35mm best of the 7 APO-Summicron-SL

[tom0511]

Advertisement (gone after registration)

I have not (yet) used the 35 but I find all SL lenses I have used so far are soo good that I dont think it will have any practical influence on my photography and IQ if there are small differences between the several Summicrons. The prices are steep but for me it feels like a long term future proof buy.

 

[scott kirkpatrick]

1 hour ago, Jeff S said:

  Anyone (well, any good lens designer) can produce great results when size isn’t a constraint.

Good lens designers are not exactly common.  And even fewer have a 25 year unique software toolset to work within, a rare glass portfolio that is not shared, and a team which can pursue 3-4 designs in parallel, learning from each. We don't hear enough about that team.  Anyway, when Karbe showed the MTFs of the 35 (at either the L-Mount Alliance or the LHSA meeting) in Wetzlar, the meeting halted for a standing ovation.  And those lenses have since the 75 and 90, been designed not only to MTF objectives but to meet goals in the defocus direction (perpendicular to the radius traced in an MTF).  And you will notice that size is a constraint, especially diameter.   The SL Summicrons feel light in the hand if you are used to the 16-35.

[Jeff S]

1 minute ago, scott kirkpatrick said:

Good lens designers are not exactly common.  And even fewer have a 25 year unique software toolset to work within, a rare glass portfolio that is not shared, and a team which can pursue 3-4 designs in parallel, learning from each. We don't hear enough about that team.  Anyway, when Karbe showed the MTFs of the 35 (at either the L-Mount Alliance or the LHSA meeting) in Wetzlar, the meeting halted for a standing ovation.  And those lenses have since the 75 and 90, been designed not only to MTF objectives but to meet goals in the defocus direction (perpendicular to the radius traced in an MTF).  And you will notice that size is a constraint, especially diameter.   The SL Summicrons feel light in the hand if you are used to the 16-35.

I’m well aware. That’s why I also referred to Leica’s  (now Karbe’s) genius. My statement was a paraphrasing from Karbe himself regarding the unique challenges compactness generally presents. Clearly, the best designers separate from the pack.

The following interview regarding the development of his 50 Summilux M ASPH is an example of those challenges, especially sourcing glass types.  Other articles on the Noctilux lenses echo these  efforts and hurdles.

https://www.shutterbug.com/content/leica-lens-saga-interview-peter-karbe

Jeff

[Chuck Albertson]

7 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.  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.

Concur. And on a more practical level, it means I only have to buy one UV filter, one polarizer, one ND filter, etc.

[Jon Warwick]

4 hours ago, Jeff S said:

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

Compactness does apparently come at a higher monetary price, eg, $ price of the M 50 APO is far > any SL Summicron.

The conundrum I had was the realisation, IMHO, that the SL lenses were also technically superior to any of the M lenses.

If M lenses were equal IQ wise (more compact than the SL’s goes without saying), I’d be willing to pay up. But for me, with an interest in maximising Lens quality, it simply made more sense to stick with SL primes, which are also cheaper than certain benchmark M lenses. 

Edited November 9, 2019 by Jon Warwick

[bencychin]

7 hours ago, scott kirkpatrick said:

Good lens designers are not exactly common.  And even fewer have a 25 year unique software toolset to work within, a rare glass portfolio that is not shared, and a team which can pursue 3-4 designs in parallel, learning from each. We don't hear enough about that team.  Anyway, when Karbe showed the MTFs of the 35 (at either the L-Mount Alliance or the LHSA meeting) in Wetzlar, the meeting halted for a standing ovation.  And those lenses have since the 75 and 90, been designed not only to MTF objectives but to meet goals in the defocus direction (perpendicular to the radius traced in an MTF).  And you will notice that size is a constraint, especially diameter.   The SL Summicrons feel light in the hand if you are used to the 16-35.

After using 75 and 90 SL Cron, I share your experience they feel right in the hand.

On a different point, anyone made a comparison between the 35 SL Cron and the 35 S Summarit with S/L adapter?

It is clear the 35 S is almost the size of 50 SL Lux, so it is not light or small like the 35 SL Cron.

But how about IQ and sharpness?  Since 35 S is less constrain by the size?

Appreciate if someone can share his experience

[Stuart Richardson]

Advertisement (gone after registration)

I asked this exact question to Stephan Schulz at the Paris launch. He said that he felt that the absolute sharpness of the 35mm SL cron would be better wide open, but that by medium apertures there would be very little difference. As far as I remember, he said that he suspected the S lens might have slightly nicer bokeh, and the SL lens a bit more freedom from aberrations. Owning the 35mm S and having handled the 35mm SL, I know that if I used the 35mm lens often on an SL or SL2 body, the 35mm summicron is definitely the way to go. It is much smaller, lighter, faster to focus and quieter. But in terms of image quality, the S might make a more pleasing photo in some cases. 

