PDA

View Full Version : Summarit Series 35,50, 90 IMAGES



Guy Mancuso
16th November 2007, 15:03
Well before i get a chance to actually test these lenses , i got to shoot them for real pay this morning. i had one job left to shoot before T day so i brought the Summarits and did some real world shots with them. Today was Silent Witness Charity Golf tournament to raise money for the program. As most Americans know of Silent Witness programs in each city. I will explain it to our international friends. Silent Witness is a program where people can give anonymous tips on the location of known criminals that just created some bad news to the community. Like murder,robbery or some other bad crime and folks call in tips on there location and they do get a reward upon capture and conviction. Great program that actually works.

So today i loaded one body with just the Summarits and used only those lenses on it all day so i knew the whole card was from the new lenses. I just shot with it than i also did casual compares with the 35 cron version IV, 50 lux very little of and a ton of 90 cron vs 90 sum. So on this thread i will just show Images from the Summarits , than on another thread which i will start it will be some comparsions between them .


I am loading LR 1.3 also , so a fresh lenses and fresh software. For now I will NOT and repeat NOT WB these. Straight from the camera.

Okay I shot these early so the light will be warm

From the 35mm 2.5 Summarit
126

This one was shot at 5.6. Look how well there holding the backlight

Guy Mancuso
16th November 2007, 15:07
Now watch this we go from 2.5, 2.8, 4, 5.6 watch the background i am focused right on the door , also handheld for everything you are seeing

Guy Mancuso
16th November 2007, 15:13
Little hard to tell the bokeh here on the avbove ones but i will do that test for sure with a different subject . Here is the 35mm again 5.6 actually both are. Nice color and contrast , very Leica looking

Guy Mancuso
16th November 2007, 15:23
Just a couple more with the 35mm. i shot about 130 images with the Summarits , so not to much because i was actually working so wanted to be careful. Now this is early light and i can really make the images sing if i played around with them in LR which i am NOT doing at the moment. Really just want you to see what is coming off the sensor, so running all default here

Guy Mancuso
16th November 2007, 15:34
Let's move on to some 90mm 2.8 since i was shooting golf . i used this and the 90 cron a lot but these are all shot around F4 or 5.6 again wanted to be careful because not sure how these lenses are working and I noticed i did some back focusing, that was me though. These are on target though. Should mention the time around 8:25 so light still pretty low but the colors are getting more daylight looking

Guy Mancuso
16th November 2007, 15:35
Not sure everyone remembers Alice Cooper well he owns a bar here in town and also resides here and a few ladies from the restaurant above in there work outfits. They all dress like his style when he performed. BTW very nice guy

Guy Mancuso
16th November 2007, 15:42
okay moving on to some 50 2.5 shots . nothing wide open F4 and 5.6 but the quality is there folks , these are sharp and i am also noticing on the web only looks a little chunky but on screen very smooth and sharp. Gotta run for now but this was just some quickies so you can see some of the qualities of them. Lot more to come

Guy Mancuso
16th November 2007, 15:47
trying something here turning everything off in LR 1.3

Guy Mancuso
16th November 2007, 15:48
Must be jpeg compression which is 8

robsteve
16th November 2007, 15:48
Guy:

The forum software is resizing them to 750 pixels wide from your 900 pixels. This is where they are getting "chunky".

They look a bit on the cool side. How did they compare to the other Leica glass in regards to color temperature?

Robert

Guy Mancuso
16th November 2007, 15:50
Robert your right . If you click on them they look so much better. Hey i can control this one. Watch this , i will just bump it to 900.:D:D:D:D

robsteve
16th November 2007, 15:53
They also don't seem to have the contrast/color I am used to seeing. Is this the lens or a processing/posting problem? For example, the coat of the horse looks a little dead.

Guy Mancuso
16th November 2007, 15:54
Well i am not doing anything either Robert. Let me work one

robsteve
16th November 2007, 15:58
Well i am not doing anything either Robert. Let me work one

Are you using the fill light slider in Lightroom? That can cause the images to loose some snap/contrast.

Guy Mancuso
16th November 2007, 16:12
Nothing yet very early light so color is very warm. i will play more later and post some done up , my little Jack wants some of Dad's attention right now

Guy Mancuso
16th November 2007, 16:17
Folks click on the photo's for now to see them better.

