tgray Posted September 18, 2009 Share #21 Posted September 18, 2009 Advertisement (gone after registration) I love my 28 summicron. It's my favorite lens. I would be interested in a 28 summilux. That is until I saw the size and price. I have a feeling a 28 summicron would be pretty big and really interfere with the finder, which is problematic. Though f/1.4 would be really nice in low light situations... Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Advertisement Posted September 18, 2009 Posted September 18, 2009 Hi tgray, Take a look here 28mm Summilux?. I'm sure you'll find what you were looking for!
lars_bergquist Posted September 18, 2009 Share #22 Posted September 18, 2009 If the M9 will in fact give us a one stop advantage in noise, as Sean and others do quite plausibly argue it does, then just doubling the ISO will 'lux' all our Summicrons without any extra outlays or extra heft! The old man from the Age of Tri-X Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Jeff S Posted September 18, 2009 Share #23 Posted September 18, 2009 While I have the M8.2, not M9, the 28 cron asph is a wonderful lens...one of my all-time favorites...to the point that I have no interest in a potential lux. On the other hand, I enjoy my 50 lux asph far more than any 50 cron that I've owned. And, my 35 cron is a champ...but I never tried a 35 lux. Jeff Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
swamiji Posted September 18, 2009 Share #24 Posted September 18, 2009 Since when is there a 28mm Lux? I went with the 24mm, wishing for a 28mm. Sold my 28 cron and 50 cron to get it... But I have to admit... I love the 24 lux. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
innerimager Posted September 18, 2009 Share #25 Posted September 18, 2009 Agree with so many that the 28 cron is a very special lens. As to the hood, while Jono goes without and rids himself of the overly large hood that come with the lens, I went for a 35 lux hood which is enough smaller to make the kit a very agreeable size and I have not seen flare. (Not surprising if Jono doesn't without a hood altogether. He's a daring lad!) best....Peter Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
jonoslack Posted September 18, 2009 Share #26 Posted September 18, 2009 Given the number of lenses you have, you're not really a very effective cheapskate. <G> Cheers, Sean Hi Sean Actually, I like the little summarit so much, that I'm considering buying others! But, as you say, I'm not a successful cheapskate - I do sell lenses . . . but nearly always regret it again later! Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
guidomo Posted September 18, 2009 Share #27 Posted September 18, 2009 Advertisement (gone after registration) If the M9 will in fact give us a one stop advantage in noise, as Sean and others do quite plausibly argue it does, then just doubling the ISO will 'lux' all our Summicrons without any extra outlays or extra heft! ... And 'noct' all our Summiluxes... Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Bo_Lorentzen Posted September 18, 2009 Share #28 Posted September 18, 2009 Lars, agree, about "luxing" the crons.. (interesting sentences) More importantly, having all these wider luxes on the M8 really made it far more bulky than I enjoy, the M9 with a pocket full of cron's seems like the perfect anti-dote to over sized and over weight digital full frame cameras. BTW.. I still believe that the real line-up adjustment should be a 28lux and a 35noct out of respect for the M8 users... (and a 35 noct would by a load of fun on the M9 too) . Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
dfarkas Posted September 18, 2009 Share #29 Posted September 18, 2009 As Sean said, no mention of a 28 Lux. Stefan Daniel did say that some new lenses might be in the works, but offered no details. I asked about a reintroduction of a 28-35-50 Tri-Elmar, which he said that they would try. Better than a straight "no" or "I can't say." The 35 Cron ASPH is stellar on the M9. Really one of the best performing lenses I used on my trip. Unfortunately, I didn't get to use a 28 Cron. I opted to test out the 24 Lux instead, which also proved to be fun on the M9. I'm sure I'll be trying out as many lenses as I can on the M9 (if I can ever get my hands on one!). Sean, you're a lucky dog. David Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Marty Posted September 18, 2009 Share #30 Posted September 18, 2009 Luxes are nice and all but like Bo suggested the other advantage of M is size. Let's have more pancakes! Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
paisatge Posted September 18, 2009 Share #31 Posted September 18, 2009 Hi SeanActually, I like the little summarit so much, that I'm considering buying others! But, as you say, I'm not a successful cheapskate - I do sell lenses . . . but nearly always regret it again later! Is that the 35mm summarit? Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
sam3k Posted September 18, 2009 Share #32 Posted September 18, 2009 Luxes are nice and all but like Bo suggested the other advantage of M is size. Let's have more pancakes! Can't agree enough. I'd be more interested in a 24cron rather than a 28lux Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
jonoslack Posted September 18, 2009 Share #33 Posted September 18, 2009 Is that the 35mm summarit? HI There - yes indeed, almost a pancake, and with excellent quality to go with it. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
sean_reid Posted September 18, 2009 Share #34 Posted September 18, 2009 If the M9 will in fact give us a one stop advantage in noise, as Sean and others do quite plausibly argue it does, then just doubling the ISO will 'lux' all our Summicrons without any extra outlays or extra heft! The old man from the Age of Tri-X I thought about that to. It's not exactly the same but the ISO gain does help. Cheers, Sean Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
jplomley Posted September 18, 2009 Share #35 Posted September 18, 2009 That's actually focus shift if the lenses are spot-on wide open. Both lenses are spot on at f/2 and f/2.8 at the distances I tested them (3,6 12 feet). At f/4 and f/5.6 all of the DOF is behind the plane of focus (with the actual focus point being a tad softer). This would indicate to me that the plane of focus has shifted back, and that the only reason the focus point remains sharp is because of the DOF in front of the shifted focus plane. If the focus plane shifts further back than the front DOF coverage, than the focus point will be soft. But I'm always willing to be corrected Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
jonoslack Posted September 18, 2009 Share #36 Posted September 18, 2009 Stefan Daniel did say that some new lenses might be in the works, but offered no details. I asked about a reintroduction of a 28-35-50 Tri-Elmar, which he said that they would try. Better than a straight "no" or "I can't say." Hi David He must be getting fed up with that question - I asked him as well, and he agreed that it would be a good idea . . . here's hoping it'll be announced next week! Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
batmobile Posted September 19, 2009 Share #37 Posted September 19, 2009 HI There - yes indeed, almost a pancake, and with excellent quality to go with it. I would not call it pancake, as the CV 35 Pancake II is still far smaller than the Summarit 35, from my recollection about a 1-1.5cm shorter and about 100g lighter. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Archived
This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.