28mm Summilux is real!

[YYV_146]

Sean Reid posted his review of a prototype 28mm Summilux just now...

I saw Leica's earlier announcement (28,35 and 50 Summilux) and thought it must have been a typo...But this is one of the lenses I've always wanted. I've been through three Leica 28mm's and wasn't particularly happy with the rendering/performance of any of them, so I sold those(actually, I sold all three on RFF), and went for the 35lux FLE.

While the 35mm has changed the way I think about mild wides - it's simply as close to perfect a lens as I can imagine, I still prefer 28 over 35. Also, most of my work involves some kind of available light shooting, so if Leica produces this lens in standard anodized black and under $6k...It's a dream come true 😀

The press image from Leica. Looks a bit bigger than the 35lux...

 

[TennesseJones]

What did you dislike about the other 28mm lenses? Not being trolly, just genuinely interested.
I've always fancied trying the leica 28mm f2 but never found a user 2nd hand one...

 

[Lauffray]

Frankly I've always loved the 2.8 ASPH, it's such a tiny lens but such an amazing one. To me (I repeat, to me) any 28 faster than 2.8 is just plain silly

 

[YYV_146]

What did you dislike about the other 28mm lenses? Not being trolly, just genuinely interested.
I've always fancied trying the leica 28mm f2 but never found a user 2nd hand one...

The 28mm cron suffers from very serious flare issues. I'm pretty sure it's not just one copy, the lens has big patches of purple-cyan flare whenever the sun is close to the frame. I also found that the lens wide open was a good bit softer in the corners wide open than the 28mm elmarit ASPH at F2.8. It's more than capable of creating very atmospheric environmental portraits, though, as long as you pay close attention to the light.

The 28mm Elmarit ASPH was a bit too contrasty for me, but I liked the sharpness, especially the corner performance. An 2.8 lens was also just on the border of being too slow for my needs. I'd recommend it over the 28cron, though.

 

[YYV_146]

Frankly I've always loved the 2.8 ASPH, it's such a tiny lens but such an amazing one. To me (I repeat, to me) any 28 faster than 2.8 is just plain silly

The 28 ASPH is a great lens, especially considering how compact it is 😀

One of the reasons I don't like slow primes is that they don't work very well with EVFs. When it gets darker the EVF slows considerably more with an F2.8 or F4 lens compared to F1.4...

 

[TennesseJones]

Wonder if Anthony Suau's ears pricked up...

http://anthonylukephotography.blogspot.co.uk/2011/06/street-photographer-anthony-suau-visual.html

 

[Ansel]

What is all this stuff about lens rendering? There is no such thing. Lenses do not render.

 

[YYV_146]

What is all this stuff about lens rendering? There is no such thing. Lenses do not render.

I was talking about Bokeh, flare control and contrast, specifically.

Lenses don't change the image itself, but there is color rendition differences across lenses. Whether that is relevant for digital, though, is another question.

 

[f16sunshine]

What is all this stuff about lens rendering? There is no such thing. Lenses do not render.

They do on the internet 😛

 

[YYV_146]

Wonder if Anthony Suau's ears pricked up...

http://anthonylukephotography.blogspot.co.uk/2011/06/street-photographer-anthony-suau-visual.html

Hah 😀 Suau is a great photographer, and if you prefer 28mm, there really is no other decent, small and fast 28mm.

And he shoots film, which might help with flare suppression somewhat - I've always wondered if sensor reflections add to the flare of a lens.

 

[pieter]

I love my 28mm summicron. It does all manner of wonderful things, but yes it does also flare.

The summilux will not be for me. It's just too big and I just can't get into the fast wides thing. In my perception the summilux line starts at 35mm or even 50mm.
My 28 summicron I preferred over the Elmarit because of the way it renders 🙂dance🙂, not so much because of speed.

 

[V-12]

Of course lenses render. They render an image on the film or the sensor with a characteristic unique to the design, just as wide hog hair paint brush renders a different finish from a fine sable brush. Get a bigger dictionary.

As for the lens itself, I suppose its good at being a lens, but less good at being a lens with any useful purpose on the average Leica camera because of the viewfinder blockage.

V

 

[YYV_146]

Of course lenses render. They render an image on the film or the sensor with a characteristic unique to the design, just as wide hog hair paint brush renders a different finish from a fine sable brush. Get a bigger dictionary.

As for the lens itself, I suppose its good at being a lens, but less good at being a lens with any useful purpose on the average Leica camera because of the viewfinder blockage.

V

With my (thick) glasses I can't see the 28mm framelines on M digital bodies anyways. A .58 finder film M might be a bit better - haven't really tried it.

Live view with a future M type 240 or using the lens specifically with Sony/Fuji bodies is probably how I'll use it.

 

[shortstop]

With my (thick) glasses I can't see the 28mm framelines on M digital bodies anyways. A .58 finder film M might be a bit better - haven't really tried it. Live view with a future M type 240 or using the lens specifically with Sony/Fuji bodies is probably how I'll use it.

I have an MP 0,58 and wearing glasses can see the 28 frame with a bit of effort. 35 frame wearning glasses and 0,58 vf is perfectly comfortable.

 

[teddy]

What is all this stuff about lens rendering? There is no such thing. Lenses do not render.

Another word for "render" is "to make", "to depict" as in a drawing or perspective or to "produce" or 'cause to become".

It's an expression that is acceptable to describe how a lens produces an image in its own particular way.

 

[Kent]

Now it's "real"?
Yeah, but... something is not "real" to me, if it's not within reach.
And that 28 Lux definitley won't be (for me). So, for me, it's kind of "unreal". 😉

Another word for "render" is "to make", "to depict" as in a drawing or perspective or to "produce" or 'cause to become".

It's an expression that is acceptable to describe how a lens produces an image in its own particular way.

I agree and second that.

 

[Freakscene]

What is all this stuff about lens rendering? There is no such thing. Lenses do not render.

What do you think an mtf chart is? It's a mathematical description of how individual lenses transfer light to film or a sensor. Along with the lens' colour transmission data and spectral response of the capture medium, you can visualise almost everything about what photos taken with a given lens will look like, and they are remarkably different between lenses. If "rendering" is not a good description of that, I don't know what is.

Marty

 

[icebear]

.... Also, most of my work involves some kind of available light shooting, so if Leica produces this lens in standard anodized black and under $6k...It's a dream come true 😀....]

This is most likely not going to happen, it might be 5995,- Euros 🙄.
I use my 35 'cron and if that's not wide enough the 25/2.8 Biogon does a decent enough job 😀.

 

[YYV_146]

.... Also, most of my work involves some kind of available light shooting, so if Leica produces this lens in standard anodized black and under $6k...It's a dream come true 😀....]

This is most likely not going to happen, it might be 5995,- Euros 🙄.
I use my 35 'cron and if that's not wide enough the 25/2.8 Biogon does a decent enough job 😀.

5995 Euros is actually pretty close to $6k pre-tax if the Euro softens a bit...😀

The 25 2.8 is a pretty nice lens, but (pardon the pun) we have to let biogons be biogons. Digital usage is generally subpar, with corner performance issues...

 

[Archlich]

Both the 21 and 24 lux go at around $7,500 nowadays. So...

It certainly will be a killer lens though.