ho_co Posted June 26, 2008 Share #41 Posted June 26, 2008 Advertisement (gone after registration) f2.5 is half a stop slower than f2 is it not? Steve -- f/2.5 is 2/3 stop slower than f/2. Sequence in thirds of a stop: f/2.0 f/2.2 f/2.5 f/2.8 That's what makes the f/2.4 speculation so interesting: f/2.4 _is_ one-half stop slower than f/2.0. Maybe someone with a Summarit could compare metering at f/2.8 and at f/2.5? The lens may actually be close to a half-stop faster than f/2, despite its designation. I've seen comparisons of 35 Summarit and 75 Summarit; has anyone bought a 50 Summarit? Looks like less interest there. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Advertisement Posted June 26, 2008 Posted June 26, 2008 Hi ho_co, Take a look here Eyeballing the 75mm Summitar. I'm sure you'll find what you were looking for!
stunsworth Posted June 26, 2008 Share #42 Posted June 26, 2008 f/2.4 _is_ one-half stop slower than f/2.0 I don't believe that's true. I don't think it's as simple as dividing the difference between f2 and f2.8 by 2. I'll try to find the correct formula when I have time. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
luigi bertolotti Posted June 26, 2008 Share #43 Posted June 26, 2008 Hi Luigi, my question was not clear enough sorry. In fact i wanted to know if the Summarit 75 deserves its price as far as image quality. I've only used one 75mm lens personally but if you ask me why a late pre-asph 'lux 35/1.4 may cost more than a brand new 35/1.4 CV, for instance, i would probably respond that the CV is sharper at f/1.4 but the Leica colors are brighter as usual. Also as clear as i can view from pics displayed here, the sharpness and the bokeh of the Summarit 35 are really special to a point where i wonder if it is not better than my beloved 35/2 IV. So how about the 75/2.5 in this respect. Does it deserve its price as far as IQ in your opinion?BTW, the Summarit 75 costs really 5 (five) times more than the Heliar 75, at least in the USA. Hi Lct... I pointed a ratio of about 3,5 with a quick look at an European web dealer (300 vs. 1050) , surely in US$ can be indeed a different biz... Your important question "Does the 75 deserve its price" , needs an articultaed answer (fro me, at least) : - I am very satisfied with it... 3 or 4 days ago I posted a pair of pics taken with it in the "People" section and the IQ of the originals DNG is really stunning, for me (give a look... 21 June I seem... my youngest daughter is anyway worth to see... ) - So, I could simply say "It deserves its price" ... reasults are good, the price is about the lowest for a new Leica lens, all right. - But THERE IS clearly a specific competitor for this lens... the Heliar: I suspect that my results would have been VERY similar with the CV... and would had I taken the above pics both with Summarit and Heliar, compared the images, it's possible that I had concluded "well... it's ridicolous to spend 4-5 times for the Summarit..." - And so, enter the considerations I made in my previous post... Any buying decision, expecially in the "hobby/passion" area is partially irrational, can't help... Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
lars_bergquist Posted June 26, 2008 Author Share #44 Posted June 26, 2008 I don't believe that's true. I don't think it's as simple as dividing the difference between f2 and f2.8 by 2. I'll try to find the correct formula when I have time. You can't do that. The numerical aperture scale is logarithmic, not linear. 2.8 is 2 times the root of 2. The old man from the Age of the Slipstick Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
masjah Posted June 26, 2008 Share #45 Posted June 26, 2008 You can't do that. The numerical aperture scale is logarithmic, not linear. 2.8 is 2 times the root of 2. The old man from the Age of the Slipstick We've had this discussion on another thread! One half stop is a ratio or 2^(1/4). One third stop is a ratio of 2^(1/6). Howard's numbers are correct (to one decimal place). Whether the difference between one third of a stop and one half of a stop is of any significance at all in any practical situation is quite another matter! Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
luigi bertolotti Posted June 26, 2008 Share #46 Posted June 26, 2008 We've had this discussion on another thread! One half stop is a ratio or 2^(1/4). One third stop is a ratio of 2^(1/6). Howard's numbers are correct (to one decimal place). Whether the difference between one third of a stop and one half of a stop is of any significance at all in any practical situation is quite another matter![/quote] Yes... and deciding to announce the Summarits as "2,5" and not "2,4" is simply a marketing decision.... I wouldn't be surprised if between the four Summarits, one is effectively 2,43, another 2,52 and so... not certanly a scandal... Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
