Jump to content

35mm R f/2.0 or f/2.8 - which is best?


Overgaard

Recommended Posts

x

No, I actually meant the other way around. The f/2.0 is less expensive 2nd hand than the f/2.8. And that's why I wonder.

 

My f/2.8 shots look great, but I had the f/2.0 for so short I really haven't tested it against the f/2.8. I just considered the f/2.0 the classic because that's what it is in the M class. And I too like the extra f-stop.

 

I haven't used the f/2.8 that much when I was doing film, but with digital it could be used more often.

 

... which reminds me I should look what Erwin Putts write. He must have compared them, at least on a theoretically level.

Link to post
Share on other sites

No, I actually meant the other way around. The f/2.0 is less expensive 2nd hand than the f/2.8. And that's why I wonder.

 

:eek: That's not my experience but I've not watched prices recently. The Summicron is definately the better overall lens, but if you don't need the extra stop the Elmarit is no worse AFAIK

Link to post
Share on other sites

In the big book (Leica lens compendium, by Erwin Puts), the Summicron is the better lens. The Elmarit is smaller and I would assume not visibly worse than the Summicron. In my opinion the Summicron is rather long and heavy for a 2/35 mm lens.

Link to post
Share on other sites

Archived

This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.

  • Recently Browsing   0 members

    • No registered users viewing this page.
×
×
  • Create New...