HarleyTusk Posted October 31, 2019 Share #1  Posted October 31, 2019 Advertisement (gone after registration) Leica Summilux-M 35mm f/1.4 ASPH FLE Lens $3,295 Leica 35mm f/2.0 SUMMICRON-M Aspherical Lens $5,295 Im trying to decide on a lens  I can afford either one of them, I want to see what you all thought . Which lens and why? Considering the price into your choice.  also, Which lens is better/ more suitable under low light conditions? Thanks! Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Advertisement Posted October 31, 2019 Posted October 31, 2019 Hi HarleyTusk, Take a look here 35mm Summilux vs. 35mm Summicron. I'm sure you'll find what you were looking for!
Gregm61 Posted October 31, 2019 Share #2  Posted October 31, 2019 (edited) I think you have the prices turned around. Both excellent. Simply a matter of which you need/can’t live without/want the most. I have both the 1.4 FLE and version one if the f2 ASPH. If I HAD to live with one, it’d be the f1.4. It’s just a beautiful lens to use. Edited October 31, 2019 by Gregm61 1 Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
lct Posted October 31, 2019 Share #3  Posted October 31, 2019 Can only be the 35/1.4 FLE in low light. 1 Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
bags27 Posted October 31, 2019 Share #4 Â Posted October 31, 2019 What camera are you pairing it with? Not that it matters terribly much, as both have modern draws. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
HarleyTusk Posted October 31, 2019 Author Share #5  Posted October 31, 2019 I had the dollar amounts mixed up! Leica Summilux-M 35mm f/1.4 ASPH FLE Lens $5,295 Leica 35mm f/2.0 SUMMICRON-M Aspherical Lens $3,295 I would be matching these lens up to a Leica M10-P or a Leica Monochrom Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
FrozenInTime Posted October 31, 2019 Share #6 Â Posted October 31, 2019 Leica have thrown away any size advantage of the Summicron with the new long metal hood, and try to hide the fact by not showing hood on photos of it on their website. Go Summilux. 3 Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
LeicaR10 Posted October 31, 2019 Share #7  Posted October 31, 2019 (edited) Advertisement (gone after registration) Harley Tusk,  I own and have owned both lenses.  As Gregm61 and Ict wrote the 35 Lux is simply superb in low light and both excellent.  Both lenses render differently based on their optical designs. Both lenses have attributes and limitations.  What one should carefully think about is the intended use of the focal length and your genre of photography.  I suggest you consider renting the lens and see what works for you rather than relying on well intentioned advice.  There are Leica Stores that should let you test drive their demo lenses or go through a rental company such as LensRentals.  The Leica Store Los Angeles will be more than happy to help you too.  Last, based on my decades of Leica experience, I would not rely on others to help make the decision which lens to buy for you.  r/ Mark PS  Leica will be announcing a 25% price increase due to the tariff on German lenses very soon.  Whether or not this affects current on hand stock is not yet clear.  This might affect your buying decision too.  Edited October 31, 2019 by LeicaR10 1 Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
TG14 Posted October 31, 2019 Share #8  Posted October 31, 2019 29 minutes ago, HarleyTusk said: I had the dollar amounts mixed up! Leica Summilux-M 35mm f/1.4 ASPH FLE Lens $5,295 Leica 35mm f/2.0 SUMMICRON-M Aspherical Lens $3,295 I would be matching these lens up to a Leica M10-P or a Leica Monochrom I am also thinking about the exact same decision. I am leaning towards to lux but the price is making me think twice. However, if i dont get the lux, i will always be left wondering.... what it would have been. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
HarleyTusk Posted October 31, 2019 Author Share #9  Posted October 31, 2019 Thanks for the responses! Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
jakontil Posted October 31, 2019 Share #10  Posted October 31, 2019 The voigtlander 35 f2 vintage line is good too compared to summicron.... no?  i have the FLE and if u have the budget i’d go for this Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
ianman Posted October 31, 2019 Share #11  Posted October 31, 2019 (edited) 16 hours ago, HarleyTusk said: Which lens is better/ more suitable under low light conditions? Between f/2.0 and f1.4? 🤔 Seriously, with the high iso the M10 is capable of, I wouldn't be too bothered about this difference. In your shoes, I'd get a secondhand Summicron, unless you absolutely need the shallow DOF of the Summilux. Edited October 31, 2019 by ianman 2 Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
lct Posted October 31, 2019 Share #12  Posted October 31, 2019 Tried to shoot kids indoor ar f/2? Better have clear 12800 or 6400 iso then. Will happen with M11 or M12 with a bit of luck . Now even with my A7s mod, pic files are clean but get grainy there so no f/2 lens in my low light bag so far but YMMV. 1 Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
adan Posted October 31, 2019 Share #13  Posted October 31, 2019 (edited) 1 hour ago, ianman said: Between f/2.0 and f1.4? 🤔 Seriously, with the high iso the M10 is capable of, I wouldn't be too bothered about this difference. You must not shoot in the same dark places I do. (NB: M10 noise above ISO 10000 is too ratty and banded in the shadows for serious use.) To the OP - the 35 Summilux ASPH is a truly exceptional design. Visibly cleaner corner performance at f/1.4 than the Summicron ASPH at f/2. (That's a test on film, ignoring sensor-glass effects). I also find the Summilux to be a bit more open and limpid in high-contrast light - more shadow detail for a given amount of strong highlight detail. However, the lux does have more distortion. "Moustache-type" over the whole frame. The Summicron keeps lines straighter until the extreme corners. 35 Summilux ASPH - Rural library, Hartsel, Colorado 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! Edited October 31, 2019 by adan 1 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/302978-35mm-summilux-vs-35mm-summicron/?do=findComment&comment=3845375'>More sharing options...
