The other 'usual suspects' for 35/2 and 35/2.8 don't live up to my expectations, and so I want to get a 35/2 or 35/2.8 Leica R. I've read many current & recent threads and I still have a few questions. I'd appreciate any comments you can provide.
First off, I'd appreciate any comments about the relative performance of the Elmarit-R 35/2.8 vs. the Summicron-R 35/2, aside from the 'cron's +1 EV advantage wide open. If the 'cron is that much better, then I won't bother with the Elmarit. I'm looking for an excellent lens at a decent price, but I'm not cheap.
Second, version control. Based on my reading, I figure the 'cron to look for has the built-in hood and E55 filter. What version of the Elmarit should I look for?
I know the 35 lux is not an option but it's performance is excellent. Aside from having owned the lux for about 15 years I've only tried the 35 cron, not the elmarit, and I wasn't happy with the cron but maybe it was a dud.
The 35 lux is almost identical in performance to the 80 lux. Not the sharpest tool in the shed wide open, but already very sharp at f2. It has very high resolution and excellent tonal gradation when stopped down. Great colours. It really is almost identical to the 80, just wider. I generally use it at f2. It has excellent and smooth bokeh. I believe the samples below were shot at f1.4 but possibly at f2 on a 1.6 crop body.
Haven't owned the Elmarit, but owned and very much liked the 35/2 (E55 version). Not killer sharp WO, but gets sharp fast as stopping down. Lived up to it's reputation for great bokeh and that Mandler 'glow'. Lens has great flare and CA control. Having owned it and the ZF 35, in terms of pixel-peeping starting WO, I'd pick the ZF, other than that, the Summicron (which I sold the ZF for). Sold the Summicron as never found myself shooting that wide and had a number of lens at time clustered around that FL, but still regret it.
IIRC from the Sumis MTF vs an older MTF I saw for the Elmarit, there was little if anything to differentiate the two in terms of resolution once you stopped down. As for the Elmarit's bokeh, one of the Sumis strengths, I have no idea. The E55 version was a complete redesign but I've no idea on the difference vs the older version. I don't suspect it got any worse ;> Neither version has the wider aperture corner-strength of the late 28/2.8.
There are three versions of the Elmarit. The second and third are generally considered to be better than the first. The second and third are similar in design and have 7 elements in 6 groups (the first has 7 elements in 5 groups). It can be a bit hard to tell the first version from the second. They both are about 400 grams and have a detachable hood. The first version is a little longer, but you should probably get the serial numbers when the versions changed which I don't know to reliably tell a first from second version. The third version is considerably lighter and has a built in hood, so it would be easy to tell apart. The best bargain may be a second version if you can reliably find one, but if it were me I would look for a third version as it will be easy to identify. I hope this helps.
The first version of the Elmarit-R was very prone to flare, suffered from low contrast, and had 7 elements in 5 groups. The second version was much improved, with seven elements in 6 groups. The third version is pretty much optically equal to the second version, but features a built-in hood and a "standard" 55mm filter diameter. The first and second versions had odd-ball sized filter diameters, Series VI for the first version and Series VII for the second. Can't speak for the first version, but I owned the second for a while and needed to use a 48/49 step ring which allowed the use of 49mm filters (not bad considering my collection of Oly lenses). The Leica Elmarit-R renders a little differently than the Zeiss, but I rather liked it...gave a nice "painterly" look to images. Its a great little lens, and built like a tank. Avoid the first version, try to get a second or third.
The best way to tell the first and second apart is through the serial numbers. The third version has the 55mm filter, which makes things a lot easier. Here's a link to a Leica serial number reference guide:
I just sold my copy of the Elmarit-R second version about three days ago...had it listed here in the Buy/Sell forum (as well as sold my copy of the Distagon 35/2.8). I just hope the ZE Distagon 35/2 that I ordered is able to at least measure up to the two that I just sold. To give you an idea of pricing, I sold my Elmarit-R for $345, which included an AF-confirm adapter.
Gentlemen, thanks to all. I'm set for versions. One of the features I'm most interested in, is a comparison of bokeh characteristics. Hopefully someone with the right experience will contribute. No worries. It's only a matter of time. This is a great forum!
jcolwell wrote:
.. I'd appreciate any comments about the relative performance of the Elmarit-R 35/2.8 vs. the Summicron-R 35/2, aside from the 'cron's +1 EV advantage wide open.
I don't do wide very often, but I have used the last versions of both the 'cron and Elmarit. Bokeh has not made itself an issue so it's probably not bad for either lens. One difference I've noted is that the Elmarit can be made to flare occasionally (but it's manageable). The Summicron doesn't flare.
As others have mentioned, avoid the first version Elmarit.
My experience is that the cron has better color but is not as sharp as the 2.8. The 2.8 is great if you are doing B&W. It is crazy sharp and contrasty. Just lacking in color.
Jim
First version Elmarit should have a clamp on detachable round hood.
Second version has a rectangular detachable hood which bayonets on with the little silver pins.
Third version has the built in/sliding hood.
Agree with above posters, 2nd or 3rd versions are definitely better.
I like the Summicrons the best but like the 90 mm versions, they are different critters.
If absolute corner sharpness is a major factor, the 35 summicron is not for you. In 3 copies, all have had poor extreme corners, even stopped down. I've had a ZF 35, too, however, and much prefer the cron overall, even if it has soft corners. The cron is one of those lenses capable of very special shots.
Justin D wrote:
If absolute corner sharpness is a major factor, the 35 summicron is not for you. In 3 copies, all have had poor extreme corners, even stopped down. I've had a ZF 35, too, however, and much prefer the cron overall, even if it has soft corners. The cron is one of those lenses capable of very special shots.
This my experience as well. Extreme corners are not good but the edges are still good so it's a small area that isn't. As for the images, this is one of the few I've tried where the sky it shoots looks like the sky I see. Unfortunately, good as it is, the ZE 35 doesn't do that as well.
