FrankS
Registered User
I have this choice of 35mm RF lenses for an upcoming trip.
Aside from the aperture difference in speed, which would you take and why?
Aside from the aperture difference in speed, which would you take and why?
Mackinaw
Think Different
For me, an easy pick, go with the faster lens. There's just more uses for a fast lens than a slower one. The Canon is also very compact and light. And it doesn't hurt that it's optically very good.
Jim B.
Jim B.
back alley
IMAGES
you know you want to take the leica lens…but jim is right!
jammcat
Lick My Lens Cap
Canon 35 all of the way.
JMQ
Well-known
The RF Summaron is bulky & heavy. I too would take the smaller Canon 35/2.
Phil_F_NM
Camera hacker
I'll chime in for the slower lens. I've owned the Canon and the Summaron and I think the Summaron is better corrected, especially in the corners. The Canon exhibits more coma in the corners than the Summaron does.
The Summaron has the focusing tab with infinity lock which I prefer and i find the lens is a little bit easier to work with than the Canon.
Both are great optics though so you really can't choose a bad one amongst the two, it's all personal preference.
Phil Forrest
The Summaron has the focusing tab with infinity lock which I prefer and i find the lens is a little bit easier to work with than the Canon.
Both are great optics though so you really can't choose a bad one amongst the two, it's all personal preference.
Phil Forrest
raid
Dad Photographer
I think that both lenses are reasonable choices, Frank.
I may have chosen to take the 35/2 with me over the 35/2.8 on a trip. It is more versatile for different lighting conditions.
I may have chosen to take the 35/2 with me over the 35/2.8 on a trip. It is more versatile for different lighting conditions.
enasniearth
Well-known
What is your destination ,
If the light is low or poor the canon lens is a good choice with one extre stop ,
It is extremely sharp wide open ( center max falls off at corners ) stopped down it is a great lens , it is still a great lens wide open .
If you are going to a tropical paradise , Ithe summaron ,i had the summaron years ago it is smooth with excellent consistent results at any aperature , I had the 35 mm f2.8 .still in most low light conditions the 2.8 aperature is not so limiting .
FrankS
Registered User
A motorcycle trip around the US.
Btw, I'd like to meet as many rff'ers as possible along the way.
Closer to the trip this July, I'll put out feelers.
raid
Dad Photographer
Your trip must reach the sugar white beaches of Pensacola Beach, on your way to New Orleans, which is 195 miles to the West of us.
jordan.dickinson
Jordan Dickinson
I love the 35 Summaron M2 version!! Gotta be in my top Leica glass. It's extremely small, very very sharp, and built like a miniature tank. I've never used the Canon, so keep that in mind, but if it were me, I'd go Summaron.
FrankS
Registered User
raid
Dad Photographer
That would be awesome, Frank. I will be here in July.
enochRoot
a chymist of some repute
Summaron due to closer minimum focus (if for no other reason). Why limit yourself to a 35mm that can only focus down to 1 meter? If you have other lenses should you need closer focus it's not as big of a deal. But the field of view on a 35mm at 1m can be fairly large.
froyd
Veteran
A seat a the lunch (or dinner) table is open in central PA as well, if the visiting the Amish strikes your fancy!
PS - I never tried the Canon and an extra stop is a though thing to give up, but for BW, nothing I've tried surpasses the Summaron
PS - I never tried the Canon and an extra stop is a though thing to give up, but for BW, nothing I've tried surpasses the Summaron
FrankS
Registered User
Thank you froyd.
Canon 50f1.8
Canon 35f2 or Summaron f2.8
Canon 28f2.8 or Canon 28f3.5(black)
CV 20f4
M2, CL
Rolleiflex
iPhone 4S for digital
Canon 50f1.8
Canon 35f2 or Summaron f2.8
Canon 28f2.8 or Canon 28f3.5(black)
CV 20f4
M2, CL
Rolleiflex
iPhone 4S for digital
gwg
Established
Another vote for the Summaron - it was my first 35mm when I started out with an M3 (hence the version with goggles) and love the rendering, so I keep using it also on digital, despite the bulk and odd (or charming, depening on your viewpoint) look.
I also agree with the comment on the close focussing range - it doesn't sound like much, but I found 1m a little limiting on a 35, which is why my faster 35 (a Voigtländer Ultron 1.7 that is limited to 0.9 if my memory serves me well) has not really managed to replace the Summaron, especially on sunny days.
Here's an example or two on the M8:
I also agree with the comment on the close focussing range - it doesn't sound like much, but I found 1m a little limiting on a 35, which is why my faster 35 (a Voigtländer Ultron 1.7 that is limited to 0.9 if my memory serves me well) has not really managed to replace the Summaron, especially on sunny days.
Here's an example or two on the M8:
Nokton48
Veteran
I've owned both and I'd go with the Canon. You can't go wrong. You might be limited at F2.8
Ljós
Well-known
Summaron 2.8.
With an SLR, I would choose a f2 lens over an f2.8 in a heartbeat, because with most screens, the jump in screen brightness is really obvious. (And you may get away with slower speeds in a rangefinder.)
The beauty of the rangefinder is that my f2.8 focuses with the exact same precision and viewfinder brightness as any faster lens.
In return, the 2.8 Summaron is compact and delivers excellent results, already wide open. Love the lack of distortion.
Greetings, Ljós
With an SLR, I would choose a f2 lens over an f2.8 in a heartbeat, because with most screens, the jump in screen brightness is really obvious. (And you may get away with slower speeds in a rangefinder.)
The beauty of the rangefinder is that my f2.8 focuses with the exact same precision and viewfinder brightness as any faster lens.
In return, the 2.8 Summaron is compact and delivers excellent results, already wide open. Love the lack of distortion.
Greetings, Ljós
JMQ
Well-known
OP: you are talking about the 35/2.8 Summaron with goggles, right? that how I interpreted "RF".