35mm Summilux vs Summicron ASPH comparison

[agiknee]

Advertisement (gone after registration)

I have the 35luxFLE (1st gen) and the 35Cron Asph (1st gen). I'll do a test Thursday after my work day and I'll post results

[Advertisement]

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

[Jeff S]

My Summilux ASPH v.1 has marginally less tendency to flare and focus shift than my Summicron ASPH v.1, both aspects easily addressed in practical use. Otherwise, differences come down to speed, size/weight and ergonomics (including hood). Any rendering characteristics such as color, contrast, etc can be controlled in shooting and/or PP, including print decisions. Screen comparisons, especially by others, don’t have any significance for me.

Jeff

[jakontil]

On 12/12/2022 at 9:00 AM, Huss said:

I did not find my Summicron 35 Asph v1 harsh or clinical.

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!

I agree with Husss, I used fle and cron and i didnt find it harsh or clinical, at some substances, the cron renders very fine for f2

the size matters much for me, claiming that the fle is not much different in terms of size is a bit underwhelming, both hoodless 

At the end of the day, im sticking with either cron or the reissue SR summilux

Edited December 13, 2022 by jakontil

[PeterKKB]

12 hours ago, agiknee said:

I have the 35luxFLE (1st gen) and the 35Cron Asph (1st gen). I'll do a test Thursday after my work day and I'll post results

 

Thanks, I would be really interested to see the results! I'm more interested in the rendering than any zoom-in sharpness comparison, essentially how they would handle the same landscape or portrait in a way. 

Edited December 13, 2022 by PeterKKB

[PeterKKB]

On 12/12/2022 at 3:00 AM, Huss said:

I did not find my Summicron 35 Asph v1 harsh or clinical.

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!

That's a brilliant image wow. How does the FLE compare to the non-FLE ASPH Summilux? I know about focusing distance, focus shift etc, I'm referring more to rendering. 

[PeterKKB]

19 hours ago, KFo said:

1/4: next?

Barcelona Plaza should be Summicron, also the Barista above I would say Summicron as well, the other 2 more difficult to call I think. 

Edited December 13, 2022 by PeterKKB

[Huss]

Advertisement (gone after registration)

1 hour ago, PeterKKB said:

That's a brilliant image wow. How does the FLE compare to the non-FLE ASPH Summilux? I know about focusing distance, focus shift etc, I'm referring more to rendering. 

Thanks!  I don’t know as I have never used a non FLE Lux.  But… here’s the thing.  I’ve found what matters much more than anything is subject/composition/lighting.  Then gear.  Leica makes great lenses, so I’m sure that one will be great too.

Some people can detect the fine nuances in lenses. I can’t, or at least do not pay attention enough!  I just focus on does the complete pic look good to me?  When I look at my catalogue, my favourite shots have been taken using lenses from Pentax, Minolta, Nikon, Zeiss, Voigtlander, Olympus, Fuji.  And Leica.

So why do I use Leica cameras and lenses?  Because I love the way they feel, are built and handle.  As well as the results.

[Jeff S]

I think the ‘magic’ happens, or not, by the user. Otherwise, everyone would produce magic just by lens choice. Analyzing fine nuances of bokeh and such bores me to death, and has nothing to do with wonderful pics/prints IMO.
 

A competent user (photographer/editor/ printer) can produce myriad renderings using any given lens, and any given picture. Some make good choices/decisions, some don’t… well after camera/lens choice. Yes, fine nuances matter, but nuances based on shooting, editing and printing decisions and judgment by the user, not inherent in the gear. Other than maybe at f/1.4, none of my print viewers know or care whether I used my Summicron ASPH or Summilux ASPH, even those with a discerning eye. 

Jeff

[Huss]

5 hours ago, Al Brown said:

This is where the magic happens.

What magic? Spells? Potions?  The magical ability to suddenly be able to take Pulitzer prize winning photos because you happen to pull out a Leica lens instead of one made by someone else?

The uncomfortable but harsh reality is if someone just posted a pic on this site, with no comment to it, and just asked ‘what lens did I use?’    no-one would know.

[Huss]

23 minutes ago, Al Brown said:

The brand has absolutely nothing to do with it. It is the magic of knowing the exact limitations, benefits and abilities of each lens one uses and using that to one’s advantage. The DoPs spend days or even months testing lenses for movies so they could tell a certain visual story in a certain way and wrap up the director’s ideas. Some even help design lenses for a specific project, like DoP Grieg Fraser who co-designed ARRI ALFA anamorphic lenses with the company and which were used on The Batman. I am sure you have heard of Kubrick’s Barry Lyndon and his use of Zeiss f/0.7 lens he borrowed from NASA for his award winning candlelight shots in the movie. True there is no Pulitzer prize, but there is an Academy Award for Cinematography and hugely respected societies called ASC and BSC - one even got a special edition Leica M dedicated to their work which also consists of the ability to pick the proper lens for the job among other magic they do.

Yes, this is where the magic happens.

Ok now put that into perspective for Leica 35mm rangefinder photography.  None of your examples have anything to do with that, the topic we are discussing.  

