rscheffler wrote:
Hi Fred, the 35 Lux ASPH field curvature characteristics you described remind me of how the 50 Lux ASPH behaves in the midfield. It's acceptable wide open, becomes more nervous in the f/2.8-4 range and not noticeable past f/5.6.
But, but... it's a half-stop slower, doesn't shoot wide open at nearer distances and relies on significant software corrections to remove distortion and expand the image circle to cover FF...
I suspect a reason we don't have Q cameras in 35mm, 50mm, and tele is the impact it would have on M system sales.
I see a similar mid-zone resolution dip with the 50/1.4 Lux but have not tested if FC behavior changes with smaller apertures. I will check it out.
The Voigtlander 50mm f/1.2 Nokton has a slightly worse mid-zone dip but does slightly better at the very corners compared to the Lux. The latter is a tad sharper at center infinity distance, and noticeably sharper at close distance due to FLE.
Thanks Fred, looking forward to your insights about the 50 Lux's midfield.
John Black wrote:
Have both and the 35 FLE has been a workhorse for a decade. The 35 has a reputation for some not-great bokeh at times, but I can't think of shot where bokeh ruined it. The 35's use ranges from wide open handheld to stopped down landscapes. Good jack of all trades lens. Always in my bag.
The 28 Lux is heavier, so it is used less often, but when I do use it, I like its draw better than the 35. I tend to shoot it at wider apertures. Stopped and with filters there can be vignetting on the M10 Monochrom, so that also factors into using it less for landscapes. Whenever I edit the 28 Lux shots, always the same thought - "I should use this lens a lot more".
In terms of sharpness, they seem pretty comparable to me (M10M + M10R). I think the 35 FLE does better with diffraction - I use it F11 and even the rare F16 shot, and it does really well when needing all that DOF. For whatever reason, I tend to think of the 28 Lux as more of a wide-open lens.
If picking one, the 35 would win for the utility factor and more compact size. ...Show more →
Re 28 Lux vignetting: the hood causes vignetting in the very corners. This is also the case with the 21 Lux's similar rectangular hood design. I use the 28 Lux with a standard non-slim B+W Polarizer and cannot use the hood with the polarizer installed. I have not had filter vignetting problems. And that is not a thin filter by any means.
I think of the 28 Lux as a do-it-all lens. Fast when needed and no hesitation to use it stopped down, even if at times there is purple fringing in the very corners in high contrast areas. Yes, it's a bit larger than the 35 Lux, but it's smaller than the 21 Lux which it effectively replaced for me, for most low light uses. So I guess it's all relative. And I seem to prefer 28 over 35 more often than not.
As mentioned my other Luxes are the 21 and 50. With both I see noticeable sharpness/contrast/character changes in the plane of focus between wide open and slightly stopped down. This is much less the case with the 28 Lux, which IMO is a lot more consistent in the plane of focus as it's stopped down.
---------------------------------------------
genji wrote:
This thread has got me thinking seriously about replacing my 28 Cron ASPH v1 with a 28 Lux and using my Ultron 28/2 v2 for stopped down zone focusing.
Try one if you can and compare it against the Cron. It was not an easy decision for me. I slightly prefer the look of the Cron at nearer distances wide open.
I think I mentioned it in your 28mm thread that the reason I ended up with the Lux was due to shooting indoor events with the M240 and Cron that often landed me at around 1/45 or 1/60 second shutter speeds, which were too slow to avoid subject or camera motion. The Lux bought me the extra stop and helped in that regard. But I'd probably be able to get away with the Cron on the M10 by taking advantage of its better high ISO performance. I was thinking of pairing the Lux with an Elmarit ASPH for stopped down daylight work, walk-around shooting with a smaller kit, etc. But the new Ultron is probably the better fit, being similar in size, less expensive and great performance already from wide open. The question is if it will be worthwhile retaining the Lux for increasingly niche applications?
Not using the 28 Lux's hood; using a 49-67mm step up ring with 67mm filters (dark red and/or polarizer with the Leica M10-M). I haven't noticed any issues with the M10-R (no filters and using the 28 Lux's hood).
I never used any Leica hood other than build in ones. 28cron and 35lux both have filter ring protection. I love them. They are so small, clean and lovely with both about 90 degree from mfd to infinity. Muscle memory is all you need for hyper focus stop down shooting. (VC has it too now though)
For Leica M, I want to stick with Leica OEM glasses. Super fast glasses like f0.95/f1 are exceptions because I use them on L.
One of the things I like better about the 35mm f/1.4 FLE is the way that @airfrogusmc uses it. Makes we me want to get another M so I can start enjoying that lens again.
rscheffler wrote:
Try one if you can and compare it against the Cron. It was not an easy decision for me. I slightly prefer the look of the Cron at nearer distances wide open.
