Summarits vs. Summicrons

[Avotius]

You sound resentful. Are you? Every high school graduate should have been introduced to logarithms and scientific calculators in algebra. I mentioned a useful formula which can be used in place of a table for determining stop differences. It's probably in most photography handbooks. Sorry, I don't think it can be dumbed down any further.

Richard

hehe....I graduated from high school (in america) and the farthest we ever made it to was algebra 1, and there was nothing like that, regardless the people here in china learn algebra 1 around 6th grade.


Anyway, I would still take a used summicron over one of these summarits. Why? Why not? It will be cheaper, and faster, and used has never bothered me since your average used leica lens is still pretty damn good. Not to mention zeiss isnt so bad either now is it?

That said, these will still probably sell well just because it says Leica on it, if the price was half of what they are I would be looking too.

 

[Magus]

Post deleted by posters request

 

[Turtle]

I was afraid someone or something would invoke yet another financially crippling GAS attack! :bang:

Turtle, have you compared the flaring tendencies of the 50 Summicron and the 50 Planar? Is the Planar significantly better in terms of that?

No I haven't and was largely teasing. A number of people have commented that they feel the planar is better in this regard, however. Putz also conceded this I recall. As for my use of the 28bio,35bio and 50 (planar) ZMs they have all been astoundingly resistant to flare, a criticism often sometimes against the Summicron.

 

[J J Kapsberger]

...A number of people have commented that they feel the planar is better in this regard, however. Putz also conceded this I recall...

In fact Puts has this to say: "[The Planar] shares with [the Summicron] the weak suppression of secondary reflections, due to the reflections at the edges of the rear mount." This suggests that the Planar flares too.

I'm very happy with the way my Summicron draws, but I'm dismayed at its tendency to flare easily. I'm not merely repeating what I've read. I regularly see flare in my contre-jour images.

I'd only consider a Planar if, and only if, it had significantly better flare suppression. If and when I get back into the money (I'm still reeling after this year's GAS attack), I might buy that lens, compare it head-to-head with my Summicron and keep the over-all winner. Or both. Or perhaps I'll sell both and get a Summilux. Or I might end up with all three. Che sera, sera.

 

[Turtle]

In fact Puts has this to say: "[The Planar] shares with [the Summicron] the weak suppression of secondary reflections, due to the reflections at the edges of the rear mount." This suggests that the Planar flares too.

I'm very happy with the way my Summicron draws, but I'm dismayed at its tendency to flare easily. I'm not merely repeating what I've read. I regularly see flare in my contre-jour images.

I'd only consider a Planar if, and only if, it had significantly better flare suppression. If and when I get back into the money (I'm still reeling after this year's GAS attack), I might buy that lens, compare it head-to-head with my Summicron and keep the over-all winner. Or both. Or perhaps I'll sell both and get a Summilux. Or I might end up with all three. Che sera, sera.

Yes, I have read that, but also a comment elsewhere where he commented that both suffered flare but the Planar marginally less so. I cannot recall where and cannot find it either, so could be mistaken. Thought it was in an article where he came back to teh Zeiss issue after his initial tests and warmed upa bit more. Also seems users commonly gripe about Summicron flare but few do with the planar, but that could reflect the volumes out there. I totally agree with you; both are spectacular and unless there is a major difference, no need to switch. The Zeiss can be had for $600, which is amazing.

 

[Magus]

Post deleted by posters request