Archived posting to the Leica Users Group, 1997/11/03
[Author Prev] [Author Next] [Thread Prev] [Thread Next] [Author Index] [Topic Index] [Home] [Search]At 10:38 AM, you wrote: >I'm going to buy a 35mm lens (used) and can't decide between >the Summicron for its compactness and lower weight, or the >Summilux for its larger aperture.=A0 I'll be buying a non-ASPH as >I can't afford the aspherics, and if it's a Summilux it might have >to be an old one!=A0 Is one considered "better" than the other for >any reason?=A0 Which would you choose? The difference in price between the old lenses and the Summicron ASPH aren't that much. I'd say bite the bullet and get the Summicron ASPH. You won't regret it. It's very small. And sounds like a real performer. You might own this lens for the rest of your life. What's a couple extra hundred bucks? But if you're determined to get the non ASPH lenses, consider this. The Summicron focuses closer, and at f/2 it's probably a better lens. Stopped down, the Summilux is about as good. But stopped down isn't what you should decide on. Do you need 1.4? If not, then the Summicron is your choice. For absolute image quality across the board, the Summicron is probably the best. Size differences aren't significant between the older lenses. The new Summilux ASPH is quite big in comparison. But it still seems small to me! (Been carrying a Nikon F5 and 20-35 2.8 zoom for that last year around with me!) =3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D Eric Welch St. Joseph, MO http://www.ponyexpress.net/~ewelch My Karma ran over my Dogma..