I think I mentioned it in your 28mm thread that the reason I ended up with the Lux was due to shooting indoor events with the M240 and Cron that often landed me at around 1/45 or 1/60 second shutter speeds, which were too slow to avoid subject or camera motion. The Lux bought me the extra stop and helped in that regard. But I'd probably be able to get away with the Cron on the M10 by taking advantage of its better high ISO performance. I was thinking of pairing the Lux with an Elmarit ASPH for stopped down daylight work, walk-around shooting with a smaller kit, etc. But the new Ultron is probably the better fit, being similar in size, less expensive and great performance already from wide open. The question is if it will be worthwhile retaining the Lux for increasingly niche applications?...Show more →
Uh oh! My dealer called earlier today to say that he might have found a used Lux 28 for me. At the very least I’d be able to compare it to the Cron v1.
I have both and feel that they are quite different.
The 35 Lux is much smaller, lighter, and easier to walk around with but I do not feel that its rendering is anywhere near as special as the other Summilux focal lengths. Consequently I find myself rarely taking out the 35mm and will switch between the 28mm Summilux or Ultron II depending on how much I am willing to carry on the camera.
The 28mm Summilux I find has very unique rendering for the focal length wide open and that really is the reason to own it. If you are not interested in that (particularly for environmental portraiture) I think you are probably better off with the cheaper and lighter Ultron II for shooting at f2.8 or narrower.
In summary, the 28mm Summilux is one of those "magical" lenses for me for which there is no equivalent, but it only makes sense if you think that look fits in to your photographic style. It does not make sense if you are a landsape/architecture shooter for example.
Desmolicious wrote:
Anyone compare the 7A 28 1.4 to the 28 Lux?
I have all 3, the FLE, the 28Lux and the 7a 28/1.4....I haven't compared them side by side yet, as I just got the 28 Lux (again). Just off the top off my head from shooting both, I'd say with the 7a (and the TTa 's as well), in general, to me besides the handling, flare control and less contrast is what I notice with these Chinese lenses.
But, if I didn't have the means to have the Leica's, I'd for sure shoot the 7a's and TT's, to me, they are an amazing bargain. Almost all mine are fairly sharp wide open and make for fun walkaround lenses that I don't have to worry about. Different subject but, I have a little 17/1.4 TT that is AMAZING on my CL...You can almost touch the front glass and catch focus...So fun to take on hikes.
When I get some time later Maybe I'll do some impromptu tests with the Lux's and their much less expensive counterparts...(I'm no lens tester, I just do real world comparisons )
Matt Kerby wrote:
I have all 3, the FLE, the 28Lux and the 7a 28/1.4....I haven't compared them side by side yet, as I just got the 28 Lux (again). Just off the top off my head from shooting both, I'd say with the 7a (and the TTa 's as well), in general, to me besides the handling, flare control and less contrast is what I notice with these Chinese lenses.
But, if I didn't have the means to have the Leica's, I'd for sure shoot the 7a's and TT's, to me, they are an amazing bargain. Almost all mine are fairly sharp wide open and make for fun walkaround lenses that I don't have to worry about. Different subject but, I have a little 17/1.4 TT that is AMAZING on my CL...You can almost touch the front glass and catch focus...So fun to take on hikes.
When I get some time later Maybe I'll do some impromptu tests with the Lux's and their much less expensive counterparts...(I'm no lens tester, I just do real world comparisons )
I already have the 7A 28 1.4. I bought it used cheeeep as a low light back up to my 28mm Elmarit Asph. Optically no issues, but mechanically if I don't use it for a while, the focus ring freezes up, and takes an effort to break free! Then no issues. Still I've never experienced this w any other lens, ever..
Typical crappy goes waay past infinity at the hard stop that all my 7A lenses do. But the price/perf ratio is the saving grace.
Thanks for the input! I have not tried the Lux 28, so was curious.
Desmolicious wrote:
I already have the 7A 28 1.4. I bought it used cheeeep as a low light back up to my 28mm Elmarit Asph. Optically no issues, but mechanically if I don't use it for a while, the focus ring freezes up, and takes an effort to break free! Then no issues. Still I've never experienced this w any other lens, ever..
Typical crappy goes waay past infinity at the hard stop that all my 7A lenses do. But the price/perf ratio is the saving grace.
Thanks for the input! I have not tried the Lux 28, so was curious.
My 7A 28/1.4 doesn’t exhibit that freezing behaviour. As you and Matt have both suggested, it offers amazing performance for the price. So much so that I’m strongly tempted to forget about the 28 Lux and instead just replace my v1 Cron 28 with a v2.
genji wrote:
My 7A 28/1.4 doesn’t exhibit that freezing behaviour. As you and Matt have both suggested, it offers amazing performance for the price. So much so that I’m strongly tempted to forget about the 28 Lux and instead just replace my v1 Cron 28 with a v2.
I think they are very different lenses. I just received the 28/1.4 Lux today and it's one contrasty lens. Reminds me of the Zeiss 35/1.4 ZM in sharpness and rendering. The 7Artisan has great rendering (smooth at transition zone) and it's more similar to the Voigtlander 35/1.2 III. It's not that sharp wide open, especially off axis.
