Archived posting to the Leica Users Group, 1999/07/04
[Author Prev] [Author Next] [Thread Prev] [Thread Next] [Author Index] [Topic Index] [Home] [Search]>I am considering the >purchase of either the 50mm Summicron or Summilux, and was wondering about >the difference in their performance. dear adler family, don't remember the place(s) i've read them, but as i recall them the standard responses to your question are: - - the s-lux is better for low light shooting, for obvious reasons - - the s-lux offers more contrast in the center of the image shot in low light situations - - the s-cron outperforms the s-lux at wider apertures - - you'd be hard pressed to tell the difference from about f/5.6 in terms of edge to edge sharpness and detail definition - - the s-lux is more expensive and bulkier, the s-cron less expensive & lighter - - the s-cron is reputed to be the 'better' of the two lenses, technically speaking (whatever that means), and also has the distinction of being the 50mm lens against which all others are judged after weighing the proverbial pros and cons, i opted for the s-cron, as i couldn't imagine that the approximately $1,000. price difference would be justified by the quality of the low light images i might make with the s-lux, and frankly, that would be the only reason that i can see that one would choose the s-lux over the s-cron. if i really wanted/needed the low light capabilities, i would seriously consider the noctilux, and then start buying lotto tickets in bulk. good luck with whatever 50mm lens you choose, i'm sure you won't be disappointed. guy