TTArtisan 28mm f5.6

[Dennis]

Advertisement (gone after registration)

4 hours ago, Matlock said:

"Is the TT Artisan 80% of the Leica for 10% of the cost? Without question"

28 TTA : 28 Summaron = CV 35/1.4 II : 35 Lux v2

 

[Advertisement]

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

[Huss]

9 hours ago, Matlock said:

Yes I agree. The article in Viewfinder by Marke Gilbert comes to much the same conclusions (be aware that my Summaron is the earlier screw mount version). Marke's summing up is as follows: "Is the TT Artisan 80% of the Leica for 10% of the cost? Without question".

The way I see it, the Summaron is 20 % of the TTA, for 1000% of the cost.

[Huss]

On 7/14/2022 at 5:31 AM, Matlock said:

Here we have 1. Summaron 2.8cm f5.6 (screw mount). 2. Hektor 2.8cm f6.3. and 3. TTA 28mm f5.6. Straight out of camera with no PP. 

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!

 

Looking at these pics - remember this is just my opinion! - I can understand getting the Summaron or the TTA, but have no interest in the Hektor which was at the time why I bought the Orion 15 instead of the Hektor.  The Orion had that vintage look but also was sharp.  The Hektor to me is just hazy, and if this was a lens made by someone NOT called Leica would be panned.

As for the Summaron vs TTA?  Well the results show that, IMO, the only similarity between the lenses is the outer cosmetic physical construction.  The differences in optical design are very clear.  The Summaron has its character, while the TTA basically shows that it is a very modern, compact 28mm option.

[hdmesa]

11 hours ago, jakontil said:

...summaron has more vignette and lack contrasty which for some, including myself, is favorable...

More vignetting, yes, but it does not lack contrast unless you're talking about the original 28 Summaron. The new/re-issue 28 Summaron has modern coatings and a ton of contrast even wide open at f/5.6. If you're going off samples you've seen, then maybe they were taking in flat lighting.

 

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!

[Matlock]

1 hour ago, Huss said:

 

Looking at these pics - remember this is just my opinion! - I can understand getting the Summaron or the TTA, but have no interest in the Hektor which was at the time why I bought the Orion 15 instead of the Hektor.  The Orion had that vintage look but also was sharp.  The Hektor to me is just hazy, and if this was a lens made by someone NOT called Leica would be panned.

As for the Summaron vs TTA?  Well the results show that, IMO, the only similarity between the lenses is the outer cosmetic physical construction.  The differences in optical design are very clear.  The Summaron has its character, while the TTA basically shows that it is a very modern, compact 28mm option.

I agree but the Hektor is now 87 years old so allowances could be made I think, also my sample has had a rather hard life by the look of it. Your comments regarding the TTA v Summaron are very much in line with the article in Viewfinder.

[jakontil]

4 hours ago, hdmesa said:

More vignetting, yes, but it does not lack contrast unless you're talking about the original 28 Summaron. The new/re-issue 28 Summaron has modern coatings and a ton of contrast even wide open at f/5.6. If you're going off samples you've seen, then maybe they were taking in flat lighting.

 

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!

hi mate, i was referring to summaron reissue when compared to the ttartisans. for my usage alone, the reissue is plenty contrasty

[hdmesa]

Advertisement (gone after registration)

4 hours ago, jakontil said:

hi mate, i was referring to summaron reissue when compared to the ttartisans. for my usage alone, the reissue is plenty contrasty

I see. But doesn't the Summaron reissue retain better contrast than the TTArtisans when shooting into the sun, though? I'm trying to understand how it could have lower contrast but better flare resistance. Is that the one situation where the Summaron would retain better contrast?

[jakontil]

3 hours ago, hdmesa said:

I see. But doesn't the Summaron reissue retain better contrast than the TTArtisans when shooting into the sun, though? I'm trying to understand how it could have lower contrast but better flare resistance. Is that the one situation where the Summaron would retain better contrast?

the shot i seen was not against the sun when compared to the ttartisans or may be the samples shown wasnt consistent, but my reissue flares quite obvious when shot against the sun

with that said, i always look for flares when doing some street photos which is what i like obviously

from matlock samples, do you think there's a different in contrast between the two? thought slightly, the ttartisan seems better

[ianman]

16 hours ago, Huss said:

The differences in optical design are very clear.  The Summaron has its character, while the TTA basically shows that it is a very modern, compact 28mm option.

Precisely. Which is why the comparison between these two specific lenses make little sense. Just because the look the same on the outside it doesn’t follow the results will be anywhere near the same. I mean, if this TTA had been built to look like a 28mm Summicron or a 50mm Summilux, would we be getting all these comparisons? I think not. The Summaron is 100% Summaron and the TTA is 100% TTA. Users should get the lens that meets they requirements based on the results, not on price or manufacturer or what it looks or doesn’t look like.

[Capuccino-Muffin]

On 7/16/2022 at 11:43 AM, Matlock said:

Yes I agree. The article in Viewfinder by Marke Gilbert comes to much the same conclusions (be aware that my Summaron is the earlier screw mount version). Marke's summing up is as follows: "Is the TT Artisan 80% of the Leica for 10% of the cost? Without question".

How the hell one comes up with such numbers? Like, is a Bigmac 86% of a Horse Steak? Without question.

wowsky. 

[pedaes]

10 minutes ago, Capuccino-Muffin said:

Bigmac

What's a "Bigmac"?

[ianman]

26 minutes ago, pedaes said:

What's a "Bigmac"?

He wrote “without question” 🤪

[pedaes]

6 minutes ago, ianman said:

He wrote “without question” 🤪

Apologies!

