Ektachrome, Agfachrome, Fujicolor, Fujichome, etc. all would show different colours.

 

And, assessing and comparing images from the web is next to meaningless. 

 

Thanks, Jean-Michel.  Your point about camera sensors making more color rendition differences than lenses, and your analogy to films, is a good reminder.  In the film world, I am very aware of this.  With digital sensors, I had taken to thinking mostly in terms of resolution.  Your caution of not assessing images from the web is well taken; however, I find it hard to resist drawing conclusions about posted photos based on what I see on my computer from the web.  I will try to avoid this temptation.

[BJohn]

BJohn, this is very helpful.  Out of curiosity, I presume that you liked the SL28 more than the SC28.  Is this right?

 

I like photographing with a 28mm lens.  Of my existing (non-Leica) lenses, I probably use the 28mm and 40mm the most.  I incorrectly lumped the 40mm lens in my original post with Nikkor lenses; actually, it is a Voightlander manual focus, which I like very much.

 

I will look for your sample photographs that you referred to.

 

To be honest, I see a difference between the SL28 and the SC28 wide-open, if your subject is roughly at minimal focus distance. The SL28 just got that magic pop (for me). It always comes down to your interests in photography. I use my SL28 very often at minimal focus distance for enviromental portraits. For that particular use case, it is just stunning...and it delivers every time!

 

And for the SL35 and SC35 (current versions), I did not see a major difference. We tried both lenses a whole day and in different situations. In the right moments, even the SC35 can create moodys photographs with a gorgeous bokeh. But that is just my opinion, my feeling.

[jaapv]

Thanks, Jean-Michel.  Your point about camera sensors making more color rendition differences than lenses, and your analogy to films, is a good reminder.  In the film world, I am very aware of this.  With digital sensors, I had taken to thinking mostly in terms of resolution.  Your caution of not assessing images from the web is well taken; however, I find it hard to resist drawing conclusions about posted photos based on what I see on my computer from the web.  I will try to avoid this temptation.

Forget about resolution. It has to do with extreme enlargement. It tells you nothing about sensor quality. IMO the camera with the sensor that renders colours best is still the DMR from 2005. 10 MP, noisy at any ISO over 200, but the colours are unmatched.

 

However, your real problem is, that there are so many superb lenses out there. My advice would be to buy the body and just the 35 or 50 Summicron (any Summicron, no need for the newest type) and take it from there. You'll end up with a shelf full of lenses anyway.

[david.kize]

Thanks to all for their comments in this thread.  I ended up buying today the Leica M10 (silver) and the Summicron M 35mm (black), ASPH from Leica Store DC.  Jappv is right that I should get used to the M10 and the SC 35 before buying more lenses.  I will keep an eye out in the used-lens market later.

Edited April 27, 2018 by david.kize

[Jeff S]

Thanks to all for their comments in this thread. I ended up buying today the Leica M10 (silver) and the Summicron M 35mm (black), ASPH from Leica Store DC. Jappv is right that I should get used to the M10 and the SC 35 before buying more lenses. I will keep an eye out in the used-lens market later.

Congrats and enjoy! A 35 Summicron was my first Leica lens over 30 years ago and remains one of my 2 most used M lenses. And I’ve never needed more than 4.

 

I hope you’re going to be printing those lovely colors and not just looking at a screen. There’s as much or more effect on rendering through profiling, editing, paper and printer/ink choices, lighting, etc than just the camera or lens. And mostly your own techniques and choices.... otherwise we’d all produce the same results.

 

The RF experience isn’t for everyone, but hopefully you’ll bond quickly. Be sure to check the forum FAQ for many tips... https://www.l-camera-forum.com/topic/216580-leica-m8-m82-m9-m9p-mm-mtyp240-faqs-questions-with-answers/page-1?do=findComment&comment=2464039

 

Jeff

[david.kize]

Yes, Leica goes to great lengths to make the colour rendering similar across all their lenses, however, the differentiation and transitions vary. I think the best lens for colours they ever built is the Elmarit 24.

 

There is an Elmarit 24 currently for sale on the BH Photo used item website for approximately USD $1,800.  I have talked to them and it is (unsurprisingly) not 6-bit coded. It is listed as condition 9 ("Shows signs of use but very clean)".  Leica lists this lens as being capable of having its repair service apply 6-bit coding for this lens.  

 

I have not yet looked elsewhere for other Elmarit 24 offerings to compare condition and prices--or perhaps even to find this lens where someone as already had it 6-bit coded.  I am in no hurry, but I am intrigued by this lens, especially by your comment regarding color rendition.  With my Nikon D800, I usually shoot (among my prime lenses) 28mm, and I have a Zeiss Distagon 21mm, but for some reason I rarely use a lens that wide, plus it is big and heavy for travel.  (But it is a very pretty lens--I like to look at it even if I have only a few pictures taken with it.  LOL)

 

I am toying with the idea of ultimately locating a good offer for a good-condition Elmarit 24 and immediately upon receipt sending it off to Leica NJ for 6-bit coding, calibration, and any other required service.  That, of course, will add at least about USD $350 to the cost of the used lens.

[Herr Barnack]

I have the 35mm Summicron ASPH which came with my Safari set and it produces mind boggling image quality.  The 35 Summilux will have a +1EV advantage which is less important with an M10 than with an M-P240.  The 35 Summilux will have marginally deeper out of focus areas, different bokeh and marginally thinner depth of field compared to the 35 Summicron. 

