Archived posting to the Leica Users Group, 2004/11/09
[Author Prev] [Author Next] [Thread Prev] [Thread Next] [Author Index] [Topic Index] [Home] [Search]
On 09/11/2004, at 12:31 PM, lug-request@leica-users.org wrote:
> Summilux vs Summicron
Hmm, all this traffic and no-one has answered the question :?)
I have owned both the M Summicron and M Summilux (an E43
1989 version). In the end I sold the 'cron because:
o I found it too contrasty and harsh, especially for colour (gasp!)
work under the Australian sun. It may be great for polluted
northern
hemisphere light, but for our part of the globe it's just too
"forte".
o For hand-held available-light use, the 'lux is every bit as sharp.
o The 'lux has better flare control (an important issue for me as a lot
of my indoor shots have room lights shining into the lens).
o It has a long focus travel, making precise focus easier.
o Obviously you get an extra stop (although you have to do a luminance
correction in software to compensate for vignetting when wide open).
o E.Puts hates the E43 version of the 50-lux, another very good reason
for liking it :?)
FWIW the great bulk of my "Sydney Unposed" project has been shot with
the
50-lux. Have a look in particular at the Bondi beach shots at:
<http://4020.net/unposed/fun.shtml>
Here I shot into the sun and yet the 'lux managed to retain details in
both
the shadows & highlights without flaring.
Regds,
Andrew Nemeth
<http://nemeng.com/leica/>
[ Leica FAQ ]