stunsworth Posted June 26, 2008 Share #47 Posted June 26, 2008 Advertisement (gone after registration) One half stop is a ratio or 2^(1/4). One third stop is a ratio of 2^(1/6). Howard's numbers are correct (to one decimal place) Thanks for the correction. I'll go and stand in the corner for 10 minutes wearing a dunce's cap. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
masjah Posted June 26, 2008 Share #48 Posted June 26, 2008 Thanks for the correction. I'll go and stand in the corner for 10 minutes wearing a dunce's cap. Steve LOL! But there's no need - your point was perfectly correct in principle - apertures don't change in arithmetic progression - only in this case they do turn out approximately that way because the numbers are small and given to just one decimal place. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
mhoersch Posted June 26, 2008 Share #49 Posted June 26, 2008 Comments like yours do completely ignore that years ago Leica stood at the borderline of bankruptcy. Did you ever reflect why ? And did you ever reflect why sales of the Summarits don't live up to Leica's expectations? Maybe there is a tiny difference between a Leica lens and a Mercedes car which escaped your notice? Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
luigi bertolotti Posted June 26, 2008 Share #50 Posted June 26, 2008 And did you ever reflect why sales of the Summarits don't live up to Leica's expectations? Maybe there is a tiny difference between a Leica lens and a Mercedes car which escaped your notice? Is there some sure proof of this ? The only Leica dealer of my (rather little) town told me he sold a dozen of Summarits in the last 3-4 months, 4-5 of Summicrons/Summiluxes, and has a Wate and a Macro Elmar 90 for display, hoping to sell... Not a significant example (you need big numbers to draw a trend) but so is here... Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
stunsworth Posted June 26, 2008 Share #51 Posted June 26, 2008 Is there some sure proof of this ? I believe the people who went on the recent trip to Solms were told this by Leica themselves. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
eekimel Posted June 26, 2008 Share #52 Posted June 26, 2008 Regarding the Summarits, I personally think the used market is to blame. The market is flooding with superb second hans lenses at moderate prices. Who would buy a Summarit 90 when you can get a mint Elmarit 90 for $700-1000? I most certainly would not. Maybe the only real alternativ is the Summarit 2.5/75. The 1.4/75 is a very expensive lens and the 2.0/75 is so recent that it is rare in the second hand market. I second your thoughts. While I bought a 75 2.5 Summarit, when I was eyeing an upgrade to my 35 2.8 Summaron, I was eyeing both a 35 2.5 Summarit and a used 35 ASPH Summicron. I wound up with the used Summicron -- in simply flawless condition -- for less money than the Summarit without the hood. Then, when one tacks on the hood price, it was way too one-sided. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Saloti Posted June 26, 2008 Share #53 Posted June 26, 2008 I know from a former Leica employee that Leica apparently had quiet aggressive business objectives with the Summarit-lens-series. Nobody of this forum, however, will have (or publish...) the truth about the comparison plan versus actual figures with regard to these sales. However, for me it is quiet evident, that they did NOT meet their objectives. The reasoning behind this : The biggest customer potential are those users, who ARE NOTusers of the M system so far (existing customers DO HAVE different M lenses). They were targeting NEW customers. New customers, however, would go (at least in 95% of the cases) for the digital M-version, which is M8. Driven by some inconsistent reasoning the Leica management, however, decided at the end of 2007, only a year after launching the M8 (with all insufficencies), to increase the M8 body price dramatically. Now - nobody will tell me that this measure has fueled M8 sales. Decreasing M8 sales, however, are not the best pre-condition to fuel Summarit-lens-sales, okay ? Now, can we deduct from unsatisfying Summarit-lens-sales lens quality ? Definitely not, following this reasoning. And - I prefer that USERS of the Summarit lenses comment on their quality, at least I am an owner of one of the Summarit- lenses (Manfred, this is addressed to you...), and - I use it. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Saloti Posted June 26, 2008 Share #54 Posted June 26, 2008 Just to add this: What is Leica doing by offering a set M8 + Summarit Lens for 5.000,- € ? They are completely neutralizing the M8 body price increase from end of year 2007.... Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
