[Leica] Re: 35 Summicron v. Lux

[Jeff Moore <jbm@oven.com>]

2000-04-27-03:30:14 lmrmax@ix.netcom.com:
> At the moment, I am trying to decide between a 35 2.0 or 1.4. Other
> than the obvious 1 stop difference, any differences between the two in
> "look" or "feel" of the images produced?

I'll assume you're referring to the brand-new ASPH flavors of each.

I flat-out love the way the Summicron pictures look -- the Summicron
ASPH seems to let out-of-focus areas have nearly the coherence of
those from the pre-ASPH 35mm Summicron (which is also worth
considering), and the Summicron is significantly less unwieldy -- both
the lens itself and the hood strapped on front are bulkier.

The Summilux ASPH sometimes renders out-of-focus areas in a kind of
'jangly' doubled way.  Erwin's reviews (I hope I'm paraphrasing
correctly, and I hope you've read them in full:

  http://www.imx.nl/photosite/leica/m/lenses/pages/l11879.html

) seem to imply as well that the Summicron is somewhat more
consistent, from center all the way out into the corners.

Having said all that, of my 35mm-lens use, I'd say that the Summilux
gets about 90-95% and the Summicron the rest.  It's just that handy to
have the extra stop in reserve, and just how dramatically sharp
whatever's in focus is at f/1.4 relative to everything else is just a
visceral thing.  A towering, landmark lens.

So: no easy answer.  Still depends mostly on how much time you spend
in twilight or indoors.