The GetDPI Photography Forum

Great to see you here. Join our insightful photographic forum today and start tapping into a huge wealth of photographic knowledge. Completing our simple registration process will allow you to gain access to exclusive content, add your own topics and posts, share your work and connect with other members through your own private inbox! And don’t forget to say hi!

35mm summilux vs 35mm summicron -which one to buy

Y

yuetk

Guest
Hello everyone...I am debating between these 2 lenses for my M8. I hear about the focus shift on the lux, but I like the fast lense and its character. However, I also read all the good things about the summicron and are much gentle on my wallet. I am kinda stuck and not sure which lense to pick-up. I would really appreciate with some of your inputs and thoughts. Thanks in advance.

Tom
 
Tom,
the question is on how often you are going to use the lens fully open.
If this is your preferred way to use it, go with the Summilux (which one btw, asph or pre-asph?) otherwise the Summicron is by far easier to use (also in this case you have different options starting with the magic 8 lens up to the almost perfect current asp).
They are all excellent, it is mainly a matter of personal taste.
Do not worry too much about focus shift, you can manage to live with it.
Cheers,
Ario
 
W

wilsonlaidlaw

Guest
The Summilux ASPH 35 probably has the greatest quality variation of all Leica lenses. I tried quite a few before I was lucky enough to find a stellar one. I knew it was good but I did not realise how good until I ran full focus tests. It has been set up so that it has a tiny bit of front focus at 2 M wide open (focus fields split 50/50). As you stop down, it only aperture shifts a tiny amount so that the focus fields change to the traditionally correct 1/3 behind and 2/3 in front. It also has first class contrast, which again varies from lens to lens. There is a strong rumour that the chromed brass bodied lenses have a higher incidence of good lenses than the aluminium alloy bodied black ones. The chrome was last made in September 2006 (the date on the box of my one) and was never made as an originally coded lens. The downside is that the chrome/brass lens is about 33%+ heavier than the black one, which in itself is not a lightweight. If you get a good one, you can have your cake and eat it. It does everything that the Summicron does and has one extra stop. If you get a poor one, you will quickly want to sell it and buy the much safer Summicron. All a bit of a lottery I am afraid.

Wilson
 

jonoslack

Active member
I agree with Arlo
if you're going to shoot it wide open - then think about the lux. If you aren't then don't.

However - don't ignore the 35 summarit either. I haven't had a 'lux. but I've had both the 'cron and the summarit, and I sold the 'cron as I like the feel of the summarit better (and it's smaller and not much more than half the price!)
 

Paratom

Well-known member
In my experience the focus shift of the 35/1.4asph can become a (slight) problem when shooting wide open and small distances.
It seems that some lenses seem to suffer more and others less from that phenomen.
Personally I feel my copy suffered only slightly but in the end I like to have the focus plane spot on.
I now use a 35 Summarit - I just have liked the bokeh and drawing I saw from images posted by others - Really like that little lens a lot.
2.5 is not so bad for a 35mm lens andits fully usable.
I am very happy with the Summarit. The only thing is that the shortest focusing distance is a little long for my taste.
Besides the IQ I find the smallish size and handling great. And I love the traditional metal lens cover. Its the first lens I use without hood and no problem with flare at all so far.
I have to say that I have a 50/1.4 as well so I have that option if I need /want to go f1.4
Cheers, Tom
 
Hi Tom,
I do not understand your statement about focus shift shooting wide open.
Focus shift, by definition, occurs because the optimum focus plane is shifted because the lens is focused wide open, but the image is made with the lens stopped down, and this due to spherical aberration, not unusual in fast lenses.
The rangefinder and the lens cams in fact are calibrated for the wide open position (and also the AF systems) and when you stop down the increased DOF is sometime insufficient to compensate the focus shift.
If you pic is out of focus wide open either there is an error in focussing or the lens or the camera has to be calibrated.
Cheers,
Ario
 
Last edited:

jonoslack

Active member
Hi Tom,
I do not understand your statement about focus shift shooting wide open.
Focus shift, by definition, occurs because the optimum focus plane is shifted as a consequence of the lens is focused wide open, but the image is made with the lens stopped down, and this due to spherical aberration, not unusual in fast lenses.
The rangefinder and the lens cams in fact are calibrated for the wide open position (and also the AF systems) and when you stop down the increased DOF is sometime insufficient to compensate the focus shift.
Are you sure that this is the case? I thought that they were often calibrated to focus perfectly at some compromise point to reduce the effect of focus shift.

