28/2 + 50/1.4 versus 35/1.4

[hankg]

Advertisement (gone after registration)

I thought with the 28/2 Summicron and the 50/1.4 preASPH that I had my lens kit for the M8 sorted out. But I'm finding it's not quite right. On a film M I pretty much shot exclusively with a 50/1.4. Great stopped down when using the camera as a point and shoot with the hyperfocal distance set. Great wide open with beautiful transitions to OOF areas and great for low light. Once in a while I'd use a 75 at 2 or 2.8 for a portrait.

 

Now I really love the rendering of the 28 but I'm finding it a little wide. The 50 is better suited to my way of shooting but often I can't get far enough back to frame the scene as it's a 70 on the M8. I've been thinking about picking up a 35 summicron-M IV. I have owned the lens in the past and love it but it doesn't get me to 1.4. So I'm thinking trade the 28 and the 50 for a 35/1.4 ASPH if I can find one that doesn't have excessive focus shift. From what I've seen the 35 Summilux ASPH is closer to the 28/2 in feel then the other ASPH lenses and from the images I've seen it has a very pleasant bokeh closer to the preASPH lenses then most of the current Leica line up. Sean when are we going to see those OOF samples in your 35 reviews:) So what say you with experience with the 28/2 50 preASPH and 35/1.4 ASPH. How does the 35/1.4 signature compare to my 2 current lenses?

 

This is for my private shooting. For commercial stuff I'll still need a wide but for those applications I am always shooting stopped down to f8 - f16 and at those apertures any of the CV's or older Leica lenses will match the new expensive stuff. I also have a 90/4 Macro and I'm happy with that wide open for portraits and to take care of product shots while I am sans SLR. I hate having lots of lenses and the idea of one lens taking the place of 2 is really appealing. No wondering what to slap on the camera before you run out the door. I hate carrying a bag and living in the tropics I don't have any pockets to drop an extra lens into. For me less is more.

[Advertisement]

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

[Paul Hart]

I've been thinking about picking up a 35 summicron-M IV. I have owned the lens in the past and love it but it doesn't get me to 1.4.

 

I started a thread yesterday on the 35 Summicron-M IV as I'd recently picked one up for my M8. It's every bit as good as I remembered it from the last time I had one.

 

Why not get one, and just increase the ISO when you need to? Prices are high, but not nearly as high as the Summilux-M ASPH.

[luigi bertolotti]

I haven't experience with the Lux 35 asph, but if you really (quote) "hate having lots of lenses", trading 28+50 with 35 I think is a right move if you are now at all with M8: I agree that 50 is often a "bastard" focal for my M8... many times I carried it all day long and never mounted onto... and one (rather new to digital, as I am) have also to keep in mind that cropping is so easy on digital...

[Guest guy_mancuso]

I started a thread yesterday on the 35 Summicron-M IV as I'd recently picked one up for my M8. It's every bit as good as I remembered it from the last time I had one.

 

Why not get one, and just increase the ISO when you need to? Prices are high, but not nearly as high as the Summilux-M ASPH.

 

Trying to find one , Canadian or German version

[hankg]

In answer to the above. I don't really want to give up a stop if I don't have to -if I can have the quality you can get from the ASPH lenses at 1.4 and not give up the tonality and bokeh of some of the preASPH lenses well that would be having your cake and eating it to. I find the 28/2 acceptable in making that balance, my question is the 35/1.4 ASPH equal to the 28/2 in this respect?

[ArtZ]

I thought with the 28/2 Summicron and the 50/1.4 preASPH that I had my lens kit for the M8 sorted out. But I'm finding it's not quite right. On a film M I pretty much shot exclusively with a 50/1.4. Great stopped down when using the camera as a point and shoot with the hyperfocal distance set. Great wide open with beautiful transitions to OOF areas and great for low light. Once in a while I'd use a 75 at 2 or 2.8 for a portrait.

