Archived posting to the Leica Users Group, 2003/01/19
[Author Prev] [Author Next] [Thread Prev] [Thread Next] [Author Index] [Topic Index] [Home] [Search]Yes, Greg, the R Summiccron is just as good as the M. Even the first generation single cam is a fabulous lens. That is the lens that moved me off the Canon queue. The first generation Summilux R is only adequate at 1.4 so if you budget precludes the new version Summilux go with the Summicron. At least my version of the Summilux has a lot more field curvature so it doesn't quite compare to the Summicron until 5.6 or so when DOF covers both field curvature and a noticeable focus shift. My experience is different from what Erwin Puts describes so my sample could vary. Put simply, my two cam Summicron has higher contrast and crisper details with a phenomenal ability to resolve color nuance. Until about 5.6 my version of the 50 Summilux with the pull out hood is slightly behind the Summicron. After 5.6 both are equally strong lenses. If I sound down on the Summilux, I'm not. I have owned all four of the best, Zeiss, Leica, Canon, and Nikon: sold the Canons(FD and EOS) and almost never use the Nikon. If you need the speed then hunt down the latest version Summilux but purchase the Summicron and use it until the right Summilux comes down the pike. You can find one and two cam Summicrons disgustingly cheap and it isn't that expensive to add the third cam. When the lux finally materializes you can sell the Summicron for what you have in it close enough. The telling point is that I use the Summilux instead of the Summicron 9 out of 10 times. I did follow my own advice and used the Summicron until a Summilux literally came out of the blue from a studio converting to digital. Hope this helps, Don dorysrus@mindspring.com - -- To unsubscribe, see http://mejac.palo-alto.ca.us/leica-users/unsub.html