 

We M camera shooters have a tendency to fetishize ultra fast lenses like the Summiluxes and hyper fast lenses like the Noctiluxes, and not without good reason; these lenses have a fingerprint that is not there in M lenses of more modest maximum aperture.  However, the Summicrons are not lenses to be poo-poohed.  They are more than capable of hauling the mail.

 

Summiluxes are outstanding lenses, but I would not want to carry a camera bag filled with 4 or 5 Summiluxes, a Noctilux and a couple of M bodies.  In my experience, a camera bag that feels like it has a small anvil in it will be such a burden that it will take most of the enjoyment out of making images. 

[indergaard]

Before prices go up on May 1, I would like to buy a new version of the 35mm Summicron or 35mm Summilux ASPH (FLE)  lens.  The cost and weight differences are factors, but not necessarily determinative for me, and I am trying to decide which to buy.  

 

I am buying an M10 camera body plus (I think) a 50mm Summicron (Non-APO), although the 50mm Summilux is a possibility, especially if I decide not to buy the 35mm Summicron.

 

I don't ordinarily take portrait photos; nor do I expect to use the Summilux wide open at f/1.4 very often.  Bokeh is not driving my decision.

 

What I am most interested in is the beautiful and subtle color rendition that draws one into the world of the photo, in a moody sort of way.  For example, Borge Indergaard has posted, in his review of the 35mm Summilux-M ASPH, his low-resolution photo of a waterway at Freya, Norway.  The colors of the reds in boats and buildings, the micro contrast and tones of the clouds, and the overall effects of the photo has led me to use that low resolution version as my desktop wallpaper on my Mac computers.  I could try to post that photo here, but I don't know if it's proper to post someone else's photograph.  If I thought that the Summicron would have matched those colors, I would buy the Summicron due to cost, weight and size.

 

The best thing would be for me to go to a site like Lensrentals.com and rent the lenses, as well as the M10 body before I buy it.  But there is the rental cost plus the May 1 Leica price increase to consider. 

 

My current cameras are a Nikon D800, a Nikon D500, a small Sony RX100 and also the RX100v, and I have prime Nikkor lenses at 28mm, 40mm, 50mm, and 85mm, plus a Zeiss Distagon 21mm and numerous zooms (mostly Nikkor and including the 70-200 f/2.8).  This will be my first rangefinder since I spent 25 years with a Kodak Signet before putting it aside around 1978--but I still have it).  As is apparent from this post, I am not a professional.  Most of my photos these days are of family, boating, and travel.  Every once in a while I will simply look for attractive photo effects, such as a walk recently where I captured beautiful flowers with a 50mm f1.8 prime lens.  In all my photography, if there were one overriding factor, I love colors--moody and magical drawing the viewer into the world of the photo.

 

I welcome all opinions on the 35mm Summicron vs 35mm Summilux as to color rendition especially.

 

Hey David. First off, I'm pleased to hear you've used an image from my review of the 35 FLE as your wallpaper :-)

 

That photograph, and many others that I made at the same location, was made during an hour of really magical light. It was all around us. It's a very, very distant location, and the weather is normally very dramatic there. I would venture to say that the rendering of that image, and the colors and the hues, has very little to do with the lens and the camera itself. But the 35 FLE is a lens that has what I would call a cinematic rendering, and it is slightly lower in contrast than the Summicron 35 ASPH, which helped in capturing the light in a very transparent way. If I remember correctly, that image was shot at either f/5.6 or f/8 at base ISO on an M240, and the image was post-processed (very minor adjustments) in Lightroom.

 

With that type of light, and at that aperture, I am confident that the image would be more or less identical if captured with my Summicron 35 ASPH (v1) also. I sold my 35 FLE quite a while ago, and after trying many different 35's for the M system, I have found my favorite, which is the Summicron 35 ASPH. The reasons are many, but the most imporrtant is the size and weight, and also the smoothness of the rendering. I much prefer the Summicron at f/2 than the Summilux 35 FLE at f/1.4 or f/2. The Summilux FLE can have a very harsh rendering at wide open aperture. It's a bit on and off. Some images are smooth, some are not. Ergonomics are much better on the Summicron. 

 

The Summicron 35 ASPH is slightly more contrasty than the 35 FLE. It also has a bit more bite. But at the same time it's also gentle, and not punchy by modern standards. The 35 FLE has a glassy and transparent look with a touch of brilliance, while the Summicron is a little bit more muted, and it doesn't have the same type of brilliance as the 35 FLE can deliver with the right light.

 

But, with the M10, I am pretty sure that image would have needed more work to look the way it does. The files out of the M10 are far more contrasty and punchy, with noticeably darker blacks and shadows. The files from the M240 was very gentle, with very open shadows, which in this case required very little processing for a pleasing look. The M240 and 35 FLE is a fantastic combination in my opinion. I haven't tried the 35 FLE with the M10.

 

It's all personal preference, but I actually prefer the softer and more gentle look from the M240. One can always add contrast and set black points in post anyways. But Leica decided to listen to the people that wanted the more punchy out-of-camera look that many missed from the M9. And so that's what we got.

Edited May 7, 2018 by indergaard

[david.kize]

Borge, thank you for all this very interesting information.  I have many Norway photos from my trip there in 2011, but none compare to yours.

 

That is very interesting about the M240 and M10 differences.  If I ever get rid of all my Nikon systems, I can look at finding an M240/35mm FLE combination.

 

David