 

Now I really love the rendering of the 28 but I'm finding it a little wide. The 50 is better suited to my way of shooting but often I can't get far enough back to frame the scene as it's a 70 on the M8. I've been thinking about picking up a 35 summicron-M IV. I have owned the lens in the past and love it but it doesn't get me to 1.4. So I'm thinking trade the 28 and the 50 for a 35/1.4 ASPH if I can find one that doesn't have excessive focus shift. From what I've seen the 35 Summilux ASPH is closer to the 28/2 in feel then the other ASPH lenses and from the images I've seen it has a very pleasant bokeh closer to the preASPH lenses then most of the current Leica line up. Sean when are we going to see those OOF samples in your 35 reviews:) So what say you with experience with the 28/2 50 preASPH and 35/1.4 ASPH. How does the 35/1.4 signature compare to my 2 current lenses?

 

This is for my private shooting. For commercial stuff I'll still need a wide but for those applications I am always shooting stopped down to f8 - f16 and at those apertures any of the CV's or older Leica lenses will match the new expensive stuff. I also have a 90/4 Macro and I'm happy with that wide open for portraits and to take care of product shots while I am sans SLR. I hate having lots of lenses and the idea of one lens taking the place of 2 is really appealing. No wondering what to slap on the camera before you run out the door. I hate carrying a bag and living in the tropics I don't have any pockets to drop an extra lens into. For me less is more.

 

Hank,

 

Yesterday was the "White Night Festival" in Paris (and, incidentally, we sent the "All Blacks" back to Kiwiland...) I took with me one M8 with the cron 28/2 and the other M8 with the Nokton 35/1.2

 

At Tulleries it was a kind of spectacle with fire. Funny "old fashion" machines spitting fire and sculptures made with fire. After a few shots, I realized that the cron was not doing the job.

 

I love the cron 28/2 but I only took about 15 pictures with it yesterday: too wide and too slow for the pictures I wanted to take yesterday. In your case, I would keep the cron 28 because it's a wonderful lens and I would try to get a Nokton 35 (which is not really expensive).

 

Here are 4 exemples. The first three are taken with the Nokton 35, the last one with with the cron.

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!

[Artichoke]

Advertisement (gone after registration)

the 28 Summicron rendition seems superior in terms of contrast and dealing with the difficult point light sources ...focal length aside, it would seem the 28 Summicron better at dealing with such challenging photographs

I note particularly the bleeding about the light sources in the Nokton sample & the relative softness of the rendering

of course this could be a matter of exposure to some extent, but I think the 28 Summicron comes off better in this comparison, though I re3alize this was not a carefully done comparison study

[ArtZ]

the 28 Summicron rendition seems superior in terms of contrast and dealing with the difficult point light sources ...focal length aside, it would seem the 28 Summicron better at dealing with such challenging photographs

I note particularly the bleeding about the light sources in the Nokton sample & the relative softness of the rendering

of course this could be a matter of exposure to some extent, but I think the 28 Summicron comes off better in this comparison, though I re3alize this was not a carefully done comparison study

 

I do agree with you. The cron 28 is a fantastic lens and I think Hank should keep it. I meant only, IMHO, it's worthy to pay $819 for a Nokton to use it when you need f1.2 or f1.4.

 

I've noticed some ocasional bleeding with the Nokton under very strong/extreme contrast conditions like in this example.

 

Those exemples are not a study, just an illustration. I was very happy to take the Nokton with me yesterday because I'm sure that the cron didn't suit for my needs yesterday.

.

[hankg]

As nice as the 28 is I'm not going to have a $3,000 lens collecting dust on the shelf which is what will happen if I get a fast 35. The Nokton looks a bit big - if I was to go the CV route I'd go for the Ultron. But if I decide on an f2 35 then I'd buy the 35 version IV.