ianman Posted October 31, 2019 Share #14  Posted October 31, 2019 1 hour ago, adan said: You must not shoot in the same dark places I do Well neither you nor I know the answer to that. Could you post an example? Don't tell me the photo you posted couldn't have been taken with a Summicron. TBH when someone asks the question whether f/2.0 or f1.4 is more suitable for low light conditions, it tells me that the poster doesn't know a whole lot about photography or hasn't thought the question through. Hence the suggestion of going for a much cheaper secondhand Summicron was in fact a subtle way of saving the poster a pile of cash. 3 Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
wattsy Posted October 31, 2019 Share #15  Posted October 31, 2019 3 hours ago, lct said: Tried to shoot kids indoor ar f/2? Better have clear 12800 or 6400 iso then. What a load of cobblers. 1 Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
lct Posted October 31, 2019 Share #16 Â Posted October 31, 2019 Uh? Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
wattsy Posted October 31, 2019 Share #17 Â Posted October 31, 2019 I have both lenses and they are both equally useful. There's a lot of crap written about the need for "speed" (both aperture speed and high ISO values). IMO trying to turn darkness/greyness into daylight (which is what using ISO speeds of 10,000+ is usually being used for)Â is a recipe for a pretty boring photo. If it's worth taking there is usually enough light for F2 and 400/800 ISO, even if you have to accept a little unsharpness from time to time. 3 1 Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
lct Posted October 31, 2019 Share #18  Posted October 31, 2019 3 minutes ago, wattsy said: If it's worth taking there is usually enough light for F2 and 400/800 ISO, even if you have to accept a little unsharpness from time to time. Unsharpness or motion blur? At what shutter speeds do you shoot indoor at f/2 and 400/800 iso? 1 Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
wattsy Posted October 31, 2019 Share #19  Posted October 31, 2019 (edited) 1 hour ago, lct said: At what shutter speeds do you shoot indoor at f/2 and 400/800 iso? That depends upon the light indoors. Which is pretty much my point. If there's a decent light source of some kind – side window, spot light, even a candle near someone's face – there's usually enough light to expose the subject area that the light is falling on and you'll probably get 1/60 or so quite easily. If, however, you are just hoping to turn a dingy room into daylight – usually a very boring photo – then, by all means, crank up your ISO. What seems to get lost in these discussions is that it wasn't that many years ago when 400 ISO was high speed and F2 was a perfectly respectable (if not fast) lens and plenty of people took plenty of decent photographs indoors. Edited October 31, 2019 by wattsy 6 Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
lct Posted October 31, 2019 Share #20  Posted October 31, 2019 58 minutes ago, wattsy said: That depends upon the light indoors. Which is pretty much my point. If there's a decent light source of some kind – side window, spot light, even a candle near someone's face – there's usually enough light to expose the subject area that the light is falling on and you'll probably get 1/60 or so quite easily. If, however, you are just hoping to turn a dingy room into daylight – usually a very boring photo – then, by all means, crank up your ISO. What seems to get lost in these discussions is that it wasn't that many years ago when 400 ISO was high speed and F2 was a perfectly respectable (if not fast) lens and plenty of people took plenty of decent photographs indoors. There are lots of indoor pics we could not shoot in available light in the past. Now we can shoot them fortunately but we need faster apertures, higher isos or both. Here at 1/50s, 12800 iso. Let alone on moving subjects needing faster shutter speeds needless to say.  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/302978-35mm-summilux-vs-35mm-summicron/?do=findComment&comment=3845530'>More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Create an account or sign in to comment
You need to be a member in order to leave a comment
Create an account
Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!
Register a new accountSign in
Already have an account? Sign in here.
Sign In Now