Desmolicious wrote:
Fred, I see you sold your 28 Lux. You didn't seem to have it very long.. Did you pick another 28 or 35 over it?
I had traded my 35/1.4 FLE for the 28 Lux but went back to the former. Since I already own the Voigtlander 28/2 II and love it, I didn't feel too bad about it. I still think the 28/1.4 Lux is a great lens but optically, there is nothing beating the new Voigt.
Fred Miranda wrote:
I had traded my 35/1.4 FLE for the 28 Lux but went back to the former. Since I already own the Voigtlander 28/2 II and love it, I didn't feel too bad about it. I still think the 28/1.4 Lux is a great lens but optically, there is nothing beating the new Voigt.
Interesting. Thanks for this helpful-for-my-budget tidbit.
genji wrote:
I was disappointed when the Ultron 28/2 II was announced because I’d been hoping for an APO-Lanthar 28/2. At Rich Nelridge’s (@naturephoto1) urging I secured a copy of the Ultron and was very impressed. Initially I preferred the size and haptics of the Cron 28 I, but the Ultron was clearly superior optically and now the Cron has gone to make way for a Lux 28. With intensive use I’ve come to appreciate the Ultron’s physical design—it turns out to be perfect for street photography and I wonder if that was CV’s intent. I’ll be keeping the Ultron and the Lux.
It seems to me that, should CV be planning the release of another 28mm lens, the obvious choice is an APO-Lanthar 28/2 but one shouldn’t discount the possibility of a Nokton 28/1.4 which, given CV’s recent track record, could well give the Lux 28 a run for its money. My own preference would be that they do both....Show more →
I have the same combo (Ultron II and Lux 28) and agree that they complement each other very well. I far prefer the rendering of the Summilux opened up, but if one is just walking around taking daytime photos it is nice to have the compactness of the Voigtlander. My problem is that I constantly wonder if I should just take the Lux just in case (what if I want to do an environmental portrait and regret not having it?) so the Ultron gets much less use even though it is really a great lens. Before the Ultron II came out I also was hoping for an APO-Lantar 28/2 but with my current setup I don't think I see a role for it. I would still prefer the Summilux most of the time and an APO-Lanthar would almost certainly be larger and heavier than the Ultron, defeating the purpose of the Ultron for me.
The 28 Summilux is for me one of the hallmark Leica lenses right now.
CTMRIGuy wrote:
I have the same combo (Ultron II and Lux 28) and agree that they complement each other very well. I far prefer the rendering of the Summilux opened up, but if one is just walking around taking daytime photos it is nice to have the compactness of the Voigtlander. My problem is that I constantly wonder if I should just take the Lux just in case (what if I want to do an environmental portrait and regret not having it?) so the Ultron gets much less use even though it is really a great lens. Before the Ultron II came out I also was hoping for an APO-Lantar 28/2 but with my current setup I don't think I see a role for it. I would still prefer the Summilux most of the time and an APO-Lanthar would almost certainly be larger and heavier than the Ultron, defeating the purpose of the Ultron for me.
The 28 Summilux is for me one of the hallmark Leica lenses right now....Show more →
I agree that the Lux 28 and Ultron 28 v2 cover all the bases but, because 28, 35, and 50 are my key focal lengths and I already have the 35 and 50 APO-Lanthars, I’d find an APO-Lanthar 28 impossible to resist. The use case can come later!
genji wrote:
I agree that the Lux 28 and Ultron 28 v2 cover all the bases but, because 28, 35, and 50 are my key focal lengths and I already have the 35 and 50 APO-Lanthars, I’d find an APO-Lanthar 28 impossible to resist. The use case can come later!
Well, I would be lying if I said that I did not fall prey to similar reasoning on a regular basis!
I just went to the Leica store to get a better idea of the 28mm Summilux size without the hood. I was especially curious in relation to the 35mm FLE. Here are photos of the 28mm Summicron, 35mm FLE V1, and the 28mm Lux. I thought I would leave them here in this thread since this was one of the first hits on google when search for a comparison of the two.
<img> ;https://imgur.com/a/CB7rZok</img>;
I don't have both but the 35 is a go-to for me for its mix of size, useful focal range, and optical character. There are higher resolution 35s out there (the Carl Zeiss for example) but I love the look of the 35 Summilux. If I added a wider f/1.4 M lens, I'd take the Summilux 21 over the Summilux 28.
I'm not sure where to post images taken with the 28mm Summilux, so I figure I'll post here as it attracts more interests.
2nd day of shooting with this lens, the contrast and especially saturation is immediately a huge step up from Thypoch 28mm that I loved. I like everything about the lux more, except two:
1) The Thypoch can simply shoot under harsh light and doesn't glow, details are clear. The lux will glow a little. But since it's harsh light, there'll be enough light to stop down a little to avoid that.
