egibaud Posted November 19, 2006 Share #1 Posted November 19, 2006 Advertisement (gone after registration) if money was not a problem would you go for summicron or summilux? (35mm and 50mm) Is aperture the main difference? or are they more we should know about before buying either one? Any link of a good comparison review of both? It would be to use with the M8. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Advertisement Posted November 19, 2006 Posted November 19, 2006 Hi egibaud, Take a look here Summilux or Summicron?. I'm sure you'll find what you were looking for!
stunsworth Posted November 19, 2006 Share #2 Posted November 19, 2006 Summilux every time. They are a bit bigger and heavier than the Summicrons, but personally I think they're worth it for the extra stop. Wasn't it Wallace Simpson who said you can't be too thin or have too much money? She should have added, that you can't have a lens that's too fast :-) The current 50mm Summilux is an outstanding lens. I've been thinking of selling my Nocti and Summicron to buy one. The only reason I haven't is because I want to see how those two lenses perform on an M8. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
gdewitt Posted November 19, 2006 Share #3 Posted November 19, 2006 Summicron every time. One cannot have a lens that is too small and light. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
egibaud Posted November 20, 2006 Author Share #4 Posted November 20, 2006 Summicron every time. One cannot have a lens that is too small and light. Do you mean you prefer a slower lens as long as it is lighter? Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
cbretteville Posted November 20, 2006 Share #5 Posted November 20, 2006 If smaller is a point in it self the 50 Elmar-M is an outstanding lens. Even if it can't be fully collapsed on the M8. I use it more than the 50 'cron I have. I'm thinking allong the same lines as Steve, sell the 'cron off to get the 'lux ASPH even though I think the oof feel of the 'lux pre-ASPH is smoother than the ASPH. That said, I haven't used my 35 'cron (4th generation) since I got my 35 'lux ASPH in February. It's harder to get into a mode where I want to sell that one though, even if it would help raise the funds for the 50 'lux. - Carl Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
j. borger Posted November 20, 2006 Share #6 Posted November 20, 2006 If smaller is a point in it self the 50 Elmar-M is an outstanding lens. Even if it can't be fully collapsed on the M8. I use it more than the 50 'cron I have. I'm thinking allong the same lines as Steve, sell the 'cron off to get the 'lux ASPH even though I think the oof feel of the 'lux pre-ASPH is smoother than the ASPH. That said, I haven't used my 35 'cron (4th generation) since I got my 35 'lux ASPH in February. It's harder to get into a mode where I want to sell that one though, even if it would help raise the funds for the 50 'lux. - Carl I did sell a 50 lux pre-asph and 50 summicron to buy the 50 lux asph and simplify the "bag".... but added the noctilux after that. Am not sure if i would ever do that again: i really loved the look of the pre-asph lux and 50 summicron. Now i use the noctilux more than the lux asph ...... and wished i had kept the 50 cron to use along with the Noctilux, for the occasional case i want the smallest package. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
cbretteville Posted November 20, 2006 Share #7 Posted November 20, 2006 Advertisement (gone after registration) Good feedback. Allthough, if the M8 happens for me I can forget more glass for a while..... - C Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
rosuna Posted November 20, 2006 Share #8 Posted November 20, 2006 What is your experience with the 35mm Summilux ASPH? Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
cbretteville Posted November 20, 2006 Share #9 Posted November 20, 2006 Ruben, I really like it. Yes it block the VF, but I mostly use a Heavystar hood I picked up on eBay which makes things better. Its heavier and bigger than my 35 'cron, but it isn't that big. The images I get with it are just outstanding and imho makes the extra size and weight worth it. Here are a few examples: Håkon's hall #1 photo - Carl Bretteville photos at pbase.com Håkon's hall #2 photo - Carl Bretteville photos at pbase.com Men at work photo - Carl Bretteville photos at pbase.com - Carl Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
lars_bergquist Posted November 20, 2006 Share #10 Posted November 20, 2006 The thing to remember is that the old days and the old rules of thumb are gone: You do no longer necessarily sacrifice image quality to speed. The old 35 mm Summilux for instance was a real dog, comatose and prone to a veiling glare from all highlights that made the lens practically useless at apertures larger than 1:4. Today's Summilux ASPH is a super lens. The difference between it and the 'Cron, f-stop for f-stop, is really negligible. You will never notice it, except for one thing: the extra speed. Similarly, the 50 mm Summilux ASPH is a fabulous optic (though the old 'spherical' 'Lux was no slouch either) and the 28 mm Summicron may well be the best of all Leica lenses shorter than 90 mm. And Hosanna, I do own and use them all. -- As for the new 28 Elmarit, it seems actually marginally (very marginally) inferior to the 'Cron. So the only things that speak for it are actually the price, and bulk perhaps. I must add that while the 50 mm ASPH is only slightly better than the 'Cron on the optical bench, it is far superior in practice because of its excellent resistance to flare and reflexes, an area where the 'Cron really doesn't shine (except where it shouldn't!) So I bought the aspherical and sold both the Summicron and my old Summilux, and that was a good decision. The old man from the Age of Flashpowder Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