stunsworth Posted June 26, 2008 Share #55 Posted June 26, 2008 IDriven by some inconsistent reasoningthe Leica management, however, decided at the end of 2007, only a year after launching the M8 (with all insufficencies), to increase the M8 body price dramatically Indeed, I don't know if you went on the trip to Solms, but from what I've heard Leica now admit that was a mistake - at least that's what I've heard from people who went on the trip. Presumably the decision - and following sales - were one of the nails in Lee's coffin. The fact is that here in the UK Leica are currently offering a £400 rebate on a purchase of a new M8. To my mind that's a way of attempting to return the price to what it was before the increase without losing face. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
wizard Posted June 26, 2008 Share #56 Posted June 26, 2008 I believe the people who went on the recent trip to Solms were told this by Leica themselves. Actually, Steve, the point was somewhat finer. While Leica people said the Summarit line didn't sell according to expectations, what they also said was that the original expectations (by Mr. Lee) were way too optimistic. Wrong boundary conditions, so to speak. By Leica standards, the Summarit line DOES sell quite well, it is the unrealistic expectation that should be blamed. Andy Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
stunsworth Posted June 26, 2008 Share #57 Posted June 26, 2008 Andy, I'm sure you're right - I'm at a disadvantage since I've heard all of this third hand. Though in my defence I would say that I was responding to a post about whether sales had lived up to Leica's expectations. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Saloti Posted June 26, 2008 Share #58 Posted June 26, 2008 Indeed, I don't know if you went on the trip to Solms, but from what I've heard Leica now admit that was a mistake - at least that's what I've heard from people who went on the trip. Presumably the decision - and following sales - were one of the nails in Lee's coffin. The fact is that here in the UK Leica are currently offering a £400 rebate on a purchase of a new M8. To my mind that's a way of attempting to return the price to what it was before the increase without losing face. Steve, I have not been in Solms. I am just following a certain business logic in my reasoning. To be honest: I am not sure whether it is very intelligent to now give rebates in one country, compensate the mistake by a set price in the other country, etc. It would be more honest to simply reduce the price again and offer a voucher to those who have paid the new price in the last months. Even if they upgrade the M8 I do not see whay they should increase the list price. Around 5.000 € for just a body is simply too much. Full stop. We are in a world of price-less markets, it appears to me that Leica still operates in cost-plus terms (good morning the 70ies...). Leica cannot make consumers pay for mismanagement both with regard to pricing in general and product management. Andy, I can follow you. This is what I mean with "quiet aggressive sales objectives". New top managers tend to handle these big figures, very often reality destroys these MBO-dreams in a very short time... Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
stunsworth Posted June 26, 2008 Share #59 Posted June 26, 2008 would be more honest to simply reduce the price again and offer a voucherto those who have paid the new price in the last months. Even if they upgrade the M8 I do not see whay they should increase the list price It would be highly unusual for a company to offer a rebate that would have to be paid from profit already made - and possibly spent - unless forced to do so by some regulatory body. As for an increased price following an upgrade, wouldn't that depend on the cost of the upgrade to Leica. I'm sure if they could contain the cost if possible. To be honest my personal opinion is that the latest increases in price, for both body and lenses, have pushed Leica right to the edge of what people can afford. I don't think they can afford to push them much further, if at all, especially given the current economic climate. Until recently I bought most of my lenses new, but that's not something I can contemplate at the moment - just my personal perspective. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
gyoung Posted June 26, 2008 Share #60 Posted June 26, 2008 Yes... and deciding to announce the Summarits as "2,5" and not "2,4" is simply a marketing decision.... I wouldn't be surprised if between the four Summarits, one is effectively 2,43, another 2,52 and so... not certanly a scandal... Just as bad as selling all those 52mm lenses as 50mm!! Gerry Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Archived
This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.