Re: [Leica] Summarit/Summilux performance

["N.S. Ng" <nsnga@pacific.net.sg>]

Hello,

When I started learning photography, I used a M3 with a Summarit. That was
almost 30 years ago, when I was about 14. This lens tends to be soft wide
open. It also has low contrast and tends to flare as well. I still
remembered using this lens at least 2.8 and only occassionally at 2.0. I did
use the lens at 1.5, but always found it to be too soft and low in contrast
for my liking.  Bear in mind the lens I have was from the 50's and was based
on the older Xenon from the 40's. Years later when I bought my first R
camera with a 50 Summicron, I stopped using this lens altogether.

Later when I decided to expand my M system with a M6 and 35 Summicron, I
decided to compare the Summicron (last version non-Asph) and the Summarit.
The Summicron won by a wide margin. I decided to buy the 35 Summilux Asph.
as well. The performance at 1.4 is outstanding. If you intend to use a 35 at
1.4, this is the lens to buy.

Good Luck on your choice.

Regards,
N.S. Ng
- ----- Original Message -----
From: Robert Beaudoin <bussbearm@cedep.com>
To: <leica-users@mejac.palo-alto.ca.us>
Sent: Monday, June 14, 1999 9:04 AM
Subject: [Leica] Summarit/Summilux performance


> Bonsoir,
>
>   In a couple of weeks I ll probably be in the very sweet period of the
year
> when I will be able to afford another M lens (new or used? we ll see).  I
do
> a fair amount of shooting in low light and my budget only allowed me the
use
> of a Summarit (SM with adapter) on my M5.  I am thinking of either the 50
or
> 35 Summilux (non ASPH).  Anyone knows first hand the performance of these
2
> lenses wide open (1.4 & 2) in comparison to the Summarit?
>
>   Thanks in advance,
>
>   Robert (Un chevalier sans blason)
>