Jump to content

35mm best of the 7 APO-Summicron-SL


nicci78

Recommended Posts

Advertisement (gone after registration)

Have you heard Peter Karbe interviewed by Hugh Brownstone ? 
Leica SL2 Lenses

He stated that its favourite lens is APO-Summicron-SL 2/35mm asph. Because it is the best of the 7 released and soon to be released APO-SL. 
They all share the same platform : size, optical design principle, 1:5 magnification, dual AF motors. 
 

35mm should have been the shortest lens of the 7. But having so much room, they took the opportunity to make it even better.

Very interesting hint.
If 35mm is the best. Is that mean that 50 is the second and 28 the third ? Because their small natural size will take advantage of the extra real estate. 

Does that mean that 75 & 90, even more in this regard, constrained in their optical design to fit inside a body a bit too small ? 

Does that mean that forthcoming 21 & 24mm will be the worst performing one ? Relative to the other one of course. Because 24 and especially 21 used to be bigger. 
 

  • Thanks 1
Link to post
Share on other sites

I guarantee you that the 50mm is better if you want to take a photo with a 50mm angle of view, and the 75mm if you want a 75mm view etc. While the 35mm may be the "best", it seems as least from the MTF that all of them are so good that you will likely never notice a failing in normal usage, and that it is best to choose whichever one best suits your photography. I decided to buy a 50mm, though the 35mm was also available. I did so because I think it will be a more useful angle of view for my work...

  • Like 4
Link to post
Share on other sites

Of course a 50 is better for 50mm use. 
 

I am just puzzled by this all 7 lenses being the same size. And how that worked in practice. Seems like that some compromises are being made 

Edited by nicci78
Link to post
Share on other sites

He hesitated a lot answering that question, because he was afraid of being misinterpreted, which often happens. For example, it says all over the Internet that he dislikes the 75mm Summilux, which he said is not correct.

Edited by evikne
  • Like 2
Link to post
Share on other sites

vor 2 Minuten schrieb evikne:

He hesitated a lot answering that question, because he was afraid of being misinterpreted, which often happens. For example, it says all over the Internet that he dislikes the 75mm Summilux, which he said is not correct.

+1 ...Karbe‘s fear of being misinterpreted is well-founded - as we can see in „nicci78“s above statements...😕

  • Haha 1
Link to post
Share on other sites

I would have rather had a much smaller 35mm, at higher cost, even if performance were marginally less. But then I’m also a contrarian regarding the extremely rapid contrast fall off of the SL Summicron  range, although stark subject isolation with low contrast or blur everywhere else seems the current rage.

Technical wonders, though, and all more than capable for my print needs and sizes.  Following the Leica Q philosophy, one could probably buy just the 35, and crop away for longer focal length equivalent fields of view, without much sacrifice at moderate print size.

Jeff

Link to post
Share on other sites

Advertisement (gone after registration)

In an earlier interview he hinted that the primary reason they are all the same size is to save on cost, which I found to be disappointing. I would have preferred an appropriately sized 35mm and 50mm Summicron.

But this talk about having more real estate is quite interesting. Excellent 50+mm lenses are dime a dozen, but reference class 35mm lenses are rare. In that regard I could see why he would consider the 35mm Summicron-SL to be the best lens in the world.

Link to post
Share on other sites

54 minutes ago, nicci78 said:

Of course a 50 is better for 50mm use. 
 

I am just puzzled by this all 7 lenses being the same size. And how that worked in practice. Seems like that some compromises are being made 

Probably not. I'd imagine that they optimized the barrel size to the longest lens in the lineup (90mm).

It's kind of like deciding on the size of a car's engine bay. If the biggest engine is a V8 the manufacturer will design the engine bay to be big enough for that engine first, and figure out V6 and I4 fitments later. Never the other way around by trying to cram in a V8 later.

Link to post
Share on other sites

vor 1 Stunde schrieb nicci78:

Does that mean that forthcoming 21 & 24mm will be the worst performing one ?

Yes, I am quite sure they will be garbage. Seriously, have a look at the much smaller 21 and 24 M lenses and let us know if you think those lenses are underperformers. The body of the new SL lenses is certainly big enough to not appreciably restrain optical performance, regardless of their focal length. 

  • Like 1
Link to post
Share on other sites

3 hours ago, nicci78 said:

I am just puzzled by this all 7 lenses being the same size. And how that worked in practice. Seems like that some compromises are being made 

Having a standard set of outside dimensions makes it possible to provide common ultra-low-tolerance parts with which to build all of them.  It is also valuable for cinema use in external focus frames.  And I am sure the envelope was set at the outset to include the intended range from 21 to 90 mm.  It strikes me as an ambitious approach to releasing a range of lenses on a timetable that Leica has never met before.  I would expect that there are savings in the lens design computations, glass procurement, and AF algorithms tuning.  Calling it a compromise to save costs is just silly.  Imagine Leica releasing individually optimized lenses at each of the 7 focal lengths (and some more that we keep asking for, like 135 and 18).  Fine, there could be some improvements made, probably unobservable, at the extremes.  But at twice the price, and requiring 7-10 years for the rollout.

  • Like 3
Link to post
Share on other sites

4 minutes ago, scott kirkpatrick said:

Fine, there could be some improvements made, probably unobservable, at the extremes.  But at twice the price, and requiring 7-10 years for the rollout.

I think the S lens rollout provides an example of what could have been possible in those regards (apart from that little AF motor fiasco, which may or may not have resulted from any expediency).  

