35mm Summicron Asph vs. 35mm Summilux Asph

[rami G]

I agree with those who find significant difference between the lenses. I first had the cron, loved it but upgraded it for the extra stop, then I missed it, bought it again, but latter found myself using it only around home, because I never took the risk of having not enough light...
I find the cron to be much sharper and has an unusual lack of any lose of sharpness in the edges even at f/2. the lux seems to have a slight higher center sharpness when wide open. However, what I love about the cron the most is the fact that it has basically no light fall off. Latter, when I got the 28 cron asph, I was hoping to find that also with the 28 (after reading some reviews and commens) but I never did. I love the 28 cron and I love the 35 lux but I do miss the 35 cron for a very particular look of the images, especially, landscape. with people photography I generally like the center to have somewhat more sharpness and better illumination, especially when the subject is in the center.
I still don't own the m8, but note that on the R-D1 the 35lux is my favorite lens.
this is a shot with the 35lux and the R-D1:

http://www.photo.net/photodb/photo?photo_id=4635928&size=lg

 

[StuartR]

I think it would be important to differentiate between the two lenses on film and on digital, particularly the RD1. Since the RD-1 is a 1.6 crop, you are using much less of the lens, also since it is 6mp, you are losing the finest layers of resolution and microcontrast. Don't get me wrong, I am not saying the RD-1 is bad in any way, it just uses the lenses very differently from film cameras, which is different again than the M8. The lenses might behave quite differently on film, on the RD-1 and on the M8. You need look no further than vignetting...certain lenses vignette a great deal on the RD-1, but not very much at all on film cameras. The sensor and the emulsion just have different reactions. If anything, I would suspect that the lenses on the M8 are probably be closer to the way they behave on film -- just because the sensor is larger, features the special micro-lenses and 10mp. But anyway, it is just another consideration.

As for you Ted, I think you will be really really happy with the 35/1.4 ASPH. I look forward to seeing some shots when it arrives.

 

[rami G]

StuartR, I absolutely agree. maybe I should have been clearer in my own post. On film I found the 35cron the finest lens I ever tried. Never compared cron and lux on the R-D1 but I must say that the 35lux on the R-D1 is really amazing and I love it more than with film. I guess on the M8 it is an all new story.

 

[Harry Lime]

Speed is king. The extra stop really does make a difference. With f1.4 I can continue to shoot Tri-X @ 400 into the evening and night.
There isn't much you can't shoot at f1.4 and 1/30th @ 400/800 asa.

Both lenses are stellar performers and any comparison is splitting hairs.

If you got the money, grab the Lux ASPH.

 

[telenous]

I am with those who say that the two lenses render differently. I happen to prefer the Lux 35 Asph., which is very convenient, because I have one. But I had the chance to use both (and will do so again in the very near future), as well as see scanned images and prints, and if you care about such things, the differences are there to be seen. I agree with Harry Lime's take on lens speed, f/1.4 is quintessential for available light.

 

[Magus]

Post deleted by posters request