The Leica 28/1.4 Lux is very sharp at f/1.4 and it does not exhibit the mid-zone dip the 35/1.4 Lux has. My initial impression is very positive and the lens allows me to shoot in very dim light conditions. Great complement to the CV 28/2 II.
Here is a sample from tonight. (wide open) at ISO 6400.
Now I ended up with both 35/1.4 Lux and 28/1.4 Lux.
One of them is going to the chopping block and I think it's the former since I also love the CV 35/1.7 Ultron.
Fred Miranda wrote:
Now I ended up with both 35/1.4 Lux and 28/1.4 Lux.
One of them is going to the chopping block and I think it's the former since I also love the CV 35/1.7 Ultron.
28/1.4's are not so easy to come by, even f2's are rare. 35mm's are aplenty. Will you be posting any comparisons/crops from the 28mm's (ultron v2, Lux or Cron)? I can't recall which you have now.
From the little I have seen, the 28 Lux is not very smooth, but very attractive draw to me nonetheless.
Mine doesn't freeze either, in fact my 28 7a is smooth and dampened better than my Summilux. I was just saying, in general, the Leica build and user experience is an upgrade over most my TT and 7a's. I also agree it's a really great lens, especially considering the price.
genji wrote:
My 7A 28/1.4 doesn’t exhibit that freezing behaviour. As you and Matt have both suggested, it offers amazing performance for the price. So much so that I’m strongly tempted to forget about the 28 Lux and instead just replace my v1 Cron 28 with a v2.
nehemiahphoto wrote:
@Stephen G@ and @genji@ Why don't you two "love" the new CV 28/2? Just wondering the reasoning. I too have lenses I like but don't love.
Haptics. I strongly dislike its small size (the same applies to the Ultron 35/2 v2, which I also have and don’t love). As has been pointed out earlier in (I think) the Summicron 28mm discussion, the Ultron 28 v2 would be optically better (reduced vignetting) if it had been designed with a larger front element and, consequently, a 46mm instead of a 39mm filter thread. It’s not the 39mm filter size per se that’s the problem: I have various Summicron-M 50s that take 39mm filters and they’re fine because they’re long enough to use comfortably. It’s the relative short length of the Ultrons combined with the small diameter that makes them unpleasant to use. I’m waiting for some good weather to do the Ultron 28 v2 vs Cron 28 v1 rendering comparison but I already suspect that the Ultron is likely to come out in front. I don’t care because for me haptics trump rendering every single time. I’ll continue to use the Cron v1 in preference to the Ultron. And, as soon as I can replace my Cron 28 v1 with a v2, the Ultron will be sold.
genji wrote:
Haptics. I strongly dislike its small size (the same applies to the Ultron 35/2 v2, which I also have and don’t love). As has been pointed out earlier in (I think) the Summicron 28mm discussion, the Ultron 28 v2 would be optically better (reduced vignetting) if it had been designed with a larger front element and, consequently, a 46mm instead of a 39mm filter thread. It’s not the 39mm filter size per se that’s the problem: I have various Summicron-M 50s that take 39mm filters and they’re fine because they’re long enough to use comfortably. It’s the relative short length of the Ultrons combined with the small diameter that makes them unpleasant to use. I’m waiting for some good weather to do the Ultron 28 v2 vs Cron 28 v1 rendering comparison but I already suspect that the Ultron is likely to come out in front. I don’t care because for me haptics trump rendering every single time. I’ll continue to use the Cron v1 in preference to the Ultron. And, as soon as I can replace my Cron 28 v1 with a v2, the Ultron will be sold....Show more →
Ahhh---I see. Stay away from MS-Optics lenses then
But I know what you mean. I have a 35/2 v1, and I dislike the pin (versus the focusing tab). But if I get any smaller than that lens, it's downhill for me, ergonomically anyway.
Matt Kerby wrote:
I have all 3, the FLE, the 28Lux and the 7a 28/1.4....I haven't compared them side by side yet, as I just got the 28 Lux (again). Just off the top off my head from shooting both, I'd say with the 7a (and the TTa 's as well), in general, to me besides the handling, flare control and less contrast is what I notice with these Chinese lenses.
But, if I didn't have the means to have the Leica's, I'd for sure shoot the 7a's and TT's, to me, they are an amazing bargain. Almost all mine are fairly sharp wide open and make for fun walkaround lenses that I don't have to worry about. Different subject but, I have a little 17/1.4 TT that is AMAZING on my CL...You can almost touch the front glass and catch focus...So fun to take on hikes.
When I get some time later Maybe I'll do some impromptu tests with the Lux's and their much less expensive counterparts...(I'm no lens tester, I just do real world comparisons ) ...Show more →
Matt, you mention that you got the 28 Lux again. Could I ask why you sold your first copy and why you decided to get another?
