Elmarit 28 ASPH or Summarit-M 35?

W

wta

Member
Local time
8:58 PM
Joined
Apr 27, 2008
Messages
11
Hi all!
I own a ZM C-Sonnar 50/1.5, and now i want a "cheap" brand new Leica wide -angle lens on my M6.It seems that only 2 choice for me:Elmarit 28 ASPH and Summarit-M 35. Which one is better?

Thanks!

wta.
 
I went with the Elmarit 28 ASPH as I wanted something a little different and new to my experience. I have always shot 35 and continue to do so in full frame digital, it's a great all around length. BUT having shot 28, I find that it improved my work by forcing me to think a little differently.

You might try an inexpensive 28 (even LTM with an adaptor) to see if you like it.

Of course your choice depends on ...

Casey
 
2 different Fls. 2 different lenses. Plus since you have Zess - why not get a 28 AND 35 Zeiss for the price of 1 Leica lens?
 
shimokita said:
I went with the Elmarit 28 ASPH as I wanted something a little different and new to my experience. I have always shot 35 and continue to do so in full frame digital, it's a great all around length. BUT having shot 28, I find that it improved my work by forcing me to think a little differently.

You might try an inexpensive 28 (even LTM with an adaptor) to see if you like it.

Of course your choice depends on ...

Casey
Click to expand...
28 and 35 both are my favorite. I owned a summaron 35, and like the angle of view.
Thanks!
 
I'd get the 28, but I like 28 more than 35. I'm also not quite finding the need for 28 and 35. Too close for me.

The Leica 28/2.8 is really small. So is the CV 28/3.5. Mind you I don't have either of these lenses.
 
Better for what?
They both have the best modern performance you can find for 35mm cameras. 28 isn't 35 and unless your goal is to take pictures in order to impress people with sharpness, I don't understand the meaning of your question. It's the best you can find, go either way.
 
doesn't the 28mm elmarit asph cost the same as the 35mm summicron asph, $1200-1300? i'd get the 35mm because the 28mm framelines on the m6 are hard to see, even without glasses.
 
what azian said... I like the 28mm but on a .58 mag camera. for the .72 mag camera the 35mm is easier to see all the framelines at once. Having said this, the 28mm is more suitable partner to the 50mm. The 28mm Elmarit ASPH is a pretty nice lens. Ive owned two.
 
Another thing to consider is filter size. If you tend to use filters it's a royal pain to have to buy more in a different size for just one new lens. 39mm filters used to fit the majority of Leica lenses from 35mm through 135mm, plus the old 21/4 Super Angulon.

I've owned several 28mm lenses over the years but I never gave them much use. They either weren't wide enough or weren't fast enough.
 
The elmarit 28 asph is known as super sharp and high in contrast - in simple terms a 'sharp/hard/crisp' lens. The ZM sonnar is old school wide open and kinda modern stopped down. The 35 Summarit is known for exceptional OOF areas (some argue even better than the V4 cron), moderate but not excessive contrast and great resolution. My 2 cents would be to go for the new summarit 35. The look is likely to be more like the sonnar and the FL is to me the most usable of them all. The 35 works for pretty well everything. I use 28 a fair bit but 35mm a heck of a lot more. If there is one FL I had to live with it would be 35mmon the Leica and 65mm on the 6x7 (which is like a 35mm with more top to bottom depth).

As a final word, I have heard quite a few people moving away from the elamarit asph because they did not like the tonality, bokeh etc, but no negative comments about the summarit. Every user or tester seems to think they are superb in every regard.
 
Many people say don't use a 28 and a 35 because they're too similar. Sebastiao Salgado's work would have been better if he had only listened to them... So why not go for both Zeiss lenses? Optically, they're outstanding and ergonomically, they'll match the 50 you already have. And you can buy both for the price of one Leica.

But if your heart is set on Leica, both are fine choices. I would lean towards 35mm because that focal length is more versatile and it fits your viewfinder better. I find using a 28mm lens on a .72x M finder so annoying that I bought an external finder.
 
I do say they are too similar. Then again, I'd rather have one, tops two lenses to carry around. I'm not one of those who say, "I have the following lenses: 15, 21, 24, 28, 35, 50, 75, and 90." I'd rather walk around with a 28 OR a 35 instead of deciding when I should be switching lenses. But that's just me.
 
FifthLeaf said:
Many people say don't use a 28 and a 35 because they're too similar. Sebastiao Salgado's work would have been better if he had only listened to them... So why not go for both Zeiss lenses? Optically, they're outstanding and ergonomically, they'll match the 50 you already have. And you can buy both for the price of one Leica.

But if your heart is set on Leica, both are fine choices. I would lean towards 35mm because that focal length is more versatile and it fits your viewfinder better. I find using a 28mm lens on a .72x M finder so annoying that I bought an external finder.
Click to expand...

I use both 35 and 28 so that must mean that I have Salgado's great judgement ;)

28 and 35 are IMO very different. If I had to use two lenses it would be a 35 and something else, rather than a 28 and something else. I am waiting for a Zm 25 f4.
 
Dear all, I would like to report that I got a Summicron 35A, and enjoy it very much now.
I also got a 0.58 M6 TTL ready for my future 28mm lens, maybe elmarit28 or ZM Biogon 28.
Thank you for your great helpful advice.
 
why people discount the 28mm Elmarit V3 is beyond my comprehension. I would bet that the Biogon and even newer models are barely any better. For about $900 it's a steal
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top Bottom