35 lux or not?

[GMB]

I have the chance to buy a new 35 lux from a dealer at list price. I wonder whether its worth the extra money over the cron (which I have and don't plan on selling). I guess it only makes sense to get the lux to shoot it wide open because I assume that otherwise there is no real difference between the two lenses. Am I missing something?

(I know, if I get it and dont like it I can probably always sell without a loss.)

 

[SYGTAFOTO]

If you are absolutely sure you are not going to sell the cron, then it might not be worth it to buy the lux as you would be paying just to use it at f/1.4. However when I bought mine, I sold my cron in a heartbeat. Lux does everything cron does and more so I didn't see the need to keep the cron. Only advantage would be that cron is a bit more compact for portability.

 

[Double Negative]

It's a larger, heavier and (much) more expensive lens. If you need/want the extra stop though... Both are wonderful lenses in every respect and from wide open.

I don't buy into that "shoot it wide open always" mantra. I think of it more as a wider array of choices and improved control over DoF.

 

[glenerrolrd]

If you are committed to the M system ..buy the 35 lux and sell the cron . They are both great lenses and a perfect focal length for the M system . The lux has an edge in every area and having the 1.4 to extend the light gathering or to reduce DOF just makes it better .
Agree with DN its not a question of always using it wide open . There is a brilliance and clean color transmission that is similar to the Noctilux . The whites are clean without a color cast .

This is a lens I really enjoy in bad light ..like a rainy day or with heavy overcast .

I select from the 35 lux asph fle or the 28 / 2 cron based on the light . The Cron has a creamy bokeh and a beauty in decent light but the 35 lux hammers it in dull light .

 

[ramosa]

I recently went through considerable consideration of 35mm lenses. I think it comes down to price, size, and speed, as well as rendering. I’m not sure which Cron you have. If it’s the Cron ASPH, then the rendering will be quite similar to the new Lux. If this is the case, I agree with others that I would pick one of the two lenses and go with it. However, if your current 35mm Cron is a pre-ASPH version, then the rendering will be significantly different, with the new Lux being near “perfect” (but a bit nervous at times in OOF per the improvements in sharpness), while the pre-ASPH lenses have a more classic feel. If so, there may be a stronger rationale for having two 35mm lenses, as they’d differ not only in terms of size and speed, but also rendering.

 

[fotomeow]

I recently went through considerable consideration of 35mm lenses. I think it comes down to price, size, and speed, as well as rendering. I’m not sure which Cron you have. If it’s the Cron ASPH, then the rendering will be quite similar to the new Lux. If this is the case, I agree with others that I would pick one of the two lenses and go with it. However, if your current 35mm Cron is a pre-ASPH version, then the rendering will be significantly different, with the new Lux being near “perfect” (but a bit nervous at times in OOF per the improvements in sharpness), while the pre-ASPH lenses have a more classic feel. If so, there may be a stronger rationale for having two 35mm lenses, as they’d differ not only in terms of size and speed, but also rendering.

+1. I assume the OP is referring to having an Asph Cron. I wouldn't suggest only having 2 Asph 35's or only having 2 pre-Asph 35's.
I like to have a couple lenses in each focal length b/c I can have 2 lenses with different characteristics. Eg. I have a 35 Asph Cron and a preAsph 35 Lux. Very different lenses, that I can use in very different situations to get the effects I want. Alternatively, I think a good combo would be the 35 Asph Lux and a v3/v4 preAsph Cron. Different animals for different situations.

 

[Paratom]

I would recommend the new 35 Lux and sell the cron.
I had a Cron Vers,4, later a 35 Lux asphI (I didnt really manage the slight focus shift), then I moved to a 35 Summarit (very nice and compact lens, and I (still?) own it. Finally got the Summilux asphII last year and I think it is a great lens.
The only reason why I still have the Summarit is because I thought it is a compact alternative when one wants a small lens or when one doesnt want to carry too much money in a bag.

 

[GMB]

Thanks for all the helpful posts. Indeed, my cron is the ASPH. The reason I like it is that it is compact and razor sharp. It was also my first Leica lens and therefore does have an emotional value and thefore it would be a tough decision to sell it.