Guy Mancuso
16th November 2007, 16:27
I had this forum set up for 900 pixels not sure what changed that . Jack HELP:):)

Guy Mancuso
16th November 2007, 16:40
Here Robert little cleaner looking

Guy Mancuso
16th November 2007, 16:48
We fixed it:D

Guy Mancuso
16th November 2007, 17:08
Let's see a 50 Summarit and a 50 lux

Guy Mancuso
16th November 2007, 17:10
Pretty darn good

KurtKamka
16th November 2007, 17:11
Thanks for posting these, Guy. Definitely a bit of a different signature look to the images. Not a bad thing at all, just different yet still Leica. Reminds me of how the 28-90R zoom looked. It's almost like there is a bit of grittiness in the look. I'm thinking that it might be great to have a 75 or 90 to use as a light lens to carry around in a small kit.

Kurt

Guy Mancuso
16th November 2007, 17:19
Just casual viewing it seems a little more gritty Kurt like you said. There sharp so that is not a issue. The 90mm is a touch stiff to focus and a little tough to stick it. i missed several but brand new lens and it just needs to wear in. Nothing new there most lenses are like that especially the longer ones. We have to remember the early light too which not WB will look warm. But that's okay i still have a lot to do , nice to just go shoot them and get a feel for them. Travel no question they fit that bill perfect. The 35 is actually a fraction bigger than my Version IV cron. When there this small how much can you complain about that. LOL

Jack
16th November 2007, 17:25
I'm thinking that it might be great to have a 75 or 90 to use as a light lens to carry around in a small kit.

Kurt

Took the words right off my keyboard Kurt! I'm thinking a tiny 90 at only 1/2 stop slower and about 1/2 the size(!) of my Cron AA would be very cool for a travel lens.

Guy Mancuso
16th November 2007, 17:30
Filter size difference is 46 vs 55 so the barrel is thinner and it is shorter. i will set up the studio and compare the size folks , just ran out of time today. Went from 7:30 to 3 pm on this job. Good night rest after two weeks of hell work , i will be swinging again

Just wish i was in a nice location to shoot these. Like Moab. Announcements coming next week on that BTW. LOL

Terry
16th November 2007, 19:27
Took the words right off my keyboard Kurt! I'm thinking a tiny 90 at only 1/2 stop slower and about 1/2 the size(!) of my Cron AA would be very cool for a travel lens.

And you took the words right out of my mouth. Only a tiny bit bigger and more than a stop faster than the Macro Elmar.....

robsteve
17th November 2007, 04:30
Let's see a 50 Summarit and a 50 lux

am still not sure about the colour/contrast of the Summarits compared to the APO or ASPH lenses of the same range. From looking at Guy's puctures, the lenses are certainly sharp, but are still missing something. They have the look of the older lenses, color/contrast wise, but do not have the smooth colour and high contrast of the APO/ASPH equivalents.

For example , in the 50mm sample Guy posted the grass and the colours are better on the 50mm Lux shot.

Shootist
17th November 2007, 04:49
Yeah but at twice the cost. Somethings got to give somewhere.

If I didn't already own 2 50's, 2 90's, 1 75 and a 35 I'd seriously LOOK at these lenses.

Guy Mancuso
17th November 2007, 04:49
Robert i have a feeling these lenses are more Cron feeling than Lux feeling. i have a couple compares to put up today, just a few for now but that is something i want to see also is how do they look against the Lux lenses and the soft feel of the 35 mm version IV.

Now if i can talk little Jack into being my model today , we may have something. 10 dollars , movie and popcorn may do the trick. :D

Guy Mancuso
17th November 2007, 05:03
Here is another 50mm summarit than i will load three from my lenses after 147


Now these two are from my 35mm cron Version IV149

Than a 90 cron Apo150

The Coke sign is a 35 cron version IV

all of these I WB

Jack
17th November 2007, 10:18
Regarding Robert's flat comment, what I see is more of a "fill-flashed" look. They don't look "blown" anywhere to me, but they do look different --- and I hate to say it, but they more like a Canon shot...

This could just be one or two of a few different things:

1) Arizona daylight --- I *KNOW* it's freaking bright there, like 1-1/2 stops over basic daylight;

2) Possibly the raw converter --- I find C1's standard film curve to over-do the top end (though admittedly it looks like the tops are fine and the mids are running over in some of these);

3) Could be a characteristic of the lens;

4) OR could be how Leica coded the Summarits for DNG processing...

With #4 in mind, it might be interesting to see a comparitive "with coding" and "without coding" shot...

Cheers,

Guy Mancuso
17th November 2007, 10:57
Interesting thought. i wonder if LR changed is what I was thinking

Jan Brittenson
17th November 2007, 13:08
From looking at Guy's puctures, the lenses are certainly sharp, but are still missing something.

