Summilux and Summicron 35

[Guest]

Whic are the real differences in results for the Summilux 35/1,4 non Asph and the Summicron 35/2 Asph. Should be worth to change a used Summilux for a new Summicron?

Thanks
Andrea

 

[Guest]

> "Whic are the real differences in results for the Summilux > 35/1,4 non > Asph and the Summicron 35/2 Asph. Should be worth to change a > used > Summilux for a new Summicron?" > Thanks > Andrea =================================================================

1. Unless you do all your shooting from a tripod you will probably never see very much difference.

2. The people who have the newest lens seem to be mixed in their opinions. Some love it, but some have traded back to the older lens.

3. The last non-aspheric 35 mm. Summicron had the same optical formula as the 35 Summilux. Other than the smaller max aperture the advantage for the Summicron was the smaller size and lower price.

4. I prefer having a seperate lens shade. A little more bother for some, but I feel it is more effective.

 

[Guest]

Thanks

Ciao
Andrea

 

[Guest]

Hi Andrea,

if you don´t need the extra f-stop, you shouldn´t give the Summicron away. The Summicron-Asph is a very new design, the small Summilux (pre Asph.) was designed in 1961. It was loved by some and called "Flaschenboden" (bottlebottom) by others.
The Summilux has very low contrast at 1.4 - 2.8 and shows lot of flare. At it´s best f-stop at 5.6 it is as sharp as the pre-Asph Summicron.

Greetings Thomas

 

[Guest]

I subscribe to the school that says there was a tweak in the original Summilux formulation in the mid 60s. My everyday lens is a Summilux from the early 70s and compared to an early M3 Summilux I used to use it is a much better performer at wider apertures. I'll see about posting an image with it wide open soon.....in between times take a look at the gallery image "Spencer Tracy? Never heard of Him". Look at the "3-D" modelling of that image (make sure your monitor's properly adjusted!). That was with the Summilux at f2.8. It IS a great lens properly used. BUT it NEEDS its hood, and it's not the easiest one to find if you come across a lens without one. The IROOA hood for 50s and 35s vignettes on the Summilux but it LOOKS much better than the 12504, however if you're in the business of cropping a lot......

Another reason to get a Summilux 35 is that they made comparatively few of them - and there's not just me reckons it'll be a sought after collector in years to come. Having said that, it's not something I take into account and mistreat mine something rotten.

 

[Guest]

Have only shot with Summircon 35mm ASPH and is great. Summilux is also great lens but is only worth extra cash if you really need the f/1.4.

Have heard otherwise that at other apertures Summicron ASPH slightly outperforms Summilux ASPH

Mark