I'm not convinced the Summicron is that much of a compromise over the Summilux.
Vignetting and bokeh are the biggest differences (aside from the stop, of course) and I do prefer the bokeh of the lux. At f/2, both lenses are considerably sharp in the center. The lux is a hair better across the frame, and that stays consistent stopped down. If the lux wasn't so very good wide open, I'd find little justification for it's additional bulk and cost.
Worldinlens wrote:
Hmm... I think that bokeh of both R35 incredible thing for other brands.
i want try this sigma just for interest... And more want to try futures Xenon's - 35 and 50, maybe it will be really interesting bokeh lenses. But this is not means that i sell my R-lenses
Hello,just got my sigma 35 1.4DG nikon.On D800E is very very sharp WO, but not by much,and very beautifull boken.Compare to my R28 E55 head to head f/2.8 to f/2.8 is still a winner R28 at all-sharpness,resolution,clarity and colors-nothing beats R28 V2 !!!
Compare my tokina 17-35mm f/4 vs Sigma 35 head to head at f/4 to f/4 sharper and more contrasty is tokina,but not by much
Compare myself head to head this tokina outperforms nikon 28mm 2.8 AIS,nikon 20-35 f/2.8
i read more about tokina 17-35,that not as sharp,but my unit-i dont know,superior.dont know about nikon 16-35mm f/4-never had it.
finally-i sold tokina,28ais and 20-35mm.for landscapes left for me R28 V2 and for all to all sigma 35 1.4DG
I
freaklikeme wrote:
I'm not convinced the Summicron is that much of a compromise over the Summilux.
Vignetting and bokeh are the biggest differences (aside from the stop, of course) and I do prefer the bokeh of the lux. At f/2, both lenses are considerably sharp in the center. The lux is a hair better across the frame, and that stays consistent stopped down. If the lux wasn't so very good wide open, I'd find little justification for it's additional bulk and cost.
If I have to keep one, 35lux R. no question. At f1.4, 35lux could show occasional busy Bokeh. but at f2, 35lux has more blur, smoother and as beautiful bokeh as 35cron. At edge, 35cron highlight could have weird shape because of coma, which 35lux almost free of it. The thing is 35lux R is very sharp lens at f1.4, center, with quick roll off toward edge. This is the quality I am after. It give a very nice close range face portrait rendering.
For landscape or flat subject, 35lux is definitely better, but both doesn't have anything brag about. But I don't care as that is not my intention for these lenses.
35cron is very lovely lens. It is relative small size and high quality build along with better bokeh make it ideal walk around lens. Will do well with MILC body. 35lux is like a brick, but more manageable brick than Zeiss 35/1.4
zhangyue wrote:
Brad, The first one from SF Zoo looks very nice.
If I have to keep one, 35lux R. no question. At f1.4, 35lux could show occasional busy Bokeh. but at f2, 35lux has more blur, smoother and as beautiful bokeh as 35cron. At edge, 35cron highlight could have weird shape because of coma, which 35lux almost free of it. The thing is 35lux R is very sharp lens at f1.4, center, with quick roll off toward edge. This is the quality I am after. It give a very nice close range face portrait rendering.
For landscape or flat subject, 35lux is definitely better, but both doesn't have anything brag about. But I don't care as that is not my intention for these lenses.
35cron is very lovely lens. It is relative small size and high quality build along with better bokeh make it ideal walk around lens. Will do well with MILC body. 35lux is like a brick, but more manageable brick than Zeiss 35/1.4
I have a question for you Leica guys: I'v got the Apo Telyt 280/4 and a 1.4 and a 2.0 converter, both APO versions which work fine together with the Telyt.
Now I have also aquired a Vario-Elmar 4.2/105-280, a ROM Version which I will be using on a JVC video camera which will take 35mm lenses (converted to Nikon).
I now tried to match both the 1.4 and 2.0 APO converter (Nikon converted on the male side but still original Leica on the female side) with the Elmar and they would not go on.
Will it work, when I take that little ROM part out, or does the APO converter not fit at all at a non APO lens? It feels like a different bajonet
at Leitax I found this: "- It is possible to install the Leitax bayonet on the Leica Vario-Elmar-R 105-280/4.2 ROM and Vario-Apo-Elmarit 70-180/2.8 ROM, because these lenses are build the same way as the Leica ROM primes."
All clear from Leitax site about 105-280 - it's possible, but need to cut aperture lever in some cases.
p.s. if you really want modify your lenses and apo-extenders for Nikon mounts on the both sides - it's also possible. but this is ticket to one way. You can see first post in my LJ in my profile
Alex, my question about the 105-280 was not whether I could Leitax it, but why the APO extenders would not mount on the non-APO Elmarit. ( I was maybe giving to much confusing detail above). ..... and the answer is .... the ROM thingy had to go.
I could take it out, since it was only screwed in and not glued, and now the converters attach to the lens allright so that is solved.
