steve_west

Thanks for the wealth of information, comments, links etc. Learning from others'

personal experience is very valuable, and has more substance than what the shop

assistant is telling me...!

Please don't misunderstand, I know it's my choice, but being new to Leica there were a

couple of questions I had. I've only been considering buying this outfit for the past

week or so, and I tend to listen to people who have experience whenever I buy

equipment that's new to me.

The point about the tab was interesting. Noone mentioned that until I did. Would

that be because they are used to it and don't find it a problem, or because they don't

want to admit a flaw in design?

Also, a lot of people mentioned cost. As I said, the cost is the same if I buy second

hand. Of course I could buy the Summicron second hand too for that matter. In

reality cost must be an issue when buying into Leica, but it shouldn't be. I don't want

to compromise on equiptment. I wanted to know if there was a 'better' lens in every

sense of the word, hence the post. I think the Summilux is the better lens for my

purposes, I'll try and personally evaluate both before commiting. Thanks for all the

help and advise, and the warm welcome.

If anyone needs information from here in Tokyo about cameras, prices or anything I

can help with, just say the word.

Well I use a motorbike so I reckon I'm aloud the extra lumens. When I get a Noctilux

I'll down grade to a bicycle... promise!

I know that I will expand sometime in the future but I am thinking of just the one lens

for the time being. I only have enough room in my everyday luggage for one, so

that's why it's a concern. If I had the extra stop, like I said, I would certainly use it.

But I'd like to know to what extent quality is reduced in terms of contrast, sharpness

and colour rendition at full aperture. If I'm not happy with the quality at 1.4 I wouldn't

go for the Summilux. Like I said, I am a total Leica 'virgin' so I have no idea of what to

expect. If the drop off in quality is hardly noticable then I think I am edging towards

the 'lux. I'm not sure how I'd get along with the focusing tab either. (thanks Al for

the terminology). If anyone knows where I can see the same picture taken at 1.4 and

2 with a 'lux Asph I would be greatful for a hyperlink or two..!

Thanks for comments so far. I suppose what I really want to ask is this;

Suppose size, weight and cost were not issues, is there anyone out there who would

still opt for the Summicron over the Summilux? And if so, why?

One other small point is the focusing 'lever' (I don't know the right word for this thing)

on the barrel of the Summicron... Today was the first time for me to pick up a range

finder camera and try to focus it. Although overall, I think I am going to enjoy

focusing this way I found focusing on objects close by was a bit difficult with the

Summicron. It seems this focusing aid is placed in a position on the barrel optimized

for quick focusing at distances about 5 metres away to infinity... I think I would

definately focus on subjects 2~3 meters away at times - Anyone have a problem with

close subjects and this lens? Any comments on this also greatly appreciated.

This is my first posting - I've only just become a member. I work as a photographer

in Tokyo, using mainly medium format cameras but I have recently been infected with

Leicalitus - I think I'm going to buy a M7 (0.72) and a lens this month or next. I have

read everything on this site regarding the Summilux and Summicron (ASPH 35mm)

lenses. I've read over and over Erwin Put's reviews and techinical data about the two

lenses. I went to a shop today and tried both the lenses on a M7 body. I've seen as

many pictures as I can of comparsion tests and so on and on. As for cost, here in

Tokyo the Lux is the same price second hand (mint) as the Cron is new. I'm not

worried about SH gear, the Japanese OWN Leicas, they don't USE them...!

So I know about the loss of contrast and maybe some sharpness at 1.4, I know it's

more expensive and a bit bigger, and protrudes into the viewfinder more than it's

little sibling but......

I would like to hear from anyone who had a Summilux ASPH and traded it in for a

Summicron ASPH. Has anyone found the size of the Summilux to be a problem at all?

Has anyone noticed great differences in flare handling and so on? I would love to see

pictures (non-enlarged) by the Summilux ASPH at 1.4, at varying focal distances in

comparsion to the Summicron ASPH at 2. Moreover I would love to see some dawn/

dust exterior images at their widest apertures too.

The dilemma for me is simple. I think my father gave me a Leica cable release about

7 years ago but I don't think that counts... This will be my first Leica. I am set on a

35mm ASPH, and I know I would use the extra stop but.... I'd still like to hear your

personal experiences and see any examples of these lenses at their limits. Are there

any advantages or disadvantages I have overlooked? I would use the lens for candid

street stuff, some interiors probably like supermarket, shops and restaurants etc.

Sorry, a bit demanding a down-right cheeky for my first posting... but I am in need of

your expertise.... Your help and comments greatly appreciated...

If only Leica were to make a 35mm f1.7... It would be called 'the Luxicron' and you

there wouldn't be so many debates and dilemmas.... But that wouldn't be any fun,

would it?