Unscientific test of 75mm Summarit vs. Summicron on M8

[tom0511]

Advertisement (gone after registration)

I really dont think a b&W chart at one distance and one fstop says much about a lens.

Said this I decided a 75 Summarit to my 75 lux and really like it. Even if the 75 cron was very slightly better, the 75 Summarit seems so good for me that I dont see paying the double for a 75 cron.

The 75lux stays at home a lot (mainly because of weight/size and because I dont use f1.4 much anyways at 75mm)

[rob_x2004]

So you are telling me you can pick sharpness from this chart between two lenses at different f/stops at close to min focus with almost imperceptible depths of field, in this light and no other at the iso you use when maybe the numbers or the letters dont quite fall on the in focus....between lenses that are designed to pick up the light and write differently and all hand held with....

 

Oh...I get it... Um. Tuesday? Seven grams of salt in a pack of chips?

 

ps....Charts are on different angles, or did you rotate one in photoshop when resizing?

[dalippe]

So you are telling me you can pick sharpness from this chart between two lenses at different f/stops at close to min focus with almost imperceptible depths of field, in this light and no other at the iso you use when maybe the numbers or the letters dont quite fall on the in focus....between lenses that are designed to pick up the light and write differently and all hand held with....

 

Oh...I get it... Um. Tuesday? Seven grams of salt in a pack of chips?

 

ps....Charts are on different angles, or did you rotate one in photoshop when resizing?

 

I don't get the salt/chip reference but I take it from the tone of your email that it is intended to be a rude remark. Well done. Perhaps you didn't carefully read the subject of the thread?

 

I'm not reaching any general conclusions, but it surprised me that the Summarit would be sharper at any distance, especially close distances since as Mark pointed out the Summicron has special corrections for close distances.

 

The different f-stop (2.4, 2.5) point seems a bit academic given the scale of the differences. Since the effect is clear for at least a few numbers around the focal plane (and for many of the horizontal lines which are twice as densely spaced as the numbers themselves) it would take a very particular misalignment of the cron and very repeatable focusing action on my part to consistently recreate the effect through misplacement of the focal plan (recall that I saw this effect on many shots). Doesn't seem like the most likely explanation, although of course anything is possible.

 

No rotating in photoshop.

 

Enjoy your chips.

 

David

[dalippe]

I really dont think a b&W chart at one distance and one fstop says much about a lens.

 

I'm sure that's right. I didn't set out to compare the lenses but rather to check each one's alignment. In doing so I noticed this fact and thought it might be interesting to others on the forum. As you point out, it is far from a comprehensive sharpness test. More of a curious fact...

 

David

[tom0511]

I'm sure that's right. I didn't set out to compare the lenses but rather to check each one's alignment. In doing so I noticed this fact and thought it might be interesting to others on the forum. As you point out, it is far from a comprehensive sharpness test. More of a curious fact...

 

David

 

A good thing is both lenses seem to focus pretty good

[rob_x2004]

I take it from the tone of your email that it is intended to be a rude remark. Well done.

 

Rude? No. Disparaging of your method and competence, yes. In effect you are happy to disseminate advice right or wrong by as much by coincidence as anything else, and frankly this sort of thing should be challenged.

[dalippe]

Advertisement (gone after registration)

Rude? No. Disparaging of your method and competence, yes. In effect you are happy to disseminate advice right or wrong by as much by coincidence as anything else, and frankly this sort of thing should be challenged.

 

If you can find a single piece of advice in my messages, please quote it. All I have done is state facts about what I did and what I saw. I stated them carefully because I was aware of the limits of what I had done and wanted people to be able to reach their own conclusions about their significance. My exposition was apparently good enough for you to determine that you take nothing away from these facts. Others might reach different conclusions. All of the facts are available for everyone's consideration. Read more carefully before you criticize. I think that qualifies as the first piece of advice I've given here.

 

For whatever it is worth, disparagement is rude pretty much by definition. Constructive criticism can be politely offered. But I think you described your tone very well with your choice of the word "disparaging." It is precisely such posts that diminish the forum.

