Leica Newbie

[FrankS]

I've been too wordy already. Listen to Tom.

 

[Magus]

Post deleted by posters request

 

[peter_n]

let me refine the question a bit:

there are 35mm/f2 summicrons and 50mm/f1.4 summiliuxes available for $600-$800, which i could pop for if they are really better than the $400 CV lenses. i assume these are pretty old, given the price point, so what qualitative difference could i expect, both between different generation leicas, and new cv lenses?

i know it's a bit of a broad question, but i'm trying to get a good overview before i go shopping.

OK so here's a bit of a broad answer. 😉 If your output is small print or the web then a less expensive lens will do fine. If you are going to frame and hang then you need paper of maybe 11x14, 16x20, 20x30 even and that is where the more expensive lenses begin to show the difference and so the expense may be worth it. The image content, not the sharpness or any other attribute of the glass is what makes a great picture: Your work is more likely to succeed based on your eye, rather than your glass. How true that is Tom! Remember it was HCB who said "sharpness is a bourgois concept". 😉

Welcome to the forum BTW! 🙂

 

[telenous]

It has been a long time since the last time there was some sort of consensus on matters of optics and such. That feels like a victory for the RFF community.

One thing to add is that modern CV lenses are often said (cf. Erwin Puts, for instance) to perform better in terms of resolution, contrast, edge-to-edge performance than the older Leitz designs (the older Summilux 50 is a case in point). It is by the same token, and probably by the same margin, that modern Leica lenses (the Aspherical generation) are said to be better than CV lenses. The significance of these (objective) differences is very much down to (subjective) individual taste.