Archived posting to the Leica Users Group, 1998/01/23

[Author Prev] [Author Next] [Thread Prev] [Thread Next] [Author Index] [Topic Index] [Home] [Search]

Subject: Re: [Leica] Summicron-M 50mm or Summilux-M 50mm?
From: Erwin Puts <imxputs@knoware.nl>
Date: Sat, 24 Jan 1998 00:18:50 +0100

>In a message dated 98-01-23 13:48:55 EST, you write:
>
><< Tests are not always quite clear on the
> issue, although I get the impression that the Summicron often receives
> better test results than the Summilux. >>
>
>I recently did extensive searching on this and the results I found clearly
>indicated that the Summicron is slightly better than the Summilux, perhaps
>noticably so at f2 and f2.8.  Any advantage seems largely or completely gone
>by f4.0.  Among commentators outside the Leica group, it seems that the
>Summilux is not as highly regarded as the Summicron.  I have not used the
>Summilux.  Test reports (to the extent they can be considered useful) indicate
>that the Summilux is bettered by other 1.4 lenses including the Zeiss / Contax
>1.4 and Canon 1.4.
>
>Tom Shea

You are right in stating that the Summicron is optically better corrected
than the S'lux. This should be visible at full aperture and even at f/5.6.
I hope you an give some info your interpretation of "better" as it is a so
many connotations and meanings.
I would not say that the Leica is 'bettered' by Zeiss or Canon as both
these lenses are not very impressive at full aperture. If I would need a
1,4 I should prefer the Summilux
Erwin