I have explained it MANY times! Also, I have shown plenty of comparisons. I also showed a Nikon D3s against the Leica with the Leica producing a MUCH better file. If you have to question why you should buy a Leica then you do not really need a Leica. It is about the "system" as a whole and the way you use that "system". Also, as a bonus I have yet to find ANY DSLR that can bet its output. Those who do not own one or shoot with one would never understand. Those that do "get it".
Hi Steve. It would be great to see you do a video review of the Summilux 50mm ASPH as well. And do you see any difference in performance of this summicron 50 or summilux 50 when attached to either an M9 or M240? Keep up the good work!
No question the 50 Summicorn is a jewel. (I've owned two earlier models back in my M-film days.) My favorite "walking around combo" (should I ever have an M9) would be a 28 & 50 -- both Summicrons. Each lens small & compact but able to deliver stunning results. Hey, don't forget to put a Leica UV filter on the front of each for some protection when the rough 'n tumble of street shooting.
Steve, I have a leicaflex SL (1968). I was wondering if your reflections on the summicron 50mm can be carried over to the R-variant, or if they're significantly different. Also, what is your perspective on the R-Series versus the M-Series Leicas? Jason
The Summicrons appear to have f/2 as their widest aperture, but do hold the title as being sharpest (or one of the sharpest) lenses produced by Leica. The Summilux is what you would call "average" since the widest aperture is f/1.4, so it's more of a standard. Hence "average.
@hossrex Well, I bought an M3 about half a year ago from 1962. It came with the Summicron 50mm from the same year (the one usually called Type 2 or rigid) and I paid less than 800EUR for the kit. That is around 900$ nowadays (a little more when you posted) And it was maintained by Leica in 2005 so the times were nice and it came with a modern 0.85 rangefinder (which might be a turn off for some)
Hi guys, I'm going to sell my dslr, and start breaking into Leica. I will only be able to afford an M8 and one beautiful leica lens. Since the m8 is crop sensored, and I can only get one lens for now, is the 50 going to be too long? Maybe a 35 would be better?
C mon. Dont let the Leica fanboys brainwash you so much. Why on earth would you not rather get the Sony a6300 for roughly the same price, and you can still use m lenses with an adapter. And even autofocus.
@mono1342 You're comparing SLRs to rangefinders. The Nikons and Canons that you say give similar image quality (debatable) weigh kilos, and the lenses even more. You need a big backpack to take your kit for a walk. NOBODY except Leica makes a quality full-frame digital rangefinder. NOBODY would EVER make one as perfectly built. It's a Leica thing. If you're questioning why you'd want a Leica, you don't want a Leica. For a few of us, it's the only thing we care to shoot.
The crazy thing about Leica is you can't even find a "junker" M3 with lens for anywhere CLOSE to a thousand dollars... and that's my personal cut-off. All I want is an M3 that has an accurate shutter, and ANY Leica lens that isn't fogged... crazy that it's still insanely expensive. Good stuff though. Don't think I'm griping about Leica... I want one very badly.
I find it amusing that "great" and "overpriced" are nearly always coupled in the proclamations of those who tend to want something for next-to-nothing.
Hi, have you tried "MagicSFXphoto" (just do a Google search for it...)? On their website you will find a good free video showing the way to take brilliant photos. It made it easier for Joe to make pictures which leave you with that jaw-dropping-effect whenever you look at them. Hopefully it will help you as well.
Hello, are you familiar with "PhotoSFXart" (just do a Google search for it...)? There you will find a nice free video explaining the best way to shoot incredible pictures. This made it possible for Joe to shoot photographs that leave you with that wow-effect while you take a look at them. Hopefully it will work for you as well...
not true that the summilux is the "best" (whatever that is) 50mm lens. summicron is definately sharper. the only downside is the bokeh. there the summilux shines!
![Kodak Black - Catch Fire [Official Music Video]](http://i.ytimg.com/vi/A4ch-olIuZo/mqdefault.jpg)
I have explained it MANY times! Also, I have shown plenty of comparisons. I also showed a Nikon D3s against the Leica with the Leica producing a MUCH better file.
If you have to question why you should buy a Leica then you do not really need a Leica.
It is about the "system" as a whole and the way you use that "system". Also, as a bonus I have yet to find ANY DSLR that can bet its output.
Those who do not own one or shoot with one would never understand. Those that do "get it".
Photographers arguing yet again about Canon vs Nikon? Drop a Leica bomb on them. Argument over.
Hi Steve. It would be great to see you do a video review of the Summilux 50mm ASPH as well. And do you see any difference in performance of this summicron 50 or summilux 50 when attached to either an M9 or M240?