[Guest Walt]

In answer to the above. I don't really want to give up a stop if I don't have to -if I can have the quality you can get from the ASPH lenses at 1.4 and not give up the tonality and bokeh of some of the preASPH lenses well that would be having your cake and eating it to. I find the 28/2 acceptable in making that balance, my question is the 35/1.4 ASPH equal to the 28/2 in this respect?

Hank--

 

I think you know what I like about the 28/2.0, rather what you like. The 35/1.4 has this character in spades, more so than the 28. Again, I speak from a BW tonal scale perspective. I've seen no focus problems in my work with the 35, though I haven't photographed any yardsticks up close.

 

Walt

[hankg]

Hank--

 

I think you know what I like about the 28/2.0, rather what you like. The 35/1.4 has this character in spades, more so than the 28. Again, I speak from a BW tonal scale perspective. I've seen no focus problems in my work with the 35, though I haven't photographed any yardsticks up close.

 

Walt

 

Thanks, Walt...anyone want to trade a 35/1.4 ASPH for a 28/2 ASPH mint with 6 bit coding?

[aj55]

And there is another one - even less expensive: the 40 1.4 nokton

[tom0511]

If 50 worked for you on film I would think 35mm should be your lens.

I find it sharp but not harsh.

Here is one image from last week:

While I think its a great lens I prefer the 28+50 FOV, but thats just my personal taste.

cheers, Tom

[Jack_Flesher]

Hank:

 

I understand your dilemma... I've owned them all, and kept the 28 Cron, the 50 Lux AND the ver IV 35 Cron... In my case, I don't particularly find the 35 focal as appealing on the M8 as the 28, so my regular kit is the 21, 28 Cron, 50 Lux and 75 Lux. I grab the 35 IV when I want the traditional look. I would be just as happy or even happier with the 35 Lux, but the ver IV was less than half the price, so I can justify it sitting in the cabinet unused for long periods and I don't stress.

 

If I preferred the 35 focal, I would mount a 35 Lux on the camera and be done with it, probably selling off the 28 Cron adn 50 Lux --- my set would then probably shift to the 24, 35 Lux and 75 Lux.

 

I am actually in the very same boat now with my 24 Asph. I have the 21 Asph and prefer that focal spacing with my 28. The 24 is an awesome lens, and almost impossible to find new or used. But on the flip side it's really too much money to have it sit in a cabinet unused, so I reluctantly plan to sell it.

 

Cheers,

[wlaidlaw]

Having only been a 50/1.4 (chrome) user for a whole day, I cannot comment as yet on its imaging abilities, which I am sure are amazing. Two things that did surprise me were the horribly sharp edges on the focusing tab. I actually cut my finger on mine. The seond thing is how stiff the focusing is. I know my lens is very new and has had very little use, so hopefully this will loosen off with use. At the moment it is quite difficult to get sufficiently spot on for the lens wide open. In between posts, I am sitting working the focus backwards and forwards, trying to run it in. Someone told me some time ago, that chrome lenses were always tight when new - I don't know if anyone else has had this experience.

 

Wilson

[Artichoke]

snip

Someone told me some time ago, that chrome lenses were always tight when new - I don't know if anyone else has had this experience.

mine chrome was quite stiff, particularly at the ends of the focus throw and more so at the close end than the long ...working the focus does loosen it up a bit

interesting that this is said to be a quality of chrome lenses

I have not found the focus tab sharp however

[wlaidlaw]

mine chrome was quite stiff, particularly at the ends of the focus throw and more so at the close end than the long ...working the focus does loosen it up a bit

interesting that this is said to be a quality of chrome lenses

I have not found the focus tab sharp however

 

My tab is so sharp, I am seriously considering attacking it with a fine emery board or a piece of wet and dry 600 or 1200 grade. Due to the arthritis medication I take, the skin on my hands and fingers is very thin and fragile and I don't want to keep getting small cuts on my middle finger. I am not convinced of the design of the U shaped plastic tab on the Summilux. I rather prefer the circular button tab on my 1950's Summitar or the gently rounded one on my Zeiss ZM lenses.