[Huss]

8 hours ago, Al Brown said:

Putting in perspective: it has been one of the most asked questions in Leica history since the sixties: summicron or summilux wide open for telling a certain story. The glow of pre-asph 35 or the poppy look of modern 35 cron… etc. etc.

With modern M ”Karbe” 35mm lenses this question has diluted substantially, but in my case and perspective, I still have 3 35mm lenses and one 40, each completely different in render, looks and flaws. Will you be able to tell the difference when looking at my photographs? No idea, but I certainly will. And that is all that matters.

 

You can talk yourself into believing anything.  The only time you may be able to see the difference is wide open.  I can post four pics of the same subject taken w four different 35mm lenses at say f4 and you would not be able to tell which lens was used for which picture.  At 1.4 or 2 you may be able to due to examining the bokeh if there are leaves in the background, but unless there are aids like that you will be hard placed to pick accurately.

I think I’ll do that this weekend and see who can pick which lens took which pic.

[Huss]

12 minutes ago, Al Brown said:

I am only debating wide open, how I shoot 95% of the time. As per post #40, first sentence.

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!

Agreed, but I'll post some pics taken wide open with my 35s, and see if people can pick them out.

[Huss]

Ok, so for fun I took one pic of this static scene with my M10R, using my CV 35 1.4 v2, Lux FLE v1 and Distagon ZM 1.4.  All at 1.4.  No profile.  DNG left untouched, just converted to jpeg in LR, same methodology for all three images.

I just sat on my couch and shot the scene consecutively - framing would have been better to match shot to shot if I used a tripod.  But there you have it, nothing scientific, just trying to see where this 'magic' is at 1.4.

Guess which lens took which, and also just say which one you like the most.  Also no color/wb correction in post.  This is how the M10R processed it. 160 ISO @ 1/30 sec at 1.4 for all of them.

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!

[archive_all]

3 hours ago, Huss said:

Ok, so for fun I took one pic of this static scene with my M10R, using my CV 35 1.4 v2, Lux FLE v1 and Distagon ZM 1.4.  All at 1.4.  No profile.  DNG left untouched, just converted to jpeg in LR, same methodology for all three images.

I just sat on my couch and shot the scene consecutively - framing would have been better to match shot to shot if I used a tripod.  But there you have it, nothing scientific, just trying to see where this 'magic' is at 1.4.

Guess which lens took which, and also just say which one you like the most.  Also no color/wb correction in post.  This is how the M10R processed it. 160 ISO @ 1/30 sec at 1.4 for all of them.

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!

If I had to guess I'd say 1. FLE, 2. CV 1.4, 3. Zeiss.

[anickpick]

1. Zeiss (highest resolution in the plane of focus, smooth, modern oof rendering)

2. CV (lowest resolution, a bit of glow, classic oof rendering)

3. FLE (typical modern Summilux drawing - best impression of three-dimensionality)

Edited December 15, 2022 by anickpick

[Pyrogallol]

I can see the black cat.

[Cobram]

9 hours ago, Huss said:

Ok, so for fun I took one pic of this static scene with my M10R, using my CV 35 1.4 v2, Lux FLE v1 and Distagon ZM 1.4.  All at 1.4.  No profile.  DNG left untouched, just converted to jpeg in LR, same methodology for all three images.

I just sat on my couch and shot the scene consecutively - framing would have been better to match shot to shot if I used a tripod.  But there you have it, nothing scientific, just trying to see where this 'magic' is at 1.4.

Guess which lens took which, and also just say which one you like the most.  Also no color/wb correction in post.  This is how the M10R processed it. 160 ISO @ 1/30 sec at 1.4 for all of them.

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!

1. fle

2. cv

3. zm

[PhoToad]

1: Lux

2: VM

3: Zeiss

[Advertisement]

Hallo,

Look here: Leica M

[Jean-Michel]

7 hours ago, Al Brown said:

I did the same.

I took 3 representative images with my three 35mm lenses - 35 lux FLE, 35 summicron and 35 Old Delft all wide open. I was careful to pick the proper subject so the difference can clearly be seen, just like the poster above. The images were shot from the couch in my cellar. Lights off. At night.

Can you tell which is which? No cheating with the EXIF!

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!

If you close your eyes, the details in each image are simply amazing. 💡

[maxfairclough]

I cannot speak for everyone, but a few years ago when I was looking at entering the Leica world for the first time, Leica had loaned me an M10 with a 35mm Summilux 1.4 FLE. 

I shot with it for a month. I loved how it rendered everything. 

I purchased a Leica M10 but ended up buying a Summicron (deal with the M10). I had read a lot about how contrasty it is, which is what I prefer over sharpness. I have a few Summicrons now and in love with them, but one thing I remember about the 35 Lux is how clinically sharp it felt at 1.4. 

You can't go wrong with either. Having both, I do prefer the cron for my own reasons. But the Lux is brilliant and sharp, Tthat's all I remember about that lens and the only experience I can compare it too. Oh and it felt slightly bigger/loner than the Cron, and I prefer a smaller lens.

Anyway photo of my brother shot at 1.4 with the Lux. It is nice. I agree you are probably splitting hairs between them if shot at f/4 etc.

 

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!