[Agent M10]

4 hours ago, Stuart Richardson said:

I asked this exact question to Stephan Schulz at the Paris launch. He said that he felt that the absolute sharpness of the 35mm SL cron would be better wide open, but that by medium apertures there would be very little difference. As far as I remember, he said that he suspected the S lens might have slightly nicer bokeh, and the SL lens a bit more freedom from aberrations. Owning the 35mm S and having handled the 35mm SL, I know that if I used the 35mm lens often on an SL or SL2 body, the 35mm summicron is definitely the way to go. It is much smaller, lighter, faster to focus and quieter. But in terms of image quality, the S might make a more pleasing photo in some cases. 

The SL2 and its primes presents a real conundrum for those of us who own S glass, but aren’t considering the S3. I have an S 007 and three S lenses. I also have 3 SL primes with an SL2 on order. I’m having a hard time justifying keeping the S, given the technological leaps that Leica has done with the SL and the summicrons. Heck, you can throw the 50SL Lux in there too.

[bags27]

I struggled with purchasing (or at least waiting in line to purchase) this lens: first as a ~50 for my CL and then as a 35 if (very likely when) I get the SL2. But just yesterday I bought the M35 f/1.4 instead (and it will be "instead" rather than "in addition to"). 

1. When Brownstone asked him what his favorite lens was, Karbe wouldn't answer. So Brownstone rephrased: which one for a desert island. I thought: I hope it's a very small desert island, where he doesn't have to walk around a lot, but can just sit on the shore taking pictures of the ocean. I have seen folks struggle with the SL and a zoom, and I have tried to talk myself into the SL and a L prime walking around a Leica store. But it just wasn't fun for me.

2. Some of the most jaw-dropping photos I've seen posted on this site are with the FLE. I can't explain why, and I know that the Zeiss f/1.4 is technically at least as good and way cheaper. But there is real magic in the FLE, for me at least.

[ropo54]

29 minutes ago, bags27 said:

 

2. Some of the most jaw-dropping photos I've seen posted on this site are with the FLE. I can't explain why, and I know that the Zeiss f/1.4 is technically at least as good and way cheaper. But there is real magic in the FLE, for me at least.

Ken: I cannot comment on the SL 35mm, and having AF is a nice option at times, but I, too, am enamored with the M35 1.4 FLE on the SL.  Some photos below.  The SL and M35 FLE make a really nice lightweight option.  Rob

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 November 9, 2019 by ropo54

[ropo54]

And, one more with the M35 1.4 FLE.  The colors and clarity.  Some are critical of its bokeh but I still think its a terrific alternative.

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!

[bags27]

wow, Rob. That's what I mean!

thanks and best,

Ken

[bencychin]

55 minutes ago, ropo54 said:

Ken: I cannot comment on the SL 35mm, and having AF is a nice option at times, but I, too, am enamored with the M35 1.4 FLE on the SL.  Some photos below.  The SL and M35 FLE make a really nice lightweight option.  Rob

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!

 

These photos are fabulously pretty and have excellent IQ.

I now must try out the M35 Lux FLE on the SL.  I  like the S 35 on the SL, but do not have the SL 35 Cron.

Thanks for sharing your experience.

 

[ropo54]

50 minutes ago, bencychin said:

These photos are fabulously pretty and have excellent IQ.

I now must try out the M35 Lux FLE on the SL.  I  like the S 35 on the SL, but do not have the SL 35 Cron.

Thanks for sharing your experience.

 

Thank you bencychin.  For me, it is a "keeper".  I had owned it once before, traded it, and regretted it . . . so  had to reacquire it. I think it is a wonderful light weight option for the SL. I would love to see how it does on the SL2. Rob

Edited November 9, 2019 by ropo54

[Chaemono]

vor 7 Minuten schrieb ropo54:

Thank you bencychin.  For me, it is a "keeper".  I had owned it once before, traded it, and regretted it . . . so  had to reacquire it. I think it is a wonderful light weight option for the SL. I would love to see how it does on the SL2. Rob

It’ll do awesome on the SL2, Rob, because the SL2 files at base ISO are awesome.  And with IBIS one pretty much won’t have to go above base ISO when using fast lenses wide open. 

[ropo54]

4 minutes ago, Chaemono said:

It’ll do awesome on the SL2, Rob, because the SL2 files at base ISO are awesome.  And with IBIS one pretty much won’t have to go above base ISO when using fast lenses wide open. 

Thanks, Chaemono.  I presumed as much. My comment was meant more rhetorically . . . as in I'm eagerly awaiting!  Rob

[Chaemono]

vor 5 Minuten schrieb ropo54:

Thanks, Chaemono.  I presumed as much. My comment was meant more rhetorically . . . as in I'm eagerly awaiting!  Rob

So am I, Rob.  In the meantime, I keep bugging the people in the local Leica store to let me check it out. 😁

[ropo54]

Another example of the M 35 1.4 FLE on the SL

Lucerne, Switzerland

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!

[bags27]

Really inspiring, Rob. Can't wait until I get my lens. Thanks!

[Advertisement]

Hallo,

Look here: Leica L-Mount

[digitalfx]

He didn't pick the "best" he picked his favorite...big difference. My favorite lens is also the 35mm, that doesn't mean its the best.

But this is exactly why he was hesitant to respond. 

 

EDIT: Oops, I am wrong...he refers to it as the best lens they have ever produced- incredible!

Edited November 11, 2019 by digitalfx