I completely agree that one does not have to allways shoot wide open. My remark referred to the situation that I would keep the cron and the assumption that, other than the extra stop, the lenses would be quite similar.

Anyway, I will continue to reflect on this. (And sometimes I think that these days my money is safer if I invest it in Leica glass than keeping it in the bank :ROTFL.

 

[dseelig]

The bokeh people are one thing if you find your self shooting in low light get ti if not do not. Me I have love it will never sell it

 

[pophoto]

Here's my little contribution: (May not be helpful)

I had purchased the 35lux new for my THEN new M9, I can't say I liked it. Disclaimer here is that I am a 50mm person, and had the 50cron and would NOT sell that (but I did, since I sold the whole system), and if I had bought a 50lux, I would just view them as different lenses. With that said, I didn't like the 35lux and how it vignettes at f/1.4. I wanted to shoot it wide open. I just didn't like the look of rendering in general of the 35lux ASPH, subjective I know!

 

[seakayaker]

I have the cron and a lux. I am debating why I should keep both. I love the size of the cron over the Lux, the output from both are outstanding. I have a 50 lux and could use that if I need the extra stop. I could use the money for other equipment and should sell one.

. . . . . one of these days the debate will end.

Right now I'm not much help in answering your question, except to say I do not think you can make a bad decision.

 

[arild]

For me, the decision is between getting a 35 lux or getting a 28 cron and a 50 lux(for the extra stop). Luckily(?????), I have lots of time to make that decision.

 

[Ocean]

From my own experience, the performance of Summicron at f=2 is better than the Summilux at f=1.4. The Summicron also performs better at the edge/corner. But Summilux has a very smooth rendering that the Summicron cannot match. I also also never sell my Summilux.

 

[Shashin]

No one is going to see the difference in your images.

So, do you want a smaller camera or a faster camera? The only of thing about having two lenses with identical focal lengths is one will not be used.

 

[ramosa]

I have been meaning to provide is link: Bokeh of Leica 35mm M lenses compared (Summicron IV vs Summicron ASPH vs Summilux ASPH)

It provides a useful rendering comparison of three 35s: Cron v4, Cron ASPH, and Lux ASPH v1.

 

[SYGTAFOTO]

No one is going to see the difference in your images.

So, do you want a smaller camera or a faster camera? The only of thing about having two lenses with identical focal lengths is one will not be used.

I generally agree with your statement except that even if two lenses have the same focal length, they can have large difference in rendering ie. 35mm summilux pre-ASPH V1 vs. 35mm summiilux ASPH FLE. In which case, it may make sense to have both to make use of their differences.
But for this case, 35mm summicron ASPH and 35mm summilux ASPH FLE share very similar rendering.

 

[moreammo]

(And sometimes I think that these days my money is safer if I invest it in Leica glass than keeping it in the bank :ROTFL.

Now that's a good way to look at it, gotta run this by the wife, "New retirement plan buy more leica glass"

 

[GMB]

I "tested" the lens today. I was pleasantly surprised that it was not that much bigger. Still have to download the shots on my computer. The big question that I have to answer for myself is whether the one stop difference is worth that much more money, also considering that I have difficult focussing at 1.4 in low light (contact lenses, age above 50 etc).

 

[Double Negative]

Those the real questions to ask, Georg.

 

[Shashin]

I generally agree with your statement except that even if two lenses have the same focal length, they can have large difference in rendering ie. 35mm summilux pre-ASPH V1 vs. 35mm summiilux ASPH FLE. In which case, it may make sense to have both to make use of their differences.
But for this case, 35mm summicron ASPH and 35mm summilux ASPH FLE share very similar rendering.

I guess practically speaking I would always default to the one I thought the best. But that could be just the way I work--I am usually working on projects where I want a consistent look over the body of work. I think if if a photographer were more focused on single, stand-alone images or short series, then the lens choice might be more appealing. But then I am a heathen and as long as the image is sharp and contrasty with good color, other factors in the rendering don't worry me.