What would you consider is the best bang for the buck in selecting a 'Leica'

[AllenB]

Advertisement (gone after registration)

35mm f/1.4 Summilux, which year, model number?  I understand that Zeiss and Voigtlander make outstanding lenses (I have a 28mm and 50mm Voigtlander), but I'm interested in getting a Leica 35mm 1.4 and if not new, would like to get some suggestions on which older versions are also outstanding.  I've been doing some research and watching videos, and it gets to be a bit overwhelming, so any help would be greatly appreciated.

[Al Brown]

They are all outstanding.
We just have to define your perception of outstanding.

[rpsawin]

I guess that would depend on what you want to "bang"...

[dpitt]

One important factor is the M body that you are using. From your previous posts, I assume that you want to use this 35mm on your M11. Then there is more to a lens than IQ and rendering alone. As @Al Brown said, all Leica 35mm M Summilux (F1.4) lenses are outstanding in some way. Unfortunately, none of them can be considered cheap 🙂

There is a clear difference in rendering and character between the pre-ASPH and ASPH models if you consider all Summilux 35 models. Our wiki lists 14 different optical designs (not all F1.4) from the 50s to now: Leica 35mm lenses wiki. If you are prepared to use a simple adapter for LTM lenses then you have an additional 5 options (none faster than F2.0)

One criterium for me on the M is size and weight. Certainly for the F1.4 class it can be a deciding factor. You can put your Leica M11 with a Summilux pre-ASPH in your pocket. Only a few ASPH 35s will allow for that.

Then there is the question of bang for the buck... I love the Leica Summicron (F2.0) range in general for a great balance between performance, price and size. But you asked for F1.4. This balance is very personal, but I would urge you to also consider some Summicron options.
 

 

Edited June 10 by dpitt

[AllenB]

1 hour ago, dpitt said:

One important factor is the M body that you are using. From your previous posts, I assume that you want to use this 35mm on your M11. Then there is more to a lens than IQ and rendering alone. As @Al Brown said, all Leica 35mm M Summilux (F1.4) lenses are outstanding in some way. Unfortunately, none of them can be considered cheap 🙂

There is a clear difference in rendering and character between the pre-ASPH and ASPH models if you consider all Summilux 35 models. Our wiki lists 14 different optical designs (not all F1.4) from the 50s to now: Leica 35mm lenses wiki. If you are prepared to use a simple adapter for LTM lenses then you have an additional 5 options (none faster than F2.0)

One criterium for me on the M is size and weight. Certainly for the F1.4 class it can be a deciding factor. You can put your Leica M11 with a Summilux pre-ASPH in your pocket. Only a few ASPH 35s will allow for that.

Then there is the question of bang for the buck... I love the Leica Summicron (F2.0) range in general for a great balance between performance, price and size. But you asked for F1.4. This balance is very personal, but I would urge you to also consider some Summicron options.
 

 

I think that's a great point to consider a Summicron f/2, I was only looking at the Summilux f/1.4 for that extra light gathering when traveling abroad and at times shooting when lighting is not optimal.  I figured I'd spend more on the 35mm since it is my preferred lens choice for street photography, and since I saved by purchasing a Voigtlander 28mm and 50mm f/1.5.  I was looking for the best bang for the buck in the $3000-$4000 range used.  

[Al Brown]

45 minutes ago, AllenB said:

I think that's a great point to consider a Summicron f/2, I was only looking at the Summilux f/1.4 for that extra light gathering when traveling abroad and at times shooting when lighting is not optimal.  I figured I'd spend more on the 35mm since it is my preferred lens choice for street photography, and since I saved by purchasing a Voigtlander 28mm and 50mm f/1.5.  I was looking for the best bang for the buck in the $3000-$4000 range used.  

Just bear in mind that every Summilux is also a Summicron, but not vice versa. Thank you for attending my TED talk.

[Jean-Michel]

Advertisement (gone after registration)

I have always used a Summicron, but that is just one choice. I know that there are some real, and sometimes not so real, differences between lenses, but those are totally meaningless if you simply use one lens. I have no idea nor care how the images I make with my current 35 Summicron (ASPH) would look had I made the image with some other lens. I am one of those who never owned more than one lens in a particular focal length. 

As it happens, my Leica dealer in Canada lists an almost new 35 Summicron ASPH for just over CDN$ 3,300, so well under your budget in US$. I am sure that you can find something similar closer to your home. I never make recommendations other than strongly suggest that one makes purchases from a legitimate and as local as can be Leica dealer.

 

Edited June 10 by Jean-Michel
typos

[Antonio Russell]

Summicron is all you really need. The rest is just GAS.

[AllenB]

1 hour ago, Antonio Russell said:

Summicron is all you really need. The rest is just GAS.

You may very well be right on both counts.  👍

[Jeff S]

To each his/her own.  I’ve been a Leica M user since the 80’s, starting with Summicrons (28/35/50), and later adding or switching to Summiluxes (35/50).  I’m now moving back to my roots, all Summicrons, trading my 35 Summilux ASPH v.1 for a 50 Summicron v.5 (formerly owned), and retaining both my trusty 35 Summicron ASPH v.1 and 28 Summicron ASPH v.1.  Summicrons provide the best fit and value for my personal style and use case.  My only uncertainty is whether to retain my 50 Summilux ASPH v.1, which has also served me well, but sees limited use wide open.  I probably should sell or trade it, but nothing else tempts (unless Leica reissues a modern MATE or bi-Elmar for travel).
 

