Archived posting to the Leica Users Group, 1999/01/07
[Author Prev] [Author Next] [Thread Prev] [Thread Next] [Author Index] [Topic Index] [Home] [Search]I have the Summicron 2/35Asph and I like it very much. I used it in low light situation and it is just marvellous. The 1.4Asph is at least as good. The intrusion in the VF did never bother me with either one. The 2/35 shows sometimes a bit of flare, when extremely bright light sources (I mean eally bright, like a 500 Watt beamer in the dark) are in the field. The 1.4/35 is not as good as the 2.0 in this respect. The differences are really marginal within the range from f2.0 to f16. However the Summicron cant beat the 'Lux at f1.4. Make up your mind, if you need it, and if you like the shallow depth of field area and if you can afford it. If you do so the 1.4 is the one to go with low light capabilities as the Noctilux: Due to the shorter focal length you can use it with a longer shutter time than the 50. christoph >Gary and Dawn wrote: >As I dream towards the lens that will replace my really very nice mid >sixties chrome barrel 35mm f2 summicron, I am leaning towards the 35mm 1.4 >asph. But in all reality would I be as good off with the just introduced >35mm f2 asph? Would the 35mm 1.4 intrude into my viewing area vs the 35mm >f2. I have heard that the 50mm f1 does intrude a bit. Would those of you >who have the 1.4 asph say the intrusion is as much as the vented hood of my >current 35mm f2. I use an M4-2.