Lens roadmap in terms of image quality?

[anickpick]

Advertisement (gone after registration)

vor 7 Stunden schrieb odot:

No apo's for me , i have no plans on selling an organ for a lens  The Summilux 1.4 is nice but nearly 500g - it might boil doen to the Cron then, we'll see. Thanks a lot!

Oh, the Zeiss, i had the Biogon F2 before, nice contrasty lens, works great when shooting bw film but i just didn't like the Zeiss look. 

unless you take the carton box with complete contents with you all the time, just take the Summilux out of the box and measure the weight again.

[Advertisement]

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

[Kim Dahl]

24 minutes ago, jaapv said:

So he chooses a 25 year old design...

Yes, and I know that's the problem.  For picture quality is different from person and shooting.  I have now worked as a full-time press photographer for 38 years and still work for a newspaper and Leica is perhaps the only brand that marketing itself on it.  Hence also their new design of old lenses.  The Leica M is the camera I've always had - since 1986 - and I love it because their lenses are something special.  All of them.  But even Karbe has a definition of "the best" - SL 35 and maybe now M 35 APO.  But it is not certain it is the best for the individual.  I would very much like to try M35 APO not because my M35 - not APO - is not good but .... 😁📷

[jaapv]

31 minutes ago, anickpick said:

unless you take the carton box with complete contents with you all the time, just take the Summilux out of the box and measure the weight again.

Indeed. 320 gram. 

[otto.f]

9 hours ago, odot said:

I'm in the market for a 35mm focal length and as stated earlier, sharpness is nice but the overall look is more important to me. I will be shooting with an M6 for now and will look forward to use it with the newer digital lenses.

Look at this, an early Summicron 35, not even the pre-asph I presume: 

This might put into perspective your wish for a “digital” lens. I don’t know what you meant by that, but if you mean lenses that are designed with computermodels and produced by computerdirected grinding machines this image might broaden your alternatives. At least I find it very special.  Also, film has developed since 2008. If you look at Adox Scala or CHS100, which are really special films, clean, clear and sharp in my experience, you could also turn around your reasoning: what would older Leica lenses do on the most modern films?

[odot]

2 hours ago, anickpick said:

unless you take the carton box with complete contents with you all the time, just take the Summilux out of the box and measure the weight again.

wow, thank you for bringing this up, i just double checked, this time on the Leica shop (i dont remember where i looked initially)  and indeed, its no 500g   

[odot]

3 hours ago, Kim Dahl said:

That, of course, is a perfectly ok question to have.  Because of course he has a point.  I am also “old” Leica M uses and appreciates the older optics.  Really love my Old Leica lenses  I also understand the question and we should perhaps in some of the discussions acknowledge that lens design has gotten better at Leica as well.  (Technology and development have also caught up with Leica in certain areas and other brands are also getting “better”) There is of course a reason for these new APO designs and there was a reason why even Leica updated their 28 f2.8 and f2.0  .  That it gets complicated now is because Leica has always done the best they could and for film camera "overpreformed" many lenses.  We can look forward to that today. ☺️👍🏻 I think the short answer is that the latest designed lenses are what he is asking for.  Whether they have the look you are looking for is a completely different question.

Thank you, this makes perfect sense. I just now have to figure out whether its gonna be a Lux  with the extra stop or Cron. As someone stated earlier, the Cron also has a newer version, which is sharper but how much sharpness does one actually need?

As HCB said: sharpness is a bourgeois concept (especially when theres a 4300€ difference to it  )

[a.noctilux]

Advertisement (gone after registration)

Odot, if you can find the older Summilux-M 35mm in titanium coated ...for me the best 35mm lens (if this can have any sense) of about hundred I've used.

I regret the one I used for years when I "replaced" it with the lighter black anodized "same lens".

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!

 

Even if I have some other choices,

like here

 

For me,

buying/selling is part of fun in Leica M use

 

Anyway, the best lens is the one you have with you,

and with which one feels comfortable.

Edited March 20, 2021 by a.noctilux

[Stephen.s1]

The best for me are those that make "keeper" images. 

 

[Kim Dahl]

8 minutes ago, Stephen.s1 said:

The best for me are those that make "keeper" images. 

 

That's probably a good description.  I do not buy many M lenses.  But for example I had an M90 (non APO).  Then I bought an APO M90 f2. I tried both for a year and sold the M90 f2 afterwards and kept APO 90 f2.0.  There was a difference especially on f2 to f4  and the "new" was to stay.  Not because I did not like non APO (god for portræt but I Can do the same with APO) and there is a limit to how many lenses one can use if one is to get to know them properly.

[jaapv]

Given the shooting preferences of the OP most work will be done at 5.6 or 8.8. It is next to impossible to see any difference between the lenses mentioned at such apertures. 

[Runkel]

8 hours ago, a.noctilux said:

Odot, if you can find the older Summilux-M 35mm in titanium coated ...for me the best 35mm lens (if this can have any sense) of about hundred I've used.

I regret the one I used for years when I "replaced" it with the lighter black anodized "same lens".

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!

 

Even if I have some other choices,

like here

 

For me,

buying/selling is part of fun in Leica M use

 

Anyway, the best lens is the one you have with you,

and with which one feels comfortable.

This titanium 35mm was my first Leica lens and performed wonderfully for me for many years.  I sold it in a moment of questionable wisdom and a later black replacement never quite had the magic on digital.  Never checked the titanium for focus shift but the black had it and I do think film is more forgiving of shift.  Now the black one is gone and I’m happily shooting a few 35s, most often the Summicron v2 (with the aperture tab).  I also shoot a very late 3.5cm f/3.5 Elmar (coated), and the results on digital, including the color, might surprise some people.  
 

I fear that for my use shooting a rangefinder handheld, the benefits of a close-focusing 35mm that’s diffraction limited at f/2 could be very limited.  It’s not really diffraction limited if you’re holding it.

Edited March 20, 2021 by Runkel

[rnl]

A friend recently asked for a lens and camera recommendation. He is planning a cross county trip and wanted to take the sharpest photos of landscapes and wildlife.  I told him that I owned Leica and Canon equipment and liked using them, but at a high level of camera quality available from these manufacturers, sharpness is generally a result of technique and stability.  I conceded that the Leica lens is most probably superior to those made by Canon, however, I often strain to remember what photo was taken with with camera and have to resort to the digital fingerprint.  I ended up recommending Leica because of its simplicity, weight and size and two lenses, 35 1.4 and 90 apo.   

[pippy]

22 hours ago, odot said:

I wondered if there is somewhat of a roadmap on how to determine, which are the "best" lenses?

No.

Philip.

Edited March 20, 2021 by pippy