Whatever, this has been done to death, the truth is that some lenses suffer, and the 35 'lux is one of those lenses.
 

D&A

Well-known member
Hi All,

There is very little I can add to what Wilson already expressed (above). My experiences with both a chrome and black one has been exactly the same, esepcially upon close inspection of the files and extensive focusing tests at varying distances and all apatures. I'm not convienced that a chrome vs. black lens and matericals used, is responsible for the differences (with many balcks optomised for 1.4 performance but suffer greatly upon stopping down due to focus shift)...but simply that Leica has changed how thay optimized the lens before leaving the factory. THat change might have occured at around the time production of chrome Summilux 35's had eneded. A systempatic study would need to be performed if there was any truth to this.

In any case lenses set up for front focuisng wide open, where the subject is at the very back edge of the depth of field and thereby looses some definition, can then be used at every other f-stop with confidence and perfomance that almost matches the Summicron at most f-stops. Slight difference in curvature and edge shapness can be seen at f2 and f2.8 between the 35mm f1.4 ASPH and 35mm f2 ASPH, but one has to examine the files very closely.

Conversely, if the lens is optimized for f1.4..its bitingly sharp at f1.4 BUT upon stopping down, large focus shifts quickly causes the lens to backfocus and subject is mostly out of depth of field till almost f5.6 and beyond.

So whether there really are two kinds of optimized 35mm ASPH, I don't know, but it seems many fall into these two catagories and their use (and desire to have one over the other) will be quite subjective. For me personally, I prefer those that are set up with front focusing wide open as described..as I can also focus slightly behind subject wide open at that one particular f-stop, if biting sharpness at that apature is required.

Lastly, one other advantage of the lens subject to slight front focus, wide open...and putting subject at the very rear of the depth of field is the incredably soft and dreamy bokeh just behind the subject....something thats not as prominant in either the Summicron ASPH nor Summilux's optimized for f1.4.....although those lenses have their own unique strengths.

Dave (D&A)
 
Hi Jono,
to the best of my knowledge, by default the Leica lenses are intended to be calibrated to perfectly focus when wide open.
Of course errors may have occurred and in some case people had lenses calibrated on demand.
My copy of the Noctilux, for instance, has been adjusted (not by Leica) to slightly front focus when wide open so to compensate the focus shift in the range 1.4 to 2.8.
In this way I can use it "safely" in the whole range.
In case of the Summilux 35 asph. I prefer to keep the calibration as it is because the focus shift is not so evident as in the Noctilux and I can manage to live with it.
The same happens with the AF cameras which usually focus wide open and with many fast lenses you will get out of focus when stopping down, until when, with even smaller apertures, the DOF will prevail.
Cheers,
Ario
 
M

Mango

Guest
Get both and decide for yourself (that's what I did). Selling either of these lenses will not incur you any (or a minimal) loss. This method is cheaper than renting or making a choice based on someone else's preference, which might cause you regret after you see your own results.

If you ask enough people, I find that you inevitably are recommended the fastest glass, just because it's there. There must be some law of convergence that applies to Leica glass recommendations. :)
 

geesbert

New member
I bought Tom's Summilux and am quite happy with it. this one is as described above, front-focussing a bit at 1.4, but then spot on till diffraction kicks in. In the attached PDF you can see the effect. they are 100% crops at all apertures, focussed at the needles's pin, distance about 1.5m.
 

thrice

Active member
I'm resurrecting this thread and asking some more specific questions. I've owned the 35mm Summilux ASPH in chrome before, and as has been said, it is a stellar lens.

