I'm planning to buy a Leica M7 in the upcoming weeks, and decided to start with a 35 and 50 lens. I need one lens for an all-rounder and the other one for low light photography. This setup is mainly for people and candid photography. I'm thinking on buying current ASPH summilux and older summicron. The question is which combo is better? Or is it better to got current summicron and older summilux?? HELP!! I cant decide.... Other thing that I would like to know is which one got the Leica glow and pop? Maybe something that my nikkors wont be able to produce. Btw, When I use my SLR, I like the way my 50mm f1.8 nikkor perform which is very tack sharp (had to use softar I or II filter when I photographing family close-up portraits, otherwise it will show all the defects on face!). I never tried a prime 35mm, only in zoom...so I dont have any experience on them. Btw, I can get a deal for a 50 'cron made in canada with tab for around $475 (probably from 1979 or 80ish. Optics are very pretty no scratches, fungus, separation or corrosion. But it has some very light dust and the body is not perfect. Do you think it's a good deal? is it better than the current 50mm cron? if it's not, i think it will be better to buy the current version for a $300-400 difference with less maintenance, dont you think? other consideration: 35 CV nokton asph...read it on Black and White magazine, and got 2 tumbs up. Performance on f1.4 is better than summilux, altough at f2 to f5.6 (if im not mistaken) summilux is better. Thanks for any help!