35 mm Lens comparisons

[vikasmg]

Advertisement (gone after registration)

Brass, with the Summilux-TL 35

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!

 

And an old Summicron-M 35

 

The Summicron on the CL

 

 

 

[Advertisement]

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

[albert]

Brass, with the Summilux-TL 35

20180915 - 0001 - LEICA CL -Summilux-TL 1-1.4-35 ASPH. - Brass - L1000240 copy.jpg

 

And an old Summicron-M 35

20180915 - 0005 - LEICA CL -Summicron-M 1-2-35 - Brass - L1000246 copy.jpg

 

The Summicron on the CL

APC_0437 copy.jpg

TL SUMMILUX 35mm 1.4 gets my vote.

[vikasmg]

TL SUMMILUX 35mm 1.4 gets my vote.

 

Agreed.  But given how old the 35 sum micron is I thought it did a decent job.  Light does fall off at the edges and the rendering isn't as good.  Both were shot at f2, but the way.

[johntobias]

convenience and quality, the TL wins....I bought one!

[lct]

Not quite fair for the M 35/2 v4 which was designed in 1979 and is rather soft at corners and edges at full aperture. A mere €250 lens (7artisans 35/2) would do much better there, let alone an M 35/2 asph or 35/1.4 FLE but prices are not the same obviously. Size wise the TL 35/1.4 looks like a monster by comparison but this is another story. M lens user speaking.

[jaapv]

Corners and edges are irrelevant on APS-C... 

[lct]

Advertisement (gone after registration)

At f/2, the 35/2 v4 is sharp only at the centre of the frame so rather soft it is at edges and corners on the digital CL as well. 

[microview]

My preference is for the Summicron which seems (as here) to have more 'depth', a less flat overall image. The rose petals pick up more light with the Summilux however. (I invested in the TL myself.)

[garypoon]

I am planning to buy a CL as a walk around camera and also to back up my SL. I have a M35 f1.4 now, is it worth to replace it with TL35 1.4?

 

..gary

Edited October 2, 2018 by garypoon

[ramarren]

I am planning to buy a CL as a walk around camera and also to back up my SL. I have a M35 f1.4 now, is it worth to replace it with TL35 1.4?

 

..gary

IMO: only if you no longer have an M to use the M35 with.

 

I have a lovely '72 'Lux 35 that I shoot with using the M-D. I can use it on the CL as well, and it performs beautifully. I might also get a TL35 one of these days, but I'm not selling the M-D so it will have to be "in addition" rather than "replace".

[garypoon]

I probably shall not own any M in near future. I just cannot make up my mind..... with M35 lux have the size advantage and TL35 got the IQ advantage... just torn between both.

[jaapv]

I think you will be hard put to see a realistic quality difference.

[Jared]

I am planning to buy a CL as a walk around camera and also to back up my SL. I have a M35 f1.4 now, is it worth to replace it with TL35 1.4?

 

..gary

For a “walk around” camera I would actually recommend the 23mm TL lens on the CL rather than either of the other options. It is smaller and lighter than either of the two you are considering, and there is easily enough resolution on the CL to allow you to crop in to a 50mm field of view if you really prefer that perspective. Image quality is good at all apertures though a little soft in the corners wide open—nothing terrible. You’d get AF that way which is really nice for casual use.

 

If you really just want the 50mm equiv field of view, the 35 Summilux TL is absolutely phenomenal, but it’s quite bulky and a little heavy for “walking around”. The 35mm Summicron M would be just fine as long as you don’t mind losing AF. Probably not much lighter than the 35 ‘Lux TL due to the brass construction and the additional adapter, but it is quite a bit more compact. The one other I would consider is the 18-56 Zoom. Only issue with that lens as a “walk around” is the limited control over depth of field due to the relatively small maximum aperture.

 

Again, my favorite “walk around” on the CL is the 23, but I realize it would give you a slightly different field of view.

[garypoon]

For a “walk around” camera I would actually recommend the 23mm TL lens on the CL rather than either of the other options. It is smaller and lighter than either of the two you are considering, and there is easily enough resolution on the CL to allow you to crop in to a 50mm field of view if you really prefer that perspective. Image quality is good at all apertures though a little soft in the corners wide open—nothing terrible. You’d get AF that way which is really nice for casual use.

 

If you really just want the 50mm equiv field of view, the 35 Summilux TL is absolutely phenomenal, but it’s quite bulky and a little heavy for “walking around”. The 35mm Summicron M would be just fine as long as you don’t mind losing AF. Probably not much lighter than the 35 ‘Lux TL due to the brass construction and the additional adapter, but it is quite a bit more compact. The one other I would consider is the 18-56 Zoom. Only issue with that lens as a “walk around” is the limited control over depth of field due to the relatively small maximum aperture.

 

Again, my favorite “walk around” on the CL is the 23, but I realize it would give you a slightly different field of view.

 

I am back ordering a 11-23, so I don't want to duplicate the 35mm FOV. but you have a good point of compactness, thanks.

[sfowler]

I was very close to pulling the trigger on the 23 but then I compared it to the 21 SEM and bought the 21 SEM used. You can get the 21 used in almost perfect condition (I did) for about $2000 USD and the 23 new is about $1900. The 21 is very light and with the crop factor put into the picture its about 31mm, which in my opinion is better than the (18) = 27 or the (23) = 35. Its also a full frame lens and not a crop sensor lens which allows for growth. So you can use the 21 in the future if you ever upgrade to a full frame. The 21 new goes for about $3000. I would consider the 21mm a better lens that the 23 or 18. The 23 you get one stop more of light but that is not enough for me to justify the other pros and features of the 21. The 21 SEM is a fantastic walk around lens as well and something to consider when making this decision. 

 

This was taken with the 21 - perfect field of view for a walk around.