Some points:
I found the Veiling glare when shooting near any light source to be a major headache.
The hood makes the lens as long as a 50 lux so I tended not to use one.
I liked the rendering at f/1.4.

My friend Nate says flare is the reason he change from the 35 cron to the 35 lux asph! Has anyone had a similar experience? Ugly flare from the 35 cron asph?

Size is a real motivator for me. I find I can handhold slower with a smaller lens, and I find it much easier for getting around with a single lens kit.

I have the 35mm C-Biogon which trumps the Cron at comparable apertures according to many reviews, but is actually a larger lens and a stop slower.

If anyone can steer me in the right direction it would be great. I know from an investment perspective if I can get a 35mm lux asph at retail prices it's a good idea, but I'm not really into investing in Leica stuff.
 

glenerrolrd

Workshop Member
daniel

If you can get the new 35 1.4asph fle ..IMHO this lens is as close to perfect as I ve have in the Leica M glass. It has a balance between resolution,contrast and color that works for me . It creates files with a clarity of color that is similar to the Noct. The 0.95 Noctilux is better but so much more glass to carry .

The focus shift in the prior 35 1.4asph was bothersome . I had my copy calibrated at 2cm forward at 1.4 at 2M distance ....this gave the best balance . Keep in mind that a focus shifts you get to an edge of DOF ..not the middle . People assume that you don t need any DOF for your focusing error. I learned to shoot the previous 35 1.4 asph at 1.4 and then 5.6 . The prior 35 1.4 asph had a more distinctive signature ...sharp edge contrast but a smooth fall off .

The 35 cron asph has a strong high contrast rendering almost similar to the zeiss glass. It also seems to render slightly warmer with very high color saturation. This is my go to lens when I want POP in the images .

The pre asph cron is not as sharp but has a very smooth bokeh . Preferred for portraits and images where softer rendering is preferred. This isn t a look I wanted in my 35mm...I would rather use a pre asph 50 lux . But for the right applications its a great lens.

IMHO they really got the design of the new 35 lux asph fle right ..but they are so hard to get at at such a premium. I would avoid the older 35 lux unless you are looking for a specific rendering . They are selling at a premium because you can t find the new 35 lux.
 

D&A

Well-known member
Without repeating everything Roger expressed, especially regarding his discription of the 35mm Lux asph fle vs. the previous verion of that lens...I would say Roger hit the nail on the head and it very much reflects what I found when comparing both. The latest FLe version is near technical perfection, not unlike the 50mm Lux asph, but somewhat different. My 35mm f1.4 Lux asph (previous version) was also set up to have slight front focus at f1.4, so that upon stopping down, subject remained extremely close or within the DOF at all times.

Only issue was shooting random/moving subjects close up at f1.4, where it was often times near impossible to achieve critical focus. That alone at times would be fustrating and some key shots often missed. On the other hand, the signature of the lens and the OOF bokeh and it's "fall-off" is some of the best I've encountered with a lens that performs so well wide open and stopped down. In many ways, this is one area I feel that the newer FLE version doesn't quite achieve. Other well known photographers I know who shoot Leica also felt the same way regarding these two versions.

One thing I personally would avoid is a version of the previous 35mm Lux asph (prior to current FLE version) is one who's focus is optimized for f1.4...which would then mean the subject quickly goes out of the depth of field upon stopping down until approx. f5.6 is reached. Again that is just my personal preference.

The 35mm Cron asph is a safer bet in that it is uniformly excellent from f2 and beyond...with no percieved focus shift to speak of, excellent resolution and color reproduction and not really any issues to deal with. I personally never had an issue with flair with this lens but then again I wasn't looking or testing for it...so it may be something to look out for.