I think they look a lot like my CV lenses.

Guy Mancuso
17th November 2007, 13:49
Big test coming . Lot of processing

robsteve
17th November 2007, 16:12
I think they look a lot like my CV lenses.

I don't have any CV lenses, but I do have a lot of Leica lenses and they don't look like Leica lenses.

robsteve
17th November 2007, 16:15
Regarding Robert's flat comment, what I see is more of a "fill-flashed" look. They don't look "blown" anywhere to me, but they do look different --- and I hate to say it, but they more like a Canon shot...

This could just be one or two of a few different things:

1) Arizona daylight --- I *KNOW* it's freaking bright there, like 1-1/2 stops over basic daylight;

2) Possibly the raw converter --- I find C1's standard film curve to over-do the top end (though admittedly it looks like the tops are fine and the mids are running over in some of these);

3) Could be a characteristic of the lens;

4) OR could be how Leica coded the Summarits for DNG processing...

With #4 in mind, it might be interesting to see a comparitive "with coding" and "without coding" shot...

Cheers,


Jack:

You just have to look at the grass in the different shots. The Summarit grass doesn't have the contrast. Like you said, a fill light look to it. It may be as simple as they have more veiling flare than the Summicrons and Summiluxes.

They are a bit blue too.

Guy Mancuso
17th November 2007, 16:26
Teaser on next test that will be up in the morning. Bokeh, Color, contrast , saturation and highlight test. Tough light, nasty background, dark shadows. all the stuff you want to avoid but can't. LOL

To me this is how you test a lens in the worst conditions

My daughter Cali here so be nice. LOL

35mm Summarit wide open 2.5

Guy Mancuso
17th November 2007, 16:53
Not sure any lens in the M system can beat the look of the 75 lux wide open in open shade. Just killer

gogopix
18th November 2007, 07:08
I don't have any CV lenses, but I do have a lot of Leica lenses and they don't look like Leica lenses.

They are good though - but different. Can't put my finger on it.

One suggestion (all the MTF experts can chime in) what is see, even in images with good IF OOF ratio is a lack of the REALLY fine edge, that is, where the foreground image stops and the background begins; it is subtle, and I will likely add these to my collection (in 2011,12 and 13 according to the 1/yr formula :D
(for the audio maniacs like me, it was the important point of the Linn Sondek, when the record stopped, you Knew thru the immediate silence.)

I really liked the 90mm the best

Victor

Jack
18th November 2007, 09:30
They are good though - but different. Can't put my finger on it.
~SNIP~
I really liked the 90mm the best

Victor

I agree. Can't quite put my finger on it either, but definitely a different look. I think the 90 is the ticket for me too, as the "travel tele."

Guy Mancuso
24th November 2007, 15:01
Couple images here from the 35mm summarit

Guy Mancuso
24th November 2007, 15:03
Not doing anything but default in LR

Couple 90's

Losing internet check in later

Guy Mancuso
25th November 2007, 11:50
Just walked in the door . They do look to have more saturation but at the same time seem to give a little more DR and diffuses out the specular highlights a touch more. Now color , contrast and saturation seem to be dead even among the Summairts they all have the same look to them. I have a lot of processing to do this week and posting , plus i just shot a bunch of casual shots early in the morning the last few days and they really do pop off the screen in terms of color, contrast and saturation plus there bloody sharp to boot. Frankly when you hit 5.6 with any of them there all pretty darn equal in many ways. The lenses get shipped back tomorrow but I think i have enough material here to see what they can do. The MTF charts and some of that stuff does not interest me to much but seeing how they can render a image does. So hopefully you are seeing what they are made of. Honestly my bet is anyone buying one will be pretty darn happy with it. But i don't see folks like me with a 50 lux and 90 cron selling them for these either. i see these as more a less expensive way to get into Leica glass if you can handle the slower speed of them and also more important fill gaps in the lineup for folks and travel. I may just get the 75mm even though I did not try it but it will fill the 75 lux spot on travel tha one is a big swing in weight. I will have the sharpness test up Monday for everyone and post that test on both sites as well. Hopefully folks will just get a nice picture of what they are and with Seans tests and impressions fills in that puzzle we always talk about. Never go by one test but several and folks impressions and that gives you a good idea what you are getting. But for the money it is a thumbs up so far

Guy Mancuso
25th November 2007, 12:05
One from the 35mm summarit , still have a lot of processing but here is a quicky . Very early morning 24 degrees. No issues at all with the cold, me yes , camera no.