 

By the way, what flavor are your chips?

[dfarkas]

FWIW at our store we avoid the buy it, try it, return it scenario by offering a test drive rental program for everything we sell. For example, someone can rent two lenses they are cosidering for about $25 each for a whole weekend, then apply 100% of the rental fees toward whichever one they choose to buy. In fact, anyone can apply all rental fees from the previous 30 days toward any purchase of a camera, lens, flash, or studio lighting (even if they didn't rent it).

 

We get very, very few returns becuase we try to make sure that we 1) give sound expert advice based on individual needs and 2) we allow people to try equipment on their own terms through rental. Maybe this is not practical for B+H, but the program is extremely popular with our customers.

 

David

Dale Photo & Digital

[JumpStart]

First off, as the originator of this thread

 

First, I don't think many people order many copies of the same lens and then return defective ones as unwanted. I think that most people order one copy each of similar lenses and then choose the best model for their needs. If they notice a defective lens, they return it as defective.

 

You are fooling yourself if you think you have come up with a new idea yourself. I have read hundreds of threads of people buying 2 different cameras, lenses..... you name it and then sending one or both back. They just wanted to try the camera out. It not only causes a shortage of products available to serious buyers, but costs the manufacturer and distributor a lot of money.

 

How do I know? I'm a B&H supplier. I sell about 30,000 DVD's a month - a small amount of that to B&H. I get the largest number of returns from B&H, all due to the return policy. Most of the DVD's are watchable, not damaged, etc. Others have damage we know was done by the customer. We still have to eat the product. The customer has in effect "rented" the product for the cost of return shipping.

 

It's not fair. To our small company, B&H, and other customers who are looking to honestly buy the product.

 

That's my 2 cents, and my 100th post.

 

DBK

[dalippe]

You are fooling yourself if you think you have come up with a new idea yourself. I have read hundreds of threads of people buying 2 different cameras, lenses..... you name it and then sending one or both back. They just wanted to try the camera out. It not only causes a shortage of products available to serious buyers, but costs the manufacturer and distributor a lot of money.

 

How do I know? I'm a B&H supplier. I sell about 30,000 DVD's a month - a small amount of that to B&H. I get the largest number of returns from B&H, all due to the return policy. Most of the DVD's are watchable, not damaged, etc. Others have damage we know was done by the customer. We still have to eat the product. The customer has in effect "rented" the product for the cost of return shipping.

 

It's not fair. To our small company, B&H, and other customers who are looking to honestly buy the product.

 

That's my 2 cents, and my 100th post.

 

DBK

 

I promised in a previous post to leave behind the debate about B&H's return policy, and I'll stick by that. But I can't help wonder what new idea you think I've claimed credit for??? Perhaps you've misread my post?

 

Anyway, it is new information to this thread that B&H actually returns the returned items to the distributors rather than resells them. Do you think this is true of cameras and lenses as well? What would a distributor do with such a returned camera?

 

Thanks for the info.

 

David

[JumpStart]

You seem to think that few, if any people do this buy many and return some idea. It is very common, and misused practice.

 

What did you think happened to returned merchandise? It went to merchandise heaven?

 

You are increasing the cost of goods, and ripping off the store and the manufacturer, and inconveniencing other customers.

 

DBK

[batmobile]

Rude? No. Disparaging of your method and competence, yes. In effect you are happy to disseminate advice right or wrong by as much by coincidence as anything else, and frankly this sort of thing should be challenged.

 

You are being rude.

 

The OP was made with no claims or pretence. The methods used were clearly explained. You are under no obligation to read it or care.

 

Your comments are objectionable and should be challenged. You have demonstrated a complete lack of common courtesy. If you feel the results are not particularly helpful or downright misleading, you could have explained it very politely along with suggestions to remedy...assuming the poster would be gracious enough to spare yet more of his time producing results for ungracious individuals such as yourself.

 

I own neither and have no need to 'defend one or the other'. Do you?