[hdmesa]

7 hours ago, jakontil said:

the shot i seen was not against the sun when compared to the ttartisans or may be the samples shown wasnt consistent, but my reissue flares quite obvious when shot against the sun

with that said, i always look for flares when doing some street photos which is what i like obviously

from matlock samples, do you think there's a different in contrast between the two? thought slightly, the ttartisan seems better

I’ve not looked at comparisons side by side, but I’m sure there are minor differences. But using my 28 Summaron alongside my 28 Summilux, I never thought to myself that the Summaron lacked contrast. Regarding flare: veiling flare (the kind and amount that ruins shots, not the kind that adds artistic character), I thought that was a weakness of the TTA as reported in this thread. IDK since I don’t own one.

28 Summaron into the sun at f/5.6 (clouds and shadows highly recovered in post):

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!

28 Summaron contrast seems like any other modern lens to me:

Edited July 17, 2022 by hdmesa

[Huss]

3 hours ago, hdmesa said:

I’ve not looked at comparisons side by side, but I’m sure there are minor differences. But using my 28 Summaron alongside my 28 Summilux, I never thought to myself that the Summaron lacked contrast. Regarding flare: veiling flare (the kind and amount that ruins shots, not the kind that adds artistic character), I thought that was a weakness of the TTA as reported in this thread. IDK since I don’t own one.

28 Summaron into the sun at f/5.6 (clouds and shadows highly recovered in post):

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!

28 Summaron contrast seems like any other modern lens to me:

I think you've read it already, but if not from post #410 I added pics to deliberately show how the TTA handles flare - with the sun both in and out of the frame.  I did not use the lens hood (and never will as it is so massive and IMO defeats the whole point of this lens).

[hdmesa]

1 hour ago, Huss said:

I think you've read it already, but if not from post #410 I added pics to deliberately show how the TTA handles flare - with the sun both in and out of the frame.  I did not use the lens hood (and never will as it is so massive and IMO defeats the whole point of this lens).

What about on digital? Asking since vignetting often differs between film and digital.

https://phillipreeve.net/blog/review-ttartisan-28mm-5-6-m/

...any light source outside the frame may create severe issues with veiling flare running across most of the frame.

Edited July 17, 2022 by hdmesa

[jakontil]

11 hours ago, hdmesa said:

I’ve not looked at comparisons side by side, but I’m sure there are minor differences. But using my 28 Summaron alongside my 28 Summilux, I never thought to myself that the Summaron lacked contrast. Regarding flare: veiling flare (the kind and amount that ruins shots, not the kind that adds artistic character), I thought that was a weakness of the TTA as reported in this thread. IDK since I don’t own one.

28 Summaron into the sun at f/5.6 (clouds and shadows highly recovered in post):

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!

28 Summaron contrast seems like any other modern lens to me:

Hi mate, exactly my point, i never felt it lacked contrast compared to TTartisans’ only when side by side, and surprisingly, the 7artisans version kicks in more contrasty looks compared to TTartisans

no complaints with the reissue summaron, used exclusively for my 28mm streetphoto

and i love its characters ( flaws )

[Dennis]

From yesterday, at the beach, around 10am.

M10 + generic vented filter 37mm - all at f8

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!

Like this tiny lens. It's definitely a keeper...

 

[Advertisement]

Hallo,

Look here: Leica M

[pippy]

On 7/17/2022 at 7:48 PM, hdmesa said:

What about on digital? Asking since vignetting often differs between film and digital.

https://phillipreeve.net/blog/review-ttartisan-28mm-5-6-m/

...any light source outside the frame may create severe issues with veiling flare running across most of the frame.

There seems to be a split between certain lenses which do suffer from veiling flare and those which don't. From what I've seen and from much which I've read the pre-production samples which were sent out to reviewers - including Phillip Reeve - were all in the former category. They also seem to render with less sharpness than later examples. There has been some speculation that there might have been a slight optical-tweak before the release of the final production lenses. Certainly there was some considerable delay between the posting of the reviews and the time when the lens was available to order by the general public.

These subjects have been discussed earlier on in this thread but as the post count is now well over 450 it might be time-consuming to find those with greatest relevance. I will, however, point you in the direction of a post which I made regarding the issue of veiling flare where I couldn't get my copy to exhibit the phenomenon no matter how hard I tried. Have a look, if you are so inclined, at post #194 on page 10 (and FWIW there are examples of how sharp my own copy renders in the same page).

I suspect that there were quite a few posts on the pages surrounding that one discussing these topics.

Hope it / they might be of some help.

Philip.

[hdmesa]

7 hours ago, pippy said:

There seems to be a split between certain lenses which do suffer from veiling flare and those which don't. From what I've seen and from much which I've read the pre-production samples which were sent out to reviewers - including Phillip Reeve - were all in the former category. They also seem to render with less sharpness than later examples. There has been some speculation that there might have been a slight optical-tweak before the release of the final production lenses. Certainly there was some considerable delay between the posting of the reviews and the time when the lens was available to order by the general public.

These subjects have been discussed earlier on in this thread but as the post count is now well over 450 it might be time-consuming to find those with greatest relevance. I will, however, point you in the direction of a post which I made regarding the issue of veiling flare where I couldn't get my copy to exhibit the phenomenon no matter how hard I tried. Have a look, if you are so inclined, at post #194 on page 10 (and FWIW there are examples of how sharp my own copy renders in the same page).

I suspect that there were quite a few posts on the pages surrounding that one discussing these topics.

Hope it / they might be of some help.

Philip.

Hey, thanks for this. I thought I was keeping up with this thread, but I obviously missed a good chunk of it. I swear sometimes the “jump to first new post” setting on this forum takes me past things I haven’t read yet.