TimF Posted November 20, 2006 Share #11 Posted November 20, 2006 The old 35 mm Summilux for instance was a real dog, comatose and prone to a veiling glare from all highlights that made the lens practically useless at apertures larger than 1:4 It might be a dog, but I love it. If I had the cash then maybe I'd buy an aspheric 'lux again for widest aperture work, where it is undoubtedly superior, and use the older lens for everything else. It has a rendition which is unique. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
rosuna Posted November 20, 2006 Share #12 Posted November 20, 2006 Thanks Carl !!!!!!! I am waiting for my 35/1.4 ASPH. I first bought a 28/2 ASPH but I wear glasses and I can't see the lines. The 28mm lenses have the framelines of 28mm lenses (a bit reduced due to the lower magnification of the finder), but they provide the angle of vision of a 37mm lens. In addition, I prefer a narrower angle of view and an extra stop. I find the noise of the M8 too high. This is the truth. An extra stop is very convenient. At ISO 160 and 320 the pictures are noise free. At 640 the noise is acceptable, but can see chromatic and luminance noise (on the screen computer). ISOs 1250 and 2500 are not usable for me. The white balance of the M8 is horrible. Erratic and mostly erroneous for a wide margin in every case. Capture One LE is a ridiculously featureless aplication, but the conversions are good. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
j. borger Posted November 20, 2006 Share #13 Posted November 20, 2006 ....... The old 35 mm Summilux for instance was a real dog, comatose and prone to a veiling glare from all highlights that made the lens practically useless at apertures larger than 1:4. .............. That's s quite a statement about one of my all-time favourite Leica lenses ........ (and i own several asphericals i might add) ... it's the king of creamy and the king of midtones if you ask me! It has the Leica signature in spades ..... you are right it is not the best wide open .... but perfectly usable! Well if it's good enough for Koudelka to use as his main Leica lens these days ... it can't be that bad;) Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
kamilsukun Posted November 20, 2006 Share #14 Posted November 20, 2006 Eric, You may also see the thread http://www.leica-camera-user.com/digital-forum/7783-cron-vs-lux-only-stop-advantage.html for other comments on the subject. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
craigrmurray Posted November 21, 2006 Share #15 Posted November 21, 2006 The old 35 mm Summilux for instance was a real dog... Sure can't agree with you there, Lars. I got my 35 'Lux (I don't know what year, but still has infiity lock) back in the '80s to replace a 35 'Cron that was stolen (along with M4-P, 2 R4s and buttload of other lenses). I've used it since as my normal lens --mostly in B&W -- and have always thought the results to be stellar. I might have to retire in now for shooting with the M8, since I don't see anyone making the 486 IR Cut filters in Series sizes. Did Leica really make any doggy lenses in the bayonet era? I used to think my 135mm f4.5 Hektor was doggy, but others have since praised it. Any other thoughts out there? Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
wbesz Posted November 21, 2006 Share #16 Posted November 21, 2006 Summilux, ..naturally. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
egibaud Posted November 21, 2006 Author Share #17 Posted November 21, 2006 Thank you very much for feed back so far. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
SteveYork Posted November 21, 2006 Share #18 Posted November 21, 2006 It all comes down to whether you need the extra stop of speed. Examine your shooting habits and subjects. If you do any type of indoor shooting, then a Summilux is valuable. But if you don't need the speed, why carry aroung the bigger and heavier lenses? There's something very convenient about the small Summicrons. I recently sold my 35mm Summilux ASPH, because with film I'm a 50mm guy, but have regreted that decision ever since. I do believe in the digital arena where you can change ISO speeds between frames the need for fast lenses is mitigated somewhat. Having said that, if I were to go the M8 route, I would probably try to pick up a 35mm Summilus ASPH also, because that would be my main lens. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
albertwang Posted November 21, 2006 Share #19 Posted November 21, 2006 Summilux especially if you are doing digital. The extra stop will be handy rather than jacking up the ISO. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
MP3 Posted November 21, 2006 Share #20 Posted November 21, 2006 The current production version of all lux are superb lens, my genuine choice. The extra stop is what make a critical difference when it is in need. For the speed advantage, it worths the extra size absolutely. The fingerprints are from classic smoothness to modern sharpness, from 75 to 35 asph to 50 asph. I own the 35 and 50. For the 75, I now own the 75 Cron due to its relative compactness, though I believe one day I will change it to the Lux as well. Cheers Matthew Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Archived
This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.