Less is more for me these days.  Others have different priorities and preferences. But, as mentioned, all of these options are outstanding; no duds in the bunch.

Jeff

Edited June 10 by Jeff S

[costa43]

There are a fair few choices in your price range that will all work great. Do you prefer a bit of a vintage vibe in your lenses or do you want them to be as technically capable as possible? 
 

 

[Ernstk]

9 hours ago, Antonio Russell said:

Summicron is all you really need. The rest is just GAS.

That's just not the case. As @Al Brown succinctly said, every Summilux is a Summicron but not vice versa.

[justj]

Best bang for the buck and Leica does not belong in the same sentence.

[250swb]

A fast lens is no longer important for 'light gathering' using a modern digital camera, just up the ISO and it works better in dark corners than fast lenses ever could. So given there's only one f/stop difference between a Summilux and a Summicron it must be down to rendering wide open at f/1.4 and if you are ever going to prioritise creamy bokeh. 

[FrozenInTime]

The 35mm Summilux ASPH was the first Leica lens I bought new; the improved contrast and wide open sharpness was unlike anything else then available.

Some 25 years later I'm still using it, so that represents outstanding value, despite the shocking £1900 cost back then.

If you ever use film, that extra stop of light over a Summicron will save the day ( especially at night ! ).

[hansvons]

3 minutes ago, 250swb said:

A fast lens is no longer important for 'light gathering' using a modern digital camera,

Precisely. Wanting f/1.4 is primarily a look choice, whilst choosing an f/2 lens means in the M world smaller footprint. However, the pre-ASPH Summiluxes are pretty small, too, but you must like their signature glow and softness at full aperture down to f/2.4-2.8. I'm a 35mm guy and only own one 50mm Summicron for the rare occasion when taking headshots; the rest are three 35mm lenses. I do have a vintage-looking, glowy f1.4 lens in my arsenal (Nokton f/1.4, the better Steel-Rim copy). But this isn't an everyday lens. It's remarkable for those summerly party snaps when glows and flares can be wonderful. But other than that, I use mainly the brilliant 35mm Summicron ASPH, which offers tons of character without being super to-the-face with its look. And it's small and light. 

[dpitt]

1 hour ago, Ernstk said:

That's just not the case. As @Al Brown succinctly said, every Summilux is a Summicron but not vice versa.

 

11 hours ago, Al Brown said:

Just bear in mind that every Summilux is also a Summicron, but not vice versa. Thank you for attending my TED talk.

Technically you are right, the Summilux has F2.0 too. But a lens is more than just its aperture range.
In case of the Summilux pre-ASPH there is a "big" difference in rendering between the Summilux and Summicron pre-ASPH over F2.0 to F4.0 and when stopping down they get closer but never the same. I own both and they both have their strong points, e.g. the focus shift issue with the Summilux which the Summicron does not have.

In case of the Summilux ASPH, maybe these differences are smaller compared to the Summicron ASPH, I never had the opportunity to compare them myself.

Other than that, the form factor and weight is quite different (except for the pre-ASPH Summilux 35) which places them in a different category.

See this 

 

[crons]

20 hours ago, AllenB said:

35mm f/1.4 Summilux, which year, model number?  I understand that Zeiss and Voigtlander make outstanding lenses (I have a 28mm and 50mm Voigtlander), but I'm interested in getting a Leica 35mm 1.4 and if not new, would like to get some suggestions on which older versions are also outstanding.  I've been doing some research and watching videos, and it gets to be a bit overwhelming, so any help would be greatly appreciated.

It really depends on what you want. If you're into the best performing then get a new one. The old ones have a lot of "character" you may not want. 

Personally I go for f2 but if you're into f1.4 go for it. The old ones are small. The new ones are bigger and heavier. One of the reasons I prefer f2 summicrons instead. I seldom go below f4 anyway. 

[FrozenInTime]

5 hours ago, hansvons said:

Precisely. Wanting f/1.4 is primarily a look choice, whilst choosing an f/2 lens means in the M world smaller footprint. However, the pre-ASPH Summiluxes are pretty small, too, but you must like their signature glow and softness at full aperture down to f/2.4-2.8. I'm a 35mm guy and only own one 50mm Summicron for the rare occasion when taking headshots; the rest are three 35mm lenses. I do have a vintage-looking, glowy f1.4 lens in my arsenal (Nokton f/1.4, the better Steel-Rim copy). But this isn't an everyday lens. It's remarkable for those summerly party snaps when glows and flares can be wonderful. But other than that, I use mainly the brilliant 35mm Summicron ASPH, which offers tons of character without being super to-the-face with its look. And it's small and light. 

I do believe Summilux owners have more fun than Summicron owners 🙂

There is art in exploiting the character flaws of a classic 1.4 lens; there is a unique look to a modern aspherical lens wide open in bright sunlight at 1.4. 

[Advertisement]

Hallo,

Look here: Leica M

[patrickcolpron]

Best bang for the buck and Leica don't go hand in hand.

Not so expensive find an older Summilux FLE V1, without close focusing. 

This said, a much better lens in terms of rendering and pleasure to use for its small size, a 35 Summicron V4 can be found for less, has great rendering at f/4 and f/5.6 plus a unique bokeh or out of focus rendering at f/2 whereas the FLE isn't anything special wide open or even at f/2. 

This is one of those questions for which you will get a wide range of responses.

If money's no object, the true best bang for the bucks is the APO 35, again a Summicron lens. It is to me the king of all M 35 lenses.  I could live with just one lens and that one lens is the APO 35 M lens. 

But them again I seldom shoot wide open.