 

Please, this is a forum about cameras and photography about which we are all supposed to be enthusiastic. It is not a political debate upon which the fate of nations rests.

 

Rgds

[dalippe]

You seem to think that few, if any people do this buy many and return some idea. It is very common, and misused practice.

 

What did you think happened to returned merchandise? It went to merchandise heaven?

 

You are increasing the cost of goods, and ripping off the store and the manufacturer, and inconveniencing other customers.

 

DBK

 

Jumpstart (sorry, I don't know your real name),

 

With no offense intended, it is clear that you haven't read the thread very carefully. I think that if you take the time to do so, you'll decide that what I've said isn't so objectionable. I can see where you're coming from given what you think is going on.

 

But let me clear up a few points:

o I said that I think few people order many copies of the *same* lens in order to find the best copy. I think that many people order one copy each of similar lenses in order to discover which works best for them. The latter is what I did.

 

o I am definitely not ripping off B&H. In fact, I think they intend for people to use their return policy in the way I do. B&H salesmen have themselves suggested to me that I do this when I'm undecided between two lenses (for example, a salesman suggested I order both Canon 85mm lenses to decide if the L was worth the extra weight and cost). The few times I've done this, I am completely up front about what I am doing both at the time of sale (if I'm not ordering by web) and then later when I return one lens. I give as the reason for my return that I ordered two alternatives and this is the one I've chosen not to keep. The person accepting the return has never challenged the practice.

 

As a supplier, you might not be happy with B&H's practices, but I don't deal with you. I deal with B&H, and I honor both the letter and spirit of their return policy. If you don't like the way B&H deals with you, passing along the consequences of its return policy, then that seems to me to be between you and B&H.

 

As for what I think happens with the returned merchandise, if you read the thread more carefully you will see that most of us assumed gdi was correct in guessing it was resold to another customer and then debated whether or not we approved of such a practice. I won't rehash the arguments for and against that practice, but you can see where everybody came down on it if you'll just carefully read the thread.

[dalippe]

You seem to think that few, if any people do this buy many and return some idea. It is very common, and misused practice.

 

What did you think happened to returned merchandise? It went to merchandise heaven?

 

You are increasing the cost of goods, and ripping off the store and the manufacturer, and inconveniencing other customers.

 

DBK

I just checked the B&H website for their return policy. Excluded items include:

 

o All consumable items (e.g., film, tapes, paper, bulbs, CDs, DVDs, etc.) once opened.

 

Now there might be a distinction here between recordable DVDs and pre-recorded DVDs. I don't know which you sell, nor do I know which B&H means to exclude. But are you sure your experience is relevant to the question at hand? Are you sure your high rate of returns is related to their return policy, and that non-defective returns end up back at the distributor?

 

David

[pes084k1]

Sorry, I just don't think your results are much good. You should retry them using a tripod and delayed release. Failing that, it might be your M8 is out of alignment. The 75mm Summicron is one of the sharpest lenses and has close focus correction which the Summarit does not.

 

It is true that the Summicron is a very sharp lens, but the Summarit can be at least be as good at any stop from f/2.8 in most cases. It is a Xenotar design, like the famous Nikkor 105 2.5 AI/AIS, that on good (FMx/FEx/FA/F6) bodies, is known to have a terrific resolution and a very small "spot diagram" (way better than other praised Nikkor or Canon lenses). At f/2.8-4 on rich landscapes, I regularly get lot of aliasing with the 105 on a Velvia 50/100 and 5400 dpi scans, at 103 lp/mm, 35 Mp 4:4:4!!!

On D700, the rendition is idistinguishable from f/2.5 on, except for a slight vignetting. The Xenotar is a near-perfect design for medium apertures long focus lenses, with low changes of aberration characteristics with distance.

75 and 90 mm are more difficult designs than the 105 mm, but Leica provided slightly more elaborate rear elements and maybe more modern glass than Nikkor.

