Guest guy_mancuso Posted December 1, 2007 Share #21 Posted December 1, 2007 Advertisement (gone after registration) I should point out though Daniel the bokeh on the version IV is not bad and actually quite good and in normal area's really nice . It just does not handle that tree and stuff like it very well and gets Nocti looking. i did do a thread on the 35 version Iv that is very nice in this regards. I did not start that thread here though but i can give you a link to see it Leica 35mm Cron Version IV wide open - The GetDPI Workshop Forums Now i would also look at Seans test with the 35 cron ASPH which is a different lens all together from the version IV pre asph. This 35mm arena is going to be even tougher now to make a decision because there are a lot of options here. If i did not already have the Cron i would certainly look at the Summarit because it really is a sweety but speed maybe a issue. The 28 and 35 lenses sometimes get called into duty more than other lenses in the low light area so we have to remember what there overall job is to the shooter. Great stuff though and funny thing is i am on my third 35mm lens. Keep trying them and find what works for you Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Advertisement Posted December 1, 2007 Posted December 1, 2007 Hi Guest guy_mancuso, Take a look here Summarit 35 - Sean's Review. I'm sure you'll find what you were looking for!
sean_reid Posted December 1, 2007 Share #22 Posted December 1, 2007 That is exactly what i picked up on also. What i noticed in all of this is it seems leica made these for digital they kept the highlights from blowing than spread out the midtones while still retaining good contrast and very nice saturation. It does have a different fingerprint that for me on some shooting i really like a lot. i bought the 90mm , just love the short focus throw on it It's luck, actually, for those of us who prefer slightly lower contrast lenses. I had a discussion with Peter Karbe (Leica's head of optical design) earlier this year and he was intrigued by this question of lens contrast as it effects digital capture and the noise floor/dynamic range. In fact, he and I may keep discussing this via e-mail. As lens designers, however, Leica's team shoots for the usual optical goal of high contrast. But...the Summarits use simpler optical designs and the lucky side effect of this (for many of us) is that they show a bit less contrast as a result. Leica wasn't shooting for that, per se, but that's how it shook out. The Summarits are still high contrast lenses, but not so much so as certain Leica asphericals. Cheers, Sean Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest guy_mancuso Posted December 1, 2007 Share #23 Posted December 1, 2007 Well said Sean and one reason why i sold my 35 cron ASPH was the contrast was to high for the outdoor light here, i simply need something softer in contrast. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Paul Hart Posted December 1, 2007 Author Share #24 Posted December 1, 2007 Interesting indeed but what are Sean's conclusions? I didn't post Sean's conclusions because they are posted on his subscription site and I didn't think he'd take too kindly to me doing so. Anyway, thanks Guy for re-posting those two shots from the Summicron and the Summarit. I have the Summicron IV, but hadn't realised the bokeh could be so wild at anything other than f2. Perhaps it's that Arizona light (which we don't get here in the UK...) Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest guy_mancuso Posted December 1, 2007 Share #25 Posted December 1, 2007 Paul I think sometimes it acts like the Nocti maybe not as bad just the backgrounds is something to be careful of. i really like my Version IV and i do like the drawing or signature of that lens so i am holding on to it. Also the 35 cron IV does focus closer than the 35 summarit , not sure that was pointed out anywhere . But the summarit is 3 ft and the cron is 2.5 feet. BTW the Summarit as small as it is is a touch bigger than the cron IV. But at this size i call it a wash , there just small. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
lct Posted December 1, 2007 Share #26 Posted December 1, 2007 ...One of these days, you'll have to read these articles. I have a prominent Paris attorney discount program... Ha ha! Yes i'll study your discount program as soon as i'm retired i promise! Now Sean, sorry my friend but it is not with pics like this that it is possible to view if bokeh is harsh or not IMHO. Of course there is something subjective in bokeh but as far as i remember there is also common konwledge than an OoF rendition is 'harsh' or otherwise poor when it shows doubled lines and/or highlights get sharp edges so that they seem to be in focus instead of being in the background or the foreground. The Guy's pic above shows a good example of this re: quite ugly doubled lines that i have never got in 20+ years with my 35/2 IV. Hence my question to you Guy sorry again but are we discussing this very lens actually? Did you have it cla'd recently? If so we will have to dethrone the poor 35/2 IV i'm afraid as the Summarit would become the new 'King of Bokeh'. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
carstenw Posted December 1, 2007 Share #27 Posted December 1, 2007 Advertisement (gone after registration) LCT, did you forget some of the similar results I got in my 35mm comparison thread, where I decided that the 35 Lux Asph was the lens for me? None of the lenses were perfect, but I didn't see any evidence that the 35 Cron IV was any better on average than the other lenses I tested, and the soft flare it has wide open in almost every shot was a turn-off for me: http://www.l-camera-forum.com/leica-forum/leica-m8-forum/29964-35-lux-asph-vs-35-cron.html Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
sean_reid Posted December 1, 2007 Share #28 Posted December 1, 2007 Now Sean, sorry my friend but it is not with pics like this that it is possible to view if bokeh is harsh or not IMHO. Hi LCT, Why is that? Cheers, Sean Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
lct Posted December 1, 2007 Share #29 Posted December 1, 2007 Why is that?... Because your pic is not contrasty enough to show any doubled lines or bright OoF zones with sharp edges like these. 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! Link to post Share on other sites Simply register for free here – We are always happy to welcome new members! ' data-webShareUrl='https://www.l-camera-forum.com/topic/39251-summarit-35-seans-review/?do=findComment&comment=416715'>More sharing options...