2) Thypoch has that interesting smooth cinematic rendering to it. But that also means less bite to the details.
But what is an apparent upgrade over the Thypoch:
1) Saturation, and tonal character and separation. Especially the greens seems to have more shades to them, making the image looked richer, and the blue of the sky looked more natural. Something that post process can't quite achieve. This presented also on my previous favourite lens 35mm cron asph, the 28lux perhaps even richer so.
2) Sharp across the frame, like literally, and focus plane seems to be flatter and predictable, even at relatively close range.
I've also looked at a handful of lux vs Nokton comparison, it usually shows the Nokton to render almost the same as the lux, but I suspect the lux glow more under strong light so on those comparisons the lux will lose out on sharpness. Otherwise, to my eyes the lux is sharper across the frame, even just marginally so.
In the end I splurged on the lux because I viewed many many images taken with both lens, there are far more images taken with lux that wowed me, which I think due to different color character and rendering even if they're so close side by side. Now I have it in my hands, I love it! Is it perfect? Nope, the wide open glow means I won't get perfectly clean shot shooting street wide open, and it's heavy even without the hood! But I'm going to enjoy the heck out of it, then I'll probably get a Nokton down the road.
jeffersoncasey wrote:
I'm not sure where to post images taken with the 28mm Summilux, so I figure I'll post here as it attracts more interests.
2nd day of shooting with this lens, the contrast and especially saturation is immediately a huge step up from Thypoch 28mm that I loved. I like everything about the lux more, except two:
1) The Thypoch can simply shoot under harsh light and doesn't glow, details are clear. The lux will glow a little. But since it's harsh light, there'll be enough light to stop down a little to avoid that.
2) Thypoch has that interesting smooth cinematic rendering to it. But that also means less bite to the details.
But what is an apparent upgrade over the Thypoch:
1) Saturation, and tonal character and separation. Especially the greens seems to have more shades to them, making the image looked richer, and the blue of the sky looked more natural. Something that post process can't quite achieve. This presented also on my previous favourite lens 35mm cron asph, the 28lux perhaps even richer so.
2) Sharp across the frame, like literally, and focus plane seems to be flatter and predictable, even at relatively close range.
I've also looked at a handful of lux vs Nokton comparison, it usually shows the Nokton to render almost the same as the lux, but I suspect the lux glow more under strong light so on those comparisons the lux will lose out on sharpness. Otherwise, to my eyes the lux is sharper across the frame, even just marginally so.
In the end I splurged on the lux because I viewed many many images taken with both lens, there are far more images taken with lux that wowed me, which I think due to different color character and rendering even if they're so close side by side. Now I have it in my hands, I love it! Is it perfect? Nope, the wide open glow means I won't get perfectly clean shot shooting street wide open, and it's heavy even without the hood! But I'm going to enjoy the heck out of it, then I'll probably get a Nokton down the road.
It all started with the dreaded decentering test. 😂
Frankly the Thypoch did very well and when I was still shooting on the M9 the flaws weren't that apparent, the way it resolve the details were just the right match and the lower contrast (to compensate for the narrower dynamic range) and milder saturation suited to the M9 so well. But when I move to M10-P all flaws became more apparent, it's not the decentered corners that trigger me because the corners WO rarely matters, but I start to notice the mid frame (on the decentered side) really not that great which again, not a concern on M9, and the M10-P having broader dynamic range so the files do lack just that little bite and crunch to it.
I gotten the lux at a price I've never seen before also because it has no box and pouch. After studying for a long while decided to snatch the deal and turned out a nice upgrade, the Lux really is such a strong performer when it comes to sharpness both center and across the frame, and to my eyes the colors are the reason why one shoot with Leica, moving the sliders felt like oozing colors from the tube, something that I never quite experience with the Thypoch, which is weird cause I shot indoor side by side at the shop and they mostly looked identical, but felt like a completely different lens in real world shooting.
The bus interior shot above, focal point was around 1-1.2m but when I pixel peep around the frame looking for the focal plane they're all there and stayed detailed and sharp. If that's the price to pay for the extra bit of performance, I'm glad I did! I was blown away when I edit that shot...
rsolti13 wrote:
Congrats on the new Lux. Your images with the Thypoch were fantastic, what drove you to look to change?
For example the shot below is about as much as I can push for a broad tonal range before it look unnatural, but no where near the richness I get from the lux. It feels like I'm shooting with M9 again.
UPDATE:
This is probably a better comparison shot taken with Thypoch, they're about on par but browsing through my gallery that's about the punchiest shot I have, while the lux consistently giving me richer files.