In my experience. Summicrons are more critical designs, albeit aspherical, and need floating elements for very good rendition in near field (the bokeh of the Cron 90 mm in portraits is a byproduct of a slightly insufficient correction in close quarters) at f/2.

Even the APO characteristic is less important today, since it increases the average spot size for green-yellow dominating in most photos, except with far landscapes with orange, red or redhancer filters.

It is better not to be a fan of some lenses/brand. Leica (as Nikon in the '60) recognized the superiority of a modern (1956), rather cheap, but somewhat tolerance-critical foreign design (by Schneider), and adopted it.

From my experience, Summicrons are characterized by a top microcontrast al low-medium frequencies (10-30 lp/mm), which may hinder ultimate resolution on today sensors and films, Xenotar maximizes flare resistance and resolution, at the slight expense of medium frequencies, that can be easily manipulated by proper sharpening and/or adjacency effects on slide film.

From these properties, I believe that Summicrons are top choices for f/2 shooting, hand held, and hazy or filtered landscapes, while Summarit are better for street work, urban landscapes and still life at optimal apertures (f/2.8-5.6) and medium-long distances. They should be about equal in less demanding studio portraits.

 

Elio

[01af]

The two shots below are hand-held ...

 

 

So not the most scientific test, but ...

Exactly. In other words, it is utterly pointless. If you know that then why do you keep reasoning about the implications?

 

Don't try to do "tests" when you're too lazy to get out your tripod. When you're ready to carry out a meaningful test eventually then don't forget to check out things like aperture-related focus shift at various distances, flaring and ghosting in back-lit situations, and bokeh.

[batmobile]

Plenty of useful lens testing can be done without a tripod if there is enough light. Focus tests are best done with a tripod for close up stuff, but can readily be done without with a little care and the right circumstances.

 

Heaven forbid the original poster should post a quick test, with complete honesty about the methodology, then go about using and enjoying his lenses.

[jlindstrom]

FWIW at our store we avoid the buy it, try it, return it scenario by offering a test drive rental program for everything we sell. For example, someone can rent two lenses they are cosidering for about $25 each for a whole weekend, then apply 100% of the rental fees toward whichever one they choose to buy. In fact, anyone can apply all rental fees from the previous 30 days toward any purchase of a camera, lens, flash, or studio lighting (even if they didn't rent it).

 

We get very, very few returns becuase we try to make sure that we 1) give sound expert advice based on individual needs and 2) we allow people to try equipment on their own terms through rental. Maybe this is not practical for B+H, but the program is extremely popular with our customers.

 

David

Dale Photo & Digital

 

Sounds like excellent practise. Can only wish my local camera store had this possibility. If I lived around your neck of wood, assuming price levels around the "market price", I'd definitely shop with you Here's hoping many others adopt policies like this.

 

//Juha

[Knomad]

 

 

 

Exactly. In other words, it is utterly pointless. If you know that then why do you keep reasoning about the implications?

 

Don't try to do "tests" when you're too lazy to get out your tripod. When you're ready to carry out a meaningful test eventually then don't forget to check out things like aperture-related focus shift at various distances, flaring and ghosting in back-lit situations, and bokeh.

 

I happen to be interested in seeing hand-held, real world results.

 

That's because when I want to shoot on a tripod, I generally use a medium format rig. I use my Leica for street, fashion, spontaneous art, things that would be defeated by the rigidity of a tripod. For me the Leica is about intuition and responsiveness. What's the point in evaluating a lens in ways that I rarely would use it, beyond the curiosity of an academic exercise?

 

So I think the OP's information is far from "utterly pointless." Please don't presume to speak for everyone on this forum.

[Advertisement]

Hallo,

Look here: Leica M

[Guest mc_k]

...

Exactly. In other words, it is utterly pointless. If you know that then why do you keep reasoning about the implications?

 

Don't try to do "tests" when you're too lazy to get out your tripod. When you're ready to carry out a meaningful test eventually then don't forget to check out things like aperture-related focus shift at various distances, flaring and ghosting in back-lit situations, and bokeh.

 

thread is from two years ago ...