I wrote you a pm earlier about the Nikon mount for the other extender side (the side of the converter that goes in the Camera is leitaxed already, put the side which attaches to the lens is not). Yes I am very interested in this. - which post are you refering to? (what is "my LJ"?) I can't find anything in your profile or on your webside on converting converters ;-) - but it seems like you can do it. This is great news! Sounds like you need to file off some part of the extender? Have you tried Leica extenders with Nikon Tele lenses? I'd be interested if they are lossless in quality with Nikon lenses as well. Since there are many of these extenders around on the market it is no big loss to destroy their possible use with a Leica mount and turn them into Nikon only. If I like the price you charge for the conversion I will send you both my extenders today Please send me a pm about further details. Thanks in advance!
@cyra, Alex do conversion service. He convert 2x apo to nikon mount both male and female side of 2x.
You can look his works in livejournal he called it LJ. Here is the link for his site http://worldinlens.livejournal.com/
I can vouch for him. He knows ins and outs of Leica R lenses.
cyra wrote:
Alex, my question about the 105-280 was not whether I could Leitax it, but why the APO extenders would not mount on the non-APO Elmarit. ( I was maybe giving to much confusing detail above). ..... and the answer is .... the ROM thingy had to go.
I could take it out, since it was only screwed in and not glued, and now the converters attach to the lens allright so that is solved.
I wrote you a pm earlier about the Nikon mount for the other extender side (the side of the converter that goes in the Camera is leitaxed already, put the side which attaches to the lens is not). Yes I am very interested in this. - which post are you refering to? (what is "my LJ"?) I can't find anything in your profile or on your webside on converting converters ;-) - but it seems like you can do it. This is great news! Sounds like you need to file off some part of the extender? Have you tried Leica extenders with Nikon Tele lenses? I'd be interested if they are lossless in quality with Nikon lenses as well. Since there are many of these extenders around on the market it is no big loss to destroy their possible use with a Leica mount and turn them into Nikon only. If I like the price you charge for the conversion I will send you both my extenders today Please send me a pm about further details. Thanks in advance!
ROM-non-ROM does not matter for modification R-lenses and extenders for Nikon, the CPU-units always removed. They not need, as well some internal parts of rear Leica-R mounts
The lenses with extenders never give you same optical quality as separate lens, but sometimes this is reasonable compromise between size, price and quality
cyra wrote:
... I have also aquired a Vario-Elmar 4.2/105-280, a ROM Version which I will be using on a JVC video camera which will take 35mm lenses (converted to Nikon).
I now tried to match both the 1.4 and 2.0 APO converter (Nikon converted on the male side but still original Leica on the female side) with the Elmar and they would not go on.
Will it work, when I take that little ROM part out, or does the APO converter not fit at all at a non APO lens? It feels like a different bajonet
Some combinations of lens and converter work better if you put the converter on the body first, then put the lens on the converter (assuming a Leica-R body). This is because the body's aperture stop-down lever moves the converter's lever out of the way so the lens' aperture lever doesn't interfere with the converter's. Since you've Leitaxed the converter and a Nikon body doesn't move the lever you might need to move the converter's aperture control lever out of the way (from the Leitaxed side) with a finger before mounting the converter on the lens.
telyt wrote:
Some combinations of lens and converter work better if you put the converter on the body first, then put the lens on the converter (assuming a Leica-R body). This is because the body's aperture stop-down lever moves the converter's lever out of the way so the lens' aperture lever doesn't interfere with the converter's. Since you've Leitaxed the converter and a Nikon body doesn't move the lever you might need to move the converter's aperture control lever out of the way (from the Leitaxed side) with a finger before mounting the converter on the lens.
Yes, i understand about what was a question All exactly in this answer.
wilco and Alex thanks for the links, now I am there, just didn't see the converter site before.
Your website has become very nice, Alex. Wilco, I know that Alex knows his stuff, last year he was anouncing that he would do the converters soon, I just wanted to confirm, that this is possible now.
Thanks Telyt, I had the converter on the body first. Didn't try to move the lever though. I will remember this, thanks for the tip. Should one mount the lens wide open generally?
In this case, it seems that the ROM chip was the problem. I took it out and now it works fine.
madamasu wrote:
Four street-scenes in Jaisalmer with the Leica Elmarit 19mm. Because of the extreme contrasts between brilliant sun and pitch-black shadows, correct exposure is definitely not easy.
Here are a series of photos taken with the Leica 100mm f2.8 Macro Elmarit taken with the Panasonic Lumix G1. Images of the Japanese Maple leaves taken at the Seattle, WA Japanese Garden in October of 2012 during a Photo Workshop with Art Wolfe. Images processed through Lightroom 4. Only 2 have been uploaded to my Facebook photo page at present the last 3 will be posted in the next 3 days. The last image is fairly heavily cropped to yield the composition that I wanted. I was lazy, I should have shot the last image as a vertical.
naturephoto1 wrote:
Here are a series of photos taken with the Leica 100mm f2.8 Macro Elmarit taken with the Panasonic Lumix G1. Images of the Japanese Maple leaves taken at the Seattle, WA Japanese Garden in October of 2012 during a Photo Workshop with Art Wolfe. Images processed through Lightroom 4. Only 2 have been uploaded to my Facebook photo page at present the last 3 will be posted in the next 3 days. The last image is fairly heavily cropped to yield the composition that I wanted. I was lazy, I should have shot the last image as a vertical.
