I've been using a 28mm 2.8 M lens for a while now. I've used a 35 but end up with the 28 99% of the time. I'm considering trading in the 28 for the ASPH version. The extra stop is of course very useful but then again I could always use faster film. Question is: has anyone made a side by side comparison? Does anyone have both lenses and is able to give a constructive analysis of the two versions? I belive my 28 is the 4th version.

I also have a 35mm 1.4 summilux, boxed and very good condition with a lens hood and leica skylight filter (dated as a 1966). There are two balsam marks on the rear element. It will cost £150 to fix. I have been told that after fixing it will be worth around £650. I want to sell the lens in a fixed condition! Is anyone interested in the lens and at a price of £550?

-- Stewart Weir (weirs99@aol.com), February 14, 2002

Answers

Here is what Erwin has to say:

http://www.imx.nl/photosite/leica/mseries/testm/m2-28.html

There was a detailed comparison between the 28/2.8 Elmarit, 28/2 Summicron and the Cosina/Voigtlander 28/1.9 in the latest Viewfinder. While Erwin found significant differences, the photographers reported only very slight differences between the two lenses.

If you are not a heavy user, you can buy a great deal of film for the price difference...

-- John Collier (jbcollier@powersurfr.com), February 14, 2002.

Oops, that should read: between the two f/2 lenses.

-- John Collier (jbcollier@powersurfr.com), February 14, 2002.

Hi Steart:

I have not directly compared the two lenses as I have not owned a pre- asph 28, but here is some information. I find my 28asph to be VERY sharp -- it is in the same league as my 35asph, 24asph and 90APO. And it is significantly sharper than the 28 setting on my 3E, which is rumored to be as good as the pre-asph. At the LHSA show last fall, there were two individuals selling thier 28/2.8's in favor of the 28/2 they had just purchased, and a third who had done the same two weeks earlier. I think that if you like your pre-asph, you'll love the asph with its extra stop -- and it is no bigger than the current 2.8 version!

:-),

-- Jack Flesher (jbflesher@msn.com), February 14, 2002.

The extra stop is of course very useful but then again I could always use faster film.

Sure, but the M tops out at 1/1000 so you might hit the ceiling too soon if you use faster film, especially if you like using shallow depth of field for subject isolation. My philosophy is to get the fastest lenses you can afford (particularly with Leica since there is little or no optical penalty with the latest generation of large aperture lenses, as compared to their slower stablemates). Sometimes a stop can mean the difference between picture or no picture, which for me is in the vicinity between 1/8 and 1/15 sec with 35mm.

-- Anon Terry (anonht@yahoo.com), February 14, 2002.

Yes, and unlike most other lens speed choices in the Leica world, the step up to the 28mm Summicron does not carry a size or weigh penalty. It's just a matter of money, and not really that much money (in Leica terms). I think this is a case where the 'cron is the clear choice.

-- Dan Brown (brpatent@swbell.net), February 14, 2002.

Dear Stewart

The Leica 28/2 ASPH is not only the best 28/2 ever made, it is one of the best 35mm lenses ever made. Leica pulled all the stops, took no prisoners, compromised not a micron when they created that lens.

I use the Voigtlander 28/1.9 and am happy with it. I find it very good wide open (though it is according to all reports I've read only middling). I'm also happy with my old 'lux 35/1.4 in spite of its many negatives (pun not intended).

Is the extra f-stop a good thing. It is a great thing. It has truly enhanced my available light photography.

The most important thing you say is that you end up using the 28 99% of the time. You also indicate you want a faster 28 than the usual 2.8. (Yes you could use faster film; but consider faster film at f2.) If I were you, I'd go for it. I mean the Leica lens if you can afford it--the Voigtlander if money is a problem.

-- Alex Shishin (shishin@pp.iij4-u.or.jp), February 14, 2002.

The 28mm Elmarit must be languishing in Leica's warehouse. They really should reduce its price, as they cannot be selling any now the 'cron is here and the price differential makes the Elmarit not attractive at all (although it too is a 1st class lens).

-- Robin Smith (smith_robin@hotmail.com), February 14, 2002.

I agree,how is Leica going to sell that piece of crap?

-- Norman (normangreep@gre56.com), February 14, 2002.

I traded up from the Elmarit to the Summicron. I see absolutely no difference in quality between the two - both are exceptional lenses. The fact that Leica managed to make an f/2.0 lens that's as good as the 2.8, while keping the size the same, is marvel of optical engineering. What you get for your money with the Summicron is an extra, utterly uncompromised f-stop. At 2.8 and smaller, there's no real-world difference for the average (non-Puts) photographer.

BTW - about the 28 setting of the Tri-Elmar: mine is definitely inferior to the Elmarit (and of course the Summicron) at 4 and 5.6. This is quite visible in BIG enlargements (over 11x14) but is not an issue in hand-held shots at 8x10. The 3E still wins for versatility and being on the camera when you need to get the shot.

-- Paul Chefurka (paul@chefurka.com), February 14, 2002.

Stewart:

Keep your 28mm, take photos, use 200 ASA instead of 100. For paper, there is almost no difference.

Learn to use low speed, it's fun (even with a R7). Some of my best pix are with a Minox 35 35/2.8 at a speed of 1 sec.

For the other lens, fix it if you want to use it, otherwise....

Just a French advice....

-- Xavier d'Alfort (hot_billexf@hotmail.com), February 14, 2002.

I was't so impressed by my first roll of film with the 28 'cron. But, I was trying to rush my first roll of film through my new M6. But, now, I am very, very impressed with the lens. I shot into the headlamp of a motorcycle at dusk with little flare. And a backlite building, which I thought would produce a lousy picture, has a beautiful glow. Sorry for no pics for now .. thinking about a new scanner.

BTW, any recommendations on a fairly good scanner for negatives and especially slides? The Canon 4000dpi looks good but some report problems with slides. The Nikon 4000 looks good but is a bit pricey for me right at the moment. I know that my old Nikon Coolscan II was never that great with slides and now seems to be even worse (age of lamp??).

-- Tom (therbert@miami.edu), February 14, 2002.

Tom, try the Nikon LS-IVED. 2900 dpi, lots of good reports.

-- Paul Chefurka (paul@chefurka.com), February 14, 2002.

For the scanner, I can warmly recommend the Nikon LS IV. Easy to use, plenty of controls, good resolution, etc. I often print 30*40 cm on a Epson 1290 and I'm more than happy with the results. It takes some time to learn how to master the scanner but once you get the hang of it, it's a very powerful machine. I find the software very logic ( and I have no crashes )and more complete than the Canon Software. Good luck.

-- William Westergren (westergren@skynet.be), February 15, 2002.