Dave (D&A)
 

baudolino

Active member
My friend Nate says flare is the reason he change from the 35 cron to the 35 lux asph! Has anyone had a similar experience? Ugly flare from the 35 cron asph?
Daniel, are you sure your friend was referring to the Asph version of the Cron 35? The Asph version is very flare resistant - in fact it is a very contrasty lens, producing highly saturated colors. No problems with flare. I do use it with a hood, though (it is a compact lens, the hood doesn't get in the way). On the other hand, the previous version (Cron 35 version IV - the so called "king of bokeh") flares a lot - I called in "king of flare" when I posted an image taken with it on this forum about 6 months ago. Regards, Martin
 

Paratom

Well-known member
I had a 35cronV.4 and a 35asph before.
The slight focus shift made it difficult for me to focus the 35lux reliable.
I then sold it and got a 35 Summarit.
I also sold the 35cron IV because I thought (and still think) the Summarit is better.
The Summarit is flare resistent, small, nice bokeh and kind of "classic" gentle rendering.
The chance to check out a 35 Lux asph fle made me add this lens, and its the 35 I use mostly now.
After a calibration it focuses near perfect and reliable. Having f1.4 opens more "dramatic" shallow DOF and (I find) the color rendering and the way it renders "dark" scenes is great. The images look very "alife"/ warm/clear.
So for me the new 35Luxasph and the Summarit are the best two choices, depending what you need/want.
 

thrice

Active member
Thanks Roger, like I said, I had the 35 lux asph before, never had a noticeable issue with focus shift. I'm well aware of the rendering style. Any perceived difference between the old and new style (of asph lenses) is purely a placebo as the formula and coatings have not changed. Would you agree?

I primarily want to know how much flare the 35mm summicron exhibits and whether it suffers veiling flare when shooting into the light as the 35 lux does.

At apertures f/2.8-f/8.0 the summicron is sharper on centre due to focus shift (which is still present on the new version) and I think technique will play a bigger part in sharpness than the lens itself. I am thinking the convenience of having a shorter lens will outweigh a stop.

I think I'm slowly talking myself into the cron (especially since it is available in chrome). I just want to know if anyone has flare examples or can recount times when the flare has been an issue with the cron.
 

thrice

Active member
Daniel, are you sure your friend was referring to the Asph version of the Cron 35? The Asph version is very flare resistant - in fact it is a very contrasty lens, producing highly saturated colors. No problems with flare. I do use it with a hood, though (it is a compact lens, the hood doesn't get in the way). On the other hand, the previous version (Cron 35 version IV - the so called "king of bokeh") flares a lot - I called in "king of flare" when I posted an image taken with it on this forum about 6 months ago. Regards, Martin
Yes I'm sure. Thanks for sharing your experience :)
Nate shoots a lot, and has no romantic ideals about any lens or brand so I trust him, but he may have come across some very unfortunate situations over and over which put him off the lens, so I would like to be sure.

So for me the new 35Luxasph and the Summarit are the best two choices, depending what you need/want.
I have owned the previous summilux asph, and like I said, no focusing issues in practice. I also owned the Summarit, and mirror your experience, it is an exceptional lens, but I currently have the 35mm C-Biogon, which I consider superior to the Summarit in every respect barring build quality. Your experience mirrors mine, and while I loved the Summilux ASPH rendering the size (especially of the new version) puts me off carrying just the camera and 1 lens all day.

Does anyone with a 35mm Summicron ASPH find flare to be an issue? Ideally I'd love to see some sample photos shooting with the sun hitting the front element but out of frame, and also shooting straight at the sun :)
 
....

Does anyone with a 35mm Summicron ASPH find flare to be an issue? Ideally I'd love to see some sample photos shooting with the sun hitting the front element but out of frame, and also shooting straight at the sun :)
I have no problems; I´d say it´s one of the least ´flare-prone´ lenses I´ve used (together with my old Hassy CF 50/4 FLE). FWIW, I never use filters.

Here´s a recent shot, from a nice morning in Dalecarlia, Sweden (even bigger version here). And, it´s straight from the raw file; no cropping, no PP at all. Not even a trace of those ubiquitous diametrally opposite ghosts that plague most lenses in shots like this. And look at the detail and contrast in the birch trunks (not bragging, just praising my gear...:thumbup: )


 
Top