 

Wilson

[woodyspedden]

As nice as the 28 is I'm not going to have a $3,000 lens collecting dust on the shelf which is what will happen if I get a fast 35. The Nokton looks a bit big - if I was to go the CV route I'd go for the Ultron. But if I decide on an f2 35 then I'd buy the 35 version IV.

 

Hank

 

I have both the Nokton and the 35 lux asph latest version. I bought the nokton hoping it would get the job done and I could use the cash from the sale of the lux asph to finance another Leica lens.

 

I shot several self-assignments with both and there is no way the nokton would be my fast 35 choice. It is way too soft compared to the lux asph. I find the focus shift of the lux to be very manageable although it takes some getting used to.

 

JMHO

 

Woody Spedden

[Advertisement]

Hallo,

Look here: Leica M

[Woofer]

Please excuse my lack of knowledge here , but I have a 35 Cron bought 1992 , would that be a version IV , that I keep hearing about.

 

Thanks

[sean_reid]

I thought with the 28/2 Summicron and the 50/1.4 preASPH that I had my lens kit for the M8 sorted out. But I'm finding it's not quite right. On a film M I pretty much shot exclusively with a 50/1.4. Great stopped down when using the camera as a point and shoot with the hyperfocal distance set. Great wide open with beautiful transitions to OOF areas and great for low light. Once in a while I'd use a 75 at 2 or 2.8 for a portrait.

 

Now I really love the rendering of the 28 but I'm finding it a little wide. The 50 is better suited to my way of shooting but often I can't get far enough back to frame the scene as it's a 70 on the M8. I've been thinking about picking up a 35 summicron-M IV. I have owned the lens in the past and love it but it doesn't get me to 1.4. So I'm thinking trade the 28 and the 50 for a 35/1.4 ASPH if I can find one that doesn't have excessive focus shift. From what I've seen the 35 Summilux ASPH is closer to the 28/2 in feel then the other ASPH lenses and from the images I've seen it has a very pleasant bokeh closer to the preASPH lenses then most of the current Leica line up. Sean when are we going to see those OOF samples in your 35 reviews:) So what say you with experience with the 28/2 50 preASPH and 35/1.4 ASPH. How does the 35/1.4 signature compare to my 2 current lenses?

 

This is for my private shooting. For commercial stuff I'll still need a wide but for those applications I am always shooting stopped down to f8 - f16 and at those apertures any of the CV's or older Leica lenses will match the new expensive stuff. I also have a 90/4 Macro and I'm happy with that wide open for portraits and to take care of product shots while I am sans SLR. I hate having lots of lenses and the idea of one lens taking the place of 2 is really appealing. No wondering what to slap on the camera before you run out the door. I hate carrying a bag and living in the tropics I don't have any pockets to drop an extra lens into. For me less is more.

 

Hi Hank,

 

First of all, I will try to finish up those 35 mm OOF samples as soon as I can. The delay comes because I'm doing a lot of croppings, at several apertures, for all of the lenses. So, the prep work is really time intensive.

 

I think that if I had to work with only one lens on the M8, it would likely be the 35/1.4 ASPH. Stopped down, its more contrasty than I'd like and the focus shift may or may not pose a problem for you, but it's just a wonderful and versatile little lens. And I agree that the stop beyond F/2 is well worth having for anyone who works in existing light.

 

Should you give up the other two lenses for this lens? That's not for me to say and never would be. The 35 Ultron is, however, a way for you to see how much you love a 35 on the M8 without needing to sell the other two lenses. It's only a half-stop slower, of course, and its contrast is lower than many (which you may appreciate but which disappoints some people). Both the Ultron and the 35 Lux ASPH render beautifully in OOF areas. If you end up loving the Ultron, you'll have saved a ton of money. If not, you can sell it and go for the Lux ASPH. So that might be a good way to test the waters.

 

Cheers,

 

Sean