After more shooting, I concluded that the lux does offer richer color and contrast, that alone makes me want to put away the Thypoch despite Its lighter, and offer closer MFD. Few more findings:
- as Fred review suggested, the far end corners never quite optimally sharpen/cleaning up even stopping down to f8. Not a concern for me as long as it isn't just one corner or two 😂. This is also true for 35mm Cron ASPH, feels like a design decision.
- At 2-3m focus distance, the Lux actually render smoother bokeh than the Thypoch(!).
- after getting used to infinity lock nib, I can locate the nib MUCH easier than the tab without looking. I probably will need to relearn the muscle memory again for the tab.
Anyhow, few more sample shots. I've never seen my Thypoch render quite like these, in fact these 2 shots reminded me so much of Q2 but better.
And an unscientific comparison between the Thypoch and Lux (different day and time but similar lighting) - Thypoch files behaved differently to the sliders, I can't get it to pop as much as the Lux, and seems to have different white balance despite effort to get them to match. This is also consistent with many other comparison shots I did - tweaking white balance match certain colors, but also drift other colors. Also take note of the color tonality, the Lux just capture more shades of colors, which is mind blowing...
Thypoch:
Lux:
So what's my conclusion based on my own use and preferences? If I'm still shooting with M9, I would still prefer the Thypoch as I loved how it renders, and the Lux might be too oversaturated on M9 which I no longer able to test. But on M10-P, the Lux takes the crown.
jeffersoncasey wrote:
I'm not sure where to post images taken with the 28mm Summilux, so I figure I'll post here as it attracts more interests.
2nd day of shooting with this lens, the contrast and especially saturation is immediately a huge step up from Thypoch 28mm that I loved. I like everything about the lux more, except two:
1) The Thypoch can simply shoot under harsh light and doesn't glow, details are clear. The lux will glow a little. But since it's harsh light, there'll be enough light to stop down a little to avoid that.
2) Thypoch has that interesting smooth cinematic rendering to it. But that also means less bite to the details.
But what is an apparent upgrade over the Thypoch:
1) Saturation, and tonal character and separation. Especially the greens seems to have more shades to them, making the image looked richer, and the blue of the sky looked more natural. Something that post process can't quite achieve. This presented also on my previous favourite lens 35mm cron asph, the 28lux perhaps even richer so.
2) Sharp across the frame, like literally, and focus plane seems to be flatter and predictable, even at relatively close range.
I've also looked at a handful of lux vs Nokton comparison, it usually shows the Nokton to render almost the same as the lux, but I suspect the lux glow more under strong light so on those comparisons the lux will lose out on sharpness. Otherwise, to my eyes the lux is sharper across the frame, even just marginally so.
In the end I splurged on the lux because I viewed many many images taken with both lens, there are far more images taken with lux that wowed me, which I think due to different color character and rendering even if they're so close side by side. Now I have it in my hands, I love it! Is it perfect? Nope, the wide open glow means I won't get perfectly clean shot shooting street wide open, and it's heavy even without the hood! But I'm going to enjoy the heck out of it, then I'll probably get a Nokton down the road.
jeffersoncasey wrote:
For example the shot below is about as much as I can push for a broad tonal range before it look unnatural, but no where near the richness I get from the lux. It feels like I'm shooting with M9 again.
This is probably a better comparison shot taken with Thypoch, they're about on par but browsing through my gallery that's about the punchiest shot I have, while the lux consistently giving me richer files.
---------------------------------------------
jeffersoncasey wrote:
After more shooting, I concluded that the lux does offer richer color and contrast, that alone makes me want to put away the Thypoch despite Its lighter, and offer closer MFD. Few more findings:
- as Fred review suggested, the far end corners never quite optimally sharpen/cleaning up even stopping down to f8. Not a concern for me as long as it isn't just one corner or two 😂. This is also true for 35mm Cron ASPH, feels like a design decision.
- At 2-3m focus distance, the Lux actually render smoother bokeh than the Thypoch(!).
- after getting used to infinity lock nib, I can locate the nib MUCH easier than the tab without looking. I probably will need to relearn the muscle memory again for the tab.
So what's my conclusion based on my own use and preferences? If I'm still shooting with M9, I would still prefer the Thypoch as I loved how it renders, and the Lux might be too oversaturated on M9 which I no longer able to test. But on M10-P, the Lux takes the crown. ...Show more →
Wonderful work, and lovely images!
I do not foresee buying either lens, but truly admire what you have done, with yours.
I made these posts just to have more first hand informations for anyone who's wondering why the 28mm Summilux being such expensive lens even among the summilux siblings, or simply why Leica lenses being Leica lenses.
