Lomo LC-A Minitar-1 Art Lens vs Leica 35mm Summicron
A quick comparison by John Ricard
I recently had an opportunity to do a quick test of the new Lomo LC-A Minitar-1 Art Lens as it compares to my 35mm Summicron. The Lomo lens is based on the lens of the LC-A -a camera that feels cheap despite its high cost. However, because people love the colors, vignette and rendering of its lens it remains popular today, some 30