Leica 35/3.5 summaron vs. Canon 35/2.8

I've owned and used the Summaron 3.5cm F3.5 and I was happy with it. It is not the sharpest 35mm lens out there, but pretty decent and very compact and well made too. I have not used the Canon 35/2.8, but my experience with other Canon LTM lenses is that the "black" models have better optics (sharper and more contrast) which I am sure is a consequence of tighter construction tolerances, better optical glass, better coatings, and perhaps in some cases recalculated designs. The Canon 35/2.8 is usually a little less expensive than the Summaron on the used market.
 
Oh yes, I've also owned and used the Summaron 35mm F2.8 which seems to have crept into this discussion. I think this lens is in a higher class performance-wise. The price on the used market well reflects this too. It is a killer optic, but not an economy lens. Expect to pay double the cost of a Summaron 3.5cm/3.5 or triple the cost of a Canon 35mm F2.8 (I just wish it were not so!!)
 
Love my summaron f28 with goggles on my m3.

Love my summaron f28 with goggles on my m3.

6117731618_12ea6a7313.jpg
[/url] Mossy limb by Analogick, on Flickr[/IMG]


Plan on keeping it when I get the m10
 
Two other options are the W-Nikkor 35mm f3.5 and f2.5 lenses in LTM.
I have a f2.5 version and its a great lens, sharp stopped down and dreamy wide open with old time color rendering.
 
So I ended up getting both a canon 35/2.8 and a Leica 35/3.5, the canon is very sharp , probably a little sharper than the summaron, but the summaron has this beautiful vintage draw, it is hard to describe, anyways, I sold the canon and am keeping the Leica.
 
Back
Top Bottom