Guy Mancuso
25th November 2007, 12:13
Top one was default in LR this a little work too it to open it up some.

woodyspedden
25th November 2007, 13:52
Not sure any lens in the M system can beat the look of the 75 lux wide open in open shade. Just killer

Guy my friend

I don't care so much as to how things measure but I can tell you that the last lens to leave my M bag will be the 75 Lux. I have captured everything from portraiture to the shots of Half Dome at sunset at the workshop that there is no way I will part with this beauty. Not about sharpness, color etc although all of these things count but is about how the drawing fulfills the artistic intent. Just MHO

Woody Spedden

Guy Mancuso
25th November 2007, 15:44
Woody could not agree more. i love my 75 lux. My two favorite lenses in the M line are the 28 cron and the 75 lux. They would be the last i would ever sell if I ever switched to something else and given how much I like RF that may never happen. LOL

carstenw
26th November 2007, 11:49
The 50 Lux Asph is also up there, and now: the Apo 90 Cron. What a lens! Amazingly sharp, wonderfully compact for what it is. I love it! The 28 Cron is also up there. As a single lens on the M8, my 35 Lux Asph is hard to beat though, and as a two-lens set, probably 35 Lux Asph and 75 Lux. Lots of choices.

Jack
26th November 2007, 11:55
So you did the 90 AA?

LOLOLOLOLOL!!!

carstenw
26th November 2007, 12:02
Yup, I traded my 90 Macro kit (lens, adapter, angleviewer), because although it gave great results, I just didn't use it that much. I felt that I couldn't get close enough, and since I have the Visoflex III and Bellows II anyway, I didn't need the 90 macro. I will probably end up with a separable 135/4 Tele-Elmar and its focusing adapter for some real macro action, and the Apo 90 is awesome, much better for me than the collapsible 90 Macro, which I found overly fiddly. I did have to adjust my rangefinder again though. *Man*, is this lens touchy about adjustment. I thought it was way off first, but upon careful inspection, my rangefinder had crept out of adjustment. Some quality time with distant church towers, the moon and a 2mm Allen key fixed that.

I am pretty much done for lenses for the moment. Sometime in the next few months, I will pick up the CV21/4M and sometime in the summer I will get the CV12, but other than that, my needs are covered well. I might sell the WATE, but I am not sure yet. I also find it fiddly, although if the FF M9 is ever released, I should really keep the WATE which will come into its own then.

One day I will buy a Noctilux, but for now I have no cash, and will cancel my 30% deal with Leica. I really don't need it, having the 75 Lux.

Hey, I noticed that unlike the LUF, there is no section on this forum where we can enter our equipment. Is that on purpose?

Jack
26th November 2007, 12:20
Well good on you ;) You will enjoy the 90 AA immensely. As for the 12 and 21, I love them too. In fact, I would trade the WATE for a 21 Apsh and CV12. But then, that's me,

LOLOLOLOL!

carstenw
26th November 2007, 12:24
I even have a CV15 already, but found that I have to stop it down to f/5.6 or f/8 to get it sharp, which defeats the purpose a bit, since I often need such a lens in churches and mosques, which are notoriously dim... Hence the WATE. Once the FF M9 comes out, with an improved IR filter on the sensor, the fiddly part of the WATE disappears, and the CV12 would become quite an extreme lens, and I probably wouldn't use it much. I think I will hang on to the WATE for now. They are also nearly impossible to find, and I don't want to have to search.

Btw, I played with a 50 Summarit at my dealer today, and what a sweet little lens that is! No matter what I tried, the background bo-ke was gorgeous, and the focus plane was sharp. I think it is a bit better than this thread has led to believe, where it seems a little worse than the 35, 75, and 90. And it is really tiny!

Jack
6th December 2007, 15:49
Not sure any lens in the M system can beat the look of the 75 lux wide open in open shade. Just killer

http://forum.getdpi.com/forum/attachment.php?attachmentid=162&stc=1&d=1195350782

Guy:

Has anybody ever told you (or your daughter) that she looks just like Danica Patrick?

Guy Mancuso
6th December 2007, 15:55
I heard that one before. Have to say she is a cute kid, must be the mail mans.:ROTFL::ROTFL::ROTFL:

Jack
6th December 2007, 17:22
I heard that one before. Have to say she is a cute kid, must be the mail mans.:ROTFL::ROTFL::ROTFL:

Cute? Dude, you'd better have the shotguns ready and loaded LOLOLOLOLOLOL!

Guy Mancuso
6th December 2007, 18:57
The boys are scared of me. Exactly what i want. LOL