light_rhythm Posted June 9, 2022 Share #1 Posted June 9, 2022 (edited) Advertisement (gone after registration) Hi Leica M Lenses Forum members I am new to the forum and apologise for my cross posting in the Leica M Type 240/262 Forum. I have a Q2 with a fixed 28mm f1.7 Summilux lens. I recently bought a M11 and I am considering buying a 28mm f1.4 Summilux one of my prime lenses because I am a 28mm shooter. The cost of a single 28mm f1.4 Summilux is more than a Q2, so one would expect this lens offers higher optical precision/performance and renders. Taking into account the Q2 28mm Summilux has a macro option and the standalone 28mm Summilux has the advantage of f1.4 when fully open and, the different pixel range of the two cameras (Q2 47 megapixel / M11 60 megapixels), are there any posts or articles that compare how these two lenses perform against each other? I would be grateful for advice with this as I am weighing up the pros and cons and the cost of buying the 28mm f1.4 Summilux. Thanks Edited June 9, 2022 by light_rhythm Quote Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Advertisement Posted June 9, 2022 Posted June 9, 2022 Hi light_rhythm, Take a look here 28mm Summilux f1.4 and Q2 28mm Summilux f1.7. I'm sure you'll find what you were looking for!
Jeff S Posted June 9, 2022 Share #2 Posted June 9, 2022 Difficult to compare lens to lens, as the Q2 results obviously are affected by camera/lens design integration, including software optimization. The 28 M Summilux, however, is optically stellar, with equally obvious size and weight considerations. Some related discussions might provide some insights… I don’t own either. The 28 Summicron ASPH v.1 suits my M shooting and print needs. Jeff Quote Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
MaticB Posted June 9, 2022 Share #3 Posted June 9, 2022 I still have both (although Q2 will go into acount for incoming APO 35), and one of the reasons for this decision was, I couldn't uncompromising accept "Q2 - Summilux 1,7" rendering. It is somehow "to perfect" in in-focus areas and on the other side it lack smoothness in unfocus areas. Meanwhile, Summilux 28 is in both respects true, stellar Leica lens! When I got Q2, my first opinion was "I don't need 28 Summilux any more!", but I'm glad now, I didn't sell it. It is just my personal impression. Quote Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
light_rhythm Posted June 9, 2022 Author Share #4 Posted June 9, 2022 2 hours ago, Jeff S said: Difficult to compare lens to lens, as the Q2 results obviously are affected by camera/lens design integration, including software optimization. The 28 M Summilux, however, is optically stellar, with equally obvious size and weight considerations. Some related discussions might provide some insights… I don’t own either. The 28 Summicron ASPH v.1 suits my M shooting and print needs. Jeff Thank you Jeff, these are very helpful links. Quote Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
light_rhythm Posted June 9, 2022 Author Share #5 Posted June 9, 2022 1 hour ago, MaticB said: I still have both (although Q2 will go into acount for incoming APO 35), and one of the reasons for this decision was, I couldn't uncompromising accept "Q2 - Summilux 1,7" rendering. It is somehow "to perfect" in in-focus areas and on the other side it lack smoothness in unfocus areas. Meanwhile, Summilux 28 is in both respects true, stellar Leica lens! When I got Q2, my first opinion was "I don't need 28 Summilux any more!", but I'm glad now, I didn't sell it. It is just my personal impression. Thanks for your advice, much appreciated. Quote Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Burncraft Posted July 22, 2023 Share #6 Posted July 22, 2023 This thread has been dormant for a while, but reading the posts here were one of many many many drops that finally let me to pull the trigger on the Summilux M 28/1,4 after I found a great deal for a virtually unused 7 year old lens. One always has to be very careful of course because we have huge bias to justify even the stupidest decisions we make as smart and perfect and all. But even considering this I must say I am totally 100% blown away by the beauty of the pictures this lens helps me to take. And I know it is total cliché, but the Summilux really incorporates all these Leica qualities of magic, glow, 3-dimensionality and beauty. I am tremendously happy with the lens. My only issue and despite having read about it in some reviews and expected some - the purple fringing is crass. But again, 2 seconds in Lightroom fixes it. If you take a lot of pictures with purplish thing in them - maybe this is a no-go. But I don't and so I don't really care and there is absolutely nothing else that bothers me. The weight and size on my M11 are absolutely perfect, like built for me. I may be selling all other lenses. Oh - and making the connection to the subject of the thread: I owed a Q and shot a while with a Q2 and the results are not comparable. As has been said above: Q is a sharp shooting modern system with clinical precision and the 1,7 Summilux on it is like a scalpel. The M 1,4 may be equally sharp in the center, but at least wide open not on the edges. But when you are looking for the deliberate rangefinder process with the idea to capture a life-like-reality - the 1,4 is for you. Also, when you are looking at resale-value the economics of a manual Leica lens are not so bad. They keep their value much better than the lens with an aging camera-body attached to it. 2 Quote Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
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.