sean_reid Posted December 1, 2007 Share #30 Posted December 1, 2007 Because your pic is not contrasty enough to show any doubled lines or bright OoF zones with sharp edges like these. Hi LCT, If a lens, such as the CV 40/1.4, shows what I think of as "caffeinated" bokeh then it indeed is visible in high or low contrast light. The 40 Nokton shows the sort of OOF you may be thinking of but not a good copy of the 35/2.5. Cheers, Sean Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
lct Posted December 1, 2007 Share #31 Posted December 1, 2007 ...The 40 Nokton shows the sort of OOF you may be thinking of but not a good copy of the 35/2.5... If i were a photo reviewer i would be quite pleased to loan or buy a Skopar and show you the same pics as above Sean, if any, but i'm but a poor lawyer with too much work in hand so i would be quite happy if you could show us some significant bokeh pics i.e with enough contrast to be usefull in this respect. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
marknorton Posted December 1, 2007 Share #32 Posted December 1, 2007 I didn't post Sean's conclusions because they are posted on his subscription site and I didn't think he'd take too kindly to me doing so. It would be surprising if the Summarit did not move things forward from the pre-ASPH version IV Summicron. 20+ years between them, I was using mine (Summicron) today, it's the smallest M lens I have and I like the results. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
JWW Posted December 1, 2007 Share #33 Posted December 1, 2007 Interesting posts on the 35's. I was doing some research a while back when I was looking at various 35's and had bookmarked this old post that had some interesting info and bokeh photos using leaves on the V 4 lens. Seems like this has been argued in the film world a long time: Leica and Rangefinders Forum: Sometimes the "King of Bokeh" wears no clothes - photo.net Jan Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
mas Posted February 8, 2008 Share #34 Posted February 8, 2008 Sean, you've saved me a considerable amount of money and helped me get some better images. Thanks. This whole thread combined with your 35mm review has done it again. I'm not trading my biogon for a summicron, and I am buying a skopar. BTW-How many asph versions are there of the summicron? I've been seeing vastly varying prices. B&H has a 9+ for $1700. Some electronics firm has them advertised for $1200+, but the new price appears to be about $2500 everywhere else. ??? Michael Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
mas Posted February 8, 2008 Share #35 Posted February 8, 2008 Hmm-Just realized that perhaps it would be better to wait for Sean's really soon-to-come imminent review of the CV 35/1.4. At least one person will be waiting impatiently to see that. Michael Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
adan Posted February 8, 2008 Share #36 Posted February 8, 2008 1. Only one version fo the Summicron 35 ASPH (optically) - there are of course chrome and black and likely titanium cosmetic versions. Condition and cosmetics will have a big influenece on used lens prices, as do thing like whether it comes with lens hood and caps and so on (those can make a $125 difference all on their own). 2. Guy's 'cron IV bokeh shot is PRECISELY what I got with mine (and with a second one I tried once just to make sure) @ f/2. But the "king o' bokeh" has very variable bokeh depending on subject-to-background distance, quality of light, and so on. I got some shots, with less busy backgrounds and focused closer, that looked almost mystical, perhaps even dreamy in the blurry parts. And others that looked like they'd been made with a 500mm mirror lens - all little circles in the background. That lens also has quite noticeable coma/astigmatism @ f/2 - small lights like Xmas lights take on a strong "V" shape (V pointing towards center of image) Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
carstenw Posted February 8, 2008 Share #37 Posted February 8, 2008 There is also at least one chrome screw-mount version of the 35 Cron Asph. I saw it in Leica Camera Berlin, and it is gorgeous! Expensive though. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
jklotz Posted February 8, 2008 Share #38 Posted February 8, 2008 Hmm-Just realized that perhaps it would be better to wait for Sean's really soon-to-come imminent review of the CV 35/1.4. At least one person will be waiting impatiently to see that. Michael Make that two Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
ChrisC Posted February 8, 2008 Share #39 Posted February 8, 2008 ...... Peter Karbe.... was intrigued by this question of lens contrast as it effects digital capture and the noise floor/dynamic range......., however, Leica's team shoots for the usual optical goal of high contrast...... Sean - Keep swimming against that particular 'tide'. I've long believed that a contrasty-lens combined with capture contrast to be a horrible combination; it was true for shooting transparency film, as it is true for digital. Perhaps the film lesson was slower to learn because you can't tell with certainty whether shadows and highlights are properly protected by checking a transparency on a light box with a loupe. As your reviews demonstrate; histograms tell the story of digital file capture explicitly. ............... Chris Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
newyorkone Posted February 8, 2008 Share #40 Posted February 8, 2008 Just to show the Bokeh between the Version IV 35 cron and the 35mm summarit. I stole these images from my Ugly test. Which i did intentionally to show bad light , ugly background and contrast . But as you will see a pretty big difference in the bokeh . Both shot at 2.5 Cron first. Also notice how the specular highlights held better on the Summarit for portrait shooter a very nice feature. Now i can recover a lotof this but this is what comes off the sensor, no adjustments at all here. Maybe reason I called it the Ugly test. My poor daughter is not though. LOL This is that Arizona sun light which maybe one the brightest in the world. It's really nasty shooting here with people , normally i would never do this intentional in this light but take them in the open shade Thanks Guy...very interesting. The Summarit bokeh is amazing. But I thought the v. IV 35 Cron was supposed to be the bokeh king? Guess not anymore... Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Archived
This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.