I still wonder if a middle ground could have been reached, say with 3-4 lenses sharing economies, resulting in two sizes, rather than all 7 in one size. A smaller 35 and 50, common walk around lenses, would have been nice(er) IMO, even at a higher cost. But of course Leica knows its business model and lens design objectives.

Jeff

  • Like 2
Link to post
Share on other sites

5 hours ago, nicci78 said:

If 35mm is the best. Is that mean that 50 is the second and 28 the third ? Because their small natural size will take advantage of the extra real estate. 

Does that mean that 75 & 90, even more in this regard, constrained in their optical design to fit inside a body a bit too small ? 

Does that mean that forthcoming 21 & 24mm will be the worst performing one ? Relative to the other one of course. Because 24 and especially 21 used to be bigger. 
 

If a frog had wings, would he bump his ass when he hops?

All of the SL lenses are at the top of the class, and I doubt you'd find any significant differences between them.

  • Like 1
Link to post
Share on other sites

I am not the saying there is a difference or not. It is Peter Karbe himself by picking its best one : 35mm and explaining how it ends up being the best. 

Of course everybody agreed that they are top of the line. However APO-SL 35mm MTF is never seen before. The difference with Summicron-M or Summilux-M 35mm is massive. 

 

Link to post
Share on other sites

Out of all SL glasses introduced so far, I am also impressed the most with 35cron performance.  They are all Having great performance but 35mm focal is historically difficult design to perform the best. If you ask me about 50/75/90, there are no lack of high performance glasses with wide price range out of any other camera system. More than 5 out of 10 last introduced 85mm f1.8/f1.4 have great performances. 

Up to now, only RX1 manage to get almost everything right at this focal however still exhibit both CA. this 35cron SL manage to improve further that offer APO correction plus MTF chart like short tele-photo lens. This is an achievement that I never thought could happen and there is simply no competition at any price offer it. 

Peter certainly should be more proud of it out of other SL lenses delivered. 

  • Like 2
Link to post
Share on other sites

8 minutes ago, ZHNL said:

Up to now, only RX1 manage to get almost everything right at this focal however still exhibit both CA. this 35cron SL manage to improve further that offer APO correction plus MTF chart like short tele-photo lens. This is an achievement that I never thought could happen and there is simply no competition at any price offer it. 

Peter certainly should be more proud of it out of other SL lenses delivered. 

Don’t disagree with that, but the results were enabled to a great degree by the extra real estate, as Karbe notes, created by the larger barrel dimensions (and then of course by applying Leica genius). The question it raises, for me, is whether pride and bragging rights over technical specs is worth the extra size and weight on a more practical basis.  Business and marketing-wise, probably a great decision, including economies of scale already discussed.  But my print needs, and personal abilities, would be well served by a smaller, more nimble tool, still with ridiculous potential quality.  Such is life in the current industry.

Jeff

  • Like 1
Link to post
Share on other sites

4 hours ago, scott kirkpatrick said:

Having a standard set of outside dimensions makes it possible to provide common ultra-low-tolerance parts with which to build all of them.  It is also valuable for cinema use in external focus frames.  And I am sure the envelope was set at the outset to include the intended range from 21 to 90 mm. 

This is how it was explained to me by my local Leica dealer. 

Link to post
Share on other sites

I own (and use, of course) both SL 35 and 90mm Summicrons. They are simply outstanding/breathtaking and I‘m not able to notice any IQ- difference. 

But it‘s good to know that the resolution of SL 35mm apparently is even higher than the others, let‘s say it is performing heavenly😇

Link to post
Share on other sites

47 minutes ago, Jeff S said:

Don’t disagree with that, but the results were enabled to a great degree by the extra real estate, as Karbe notes, created by the larger barrel dimensions (and then of course by applying Leica genius). The question it raises, for me, is whether pride and bragging rights over technical specs is worth the extra size and weight on a more practical basis.  Business and marketing-wise, probably a great decision, including economies of scale already discussed.  But my print needs, and personal abilities, would be well served by a smaller, more nimble tool, still with ridiculous potential quality.  Such is life in the current industry.

Jeff

I understand. I think we need be careful about how to interpolate information from interview. He was quite uncomfortable answer that question during interview. Elements count is not that out of potions compare to other cron SL. Price is also seems quite ‘reasonable’ :)

if we take a look of the size of latest sigma 35mmf1.2, we will realize that design a small 35mm AF glass with high performance may not possible. 

Based on information we gathered before from Leica, Reducing size may not be cheaper and may imply using some exotic glass element such as 50APO m. 
 

I would prefer some SL crons for sure but I personally think this 35cron justify its price And size the most, but that is just me. 

Edited by ZHNL
Link to post
Share on other sites

12 minutes ago, ZHNL said:


Based on information we gathered before from Leica, Reducing size may not be cheaper and may imply using some exotic glass element such as 50APO m. 
 

 

Exactly, which is why I said earlier that I’d rather pay more for compactness, which definitely influences pricing of various M lenses, as Karbe has described elsewhere.  Anyone (well, any good lens designer) can produce great results when size isn’t a constraint.

Jeff

  • Like 1
Link to post
Share on other sites

Join the conversation

You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.
Note: Your post will require moderator approval before it will be visible.

Guest
Reply to this topic...

×   Pasted as rich text.   Paste as plain text instead

  Only 75 emoji are allowed.

×   Your link has been automatically embedded.   Display as a link instead

×   Your previous content has been restored.   Clear editor

×   You cannot paste images directly. Upload or insert images from URL.

×
×
  • Create New...