Keep up the good work!
No question the 50 Summicorn is a jewel. (I've owned two earlier models back in my M-film days.) My favorite "walking around combo" (should I ever have an M9) would be a 28 & 50 -- both Summicrons. Each lens small & compact but able to deliver stunning results. Hey, don't forget to put a Leica UV filter on the front of each for some protection when the rough 'n tumble of street shooting.
I dont know why leica dont put focusing tabs on all lenses
Steve,
I have a leicaflex SL (1968). I was wondering if your reflections on the summicron 50mm can be carried over to the R-variant, or if they're significantly different. Also, what is your perspective on the R-Series versus the M-Series Leicas?
Jason
The Summicrons appear to have f/2 as their widest aperture, but do hold the title as being sharpest (or one of the sharpest) lenses produced by Leica. The Summilux is what you would call "average" since the widest aperture is f/1.4, so it's more of a standard. Hence "average.
Like always nice review Steve.
You are a lucky one ;)
Still my dream, a Leica.
aaaa already saved enough to buy this. but i'm having a difficult time pulling the trigger.
@hossrex
Well, I bought an M3 about half a year ago from 1962. It came with the Summicron 50mm from the same year (the one usually called Type 2 or rigid) and I paid less than 800EUR for the kit. That is around 900$ nowadays (a little more when you posted)
And it was maintained by Leica in 2005 so the times were nice and it came with a modern 0.85 rangefinder (which might be a turn off for some)
Thanks!
Hi guys,
I'm going to sell my dslr, and start breaking into Leica. I will only be able to afford an M8 and one beautiful leica lens.
Since the m8 is crop sensored, and I can only get one lens for now, is the 50 going to be too long? Maybe a 35 would be better?
Banana Hunter Pro Save more money and get a M9 or M240.
***** I would rather invest in good glass than the newest body at the moment, since lenses will outlast it by decades.
C mon. Dont let the Leica fanboys brainwash you so much. Why on earth would you not rather get the Sony a6300 for roughly the same price, and you can still use m lenses with an adapter. And even autofocus.
@mono1342 You're comparing SLRs to rangefinders. The Nikons and Canons that you say give similar image quality (debatable) weigh kilos, and the lenses even more. You need a big backpack to take your kit for a walk.
NOBODY except Leica makes a quality full-frame digital rangefinder. NOBODY would EVER make one as perfectly built. It's a Leica thing. If you're questioning why you'd want a Leica, you don't want a Leica. For a few of us, it's the only thing we care to shoot.
The crazy thing about Leica is you can't even find a "junker" M3 with lens for anywhere CLOSE to a thousand dollars... and that's my personal cut-off.
All I want is an M3 that has an accurate shutter, and ANY Leica lens that isn't fogged... crazy that it's still insanely expensive.
Good stuff though. Don't think I'm griping about Leica... I want one very badly.
Let's be honest though, if you're shooting Leica then price isn't going to be the decider between two lenses
I have the 50mn Summilux f1.4 and each time I go to a camera shop, someone want to buy it from me, no way!
@stevehuff1969 that's a WIN!
@stevehuff1969 That's like asking why you'd buy a Rolex instead of a Casio watch. Both show time well. But yet, some people prefer Rolex.
@mono1342
Anyone who needs to ask why they should buy a Leica camera does not deserve ownership of one!!
have you heard of the 50mm f0.95 noctilux ...its sad by manyto be the best 50mm ever made for any lens mount ..but its priced like a crappy car
I find it amusing that "great" and "overpriced" are nearly always coupled in the proclamations of those who tend to want something for next-to-nothing.
@stevehuff1969 you have to "get it", since you earn a living from "reviewing" products ...
Hi, have you tried "MagicSFXphoto" (just do a Google search for it...)? On their website you will find a good free video showing the way to take brilliant photos. It made it easier for Joe to make pictures which leave you with that jaw-dropping-effect whenever you look at them. Hopefully it will help you as well.
Hello, are you familiar with "PhotoSFXart" (just do a Google search for it...)? There you will find a nice free video explaining the best way to shoot incredible pictures. This made it possible for Joe to shoot photographs that leave you with that wow-effect while you take a look at them. Hopefully it will work for you as well...
Sum-Eye-Cron
Goddd i am glad not too have a Leica camera.,every time i whant too buy a lens , i have too put my wife behind a window and put in a red lightbulb.
not true that the summilux is the "best" (whatever that is) 50mm lens. summicron is definately sharper. the only downside is the bokeh. there the summilux shines!