I have a 35mm summilux-m non asph lens already, and interested in the latest asph version.

Do you think I should go for the summilux asph or summicron asph? Price is not really the subject.

-- pat (njsl@hotmail.com), March 01, 2002

Answers

Performance-wise, the two 35 asphs can essentially be considered the same lens; one just has an extra stop. Since money isn't an object, get the 'Lux. That way if you ever need the extra stop you've got it. OTOH, the 'Cron is a tad shorter and more compact.

:-),

-- Jack Flesher (jbflesher@msn.com), March 01, 2002.

Pat, Jack is absolutely right. Both are basically the same (except for the f/1.4) because they are both ASPHs. The difference in prices (judging by those here) is about 37% or about USD 785. I myself chose the 2/35A because it's smaller and I don't always need f/1.4. If you don't either, think of all the film you can buy instead. Or what lens next.

-- Michael Kastner (kastner@zedat.fu-berlin.de), March 01, 2002.

...and I don't always need f/1.4.

But at those few times when f/1.4 will make or break the picture, that's when you'll wish you had it! If price isn't the problem, then you should get the fastest version possible, especially when there's no optical penalty and really very little size and weight difference.

-- Anon Terry (anonht@yahoo.com), March 01, 2002.

i have the 35lux asph and it's a very fine lens. if i would buy again, i'd go for the cron. the lux is just too long for my taste.

-- stefan randlkofer (geesbert@yahoo.com), March 01, 2002.

I have played with the 'cron and the 'lux at a camera store and money is also not the issue to me. I finally took the 'cron because I quite like the size of the 'cron. I am sure the 'lux is a good lens though.

-- tom tong (tom.tong@ckh.com.hk), March 01, 2002.

Keep the Simmilux original for a super compact set-up for after dark and, if you use the 35MM focal length for everyday daylight shooting, buy the new Summicron. I did just that and have the best of both worlds. There is another possible solution. Keep the summilux and buy the 28Mm summicron. That lens will knock your socks off even at F2. Kajabbi

-- Ned Learned (ned@kajabbi.com), March 01, 2002.

Unless you shoot BW which you develop yourself, I would opt for the cron. You rarely need the speed in color plus negative color is so great these days at 400 or 800

-- Bob Haight (rhaigh5748@aol.com), March 01, 2002.

If the price isn't an issue then definitely get the Lux ASPH. And definitely sell the non-ASPH, as you will never use it once you have the ASPH.

-- Jay (infinitydt@aol.com), March 01, 2002.

if money wouldn't be a topic, the I'd get the asph'lux, but keep my 'cron preasph, pay all my debts and go traveling the world, ho yes and buy some film.

-- r watson (al1231234@hotmail.com), March 01, 2002.

I too got a 'cron, because the 'lux is good deal bigger and heavier. But fast is always good in my opinion. If I find I need a 'lux later on I will have to get one, but so far I have not felt the need for it. In many ways if I do get a faster M lens it is more likely to be the 50mm 'lux

-- Robin Smith (smith_robin@hotmail.com), March 01, 2002.

I second Jack's comments. And I don't belive that the black Lux Asph is that much bigger and heavier than the Cron. Some people are real wimps. If you are not limited by $$$, don't limit yourself with the Cron. But either lens will amaze.

-- Kristian (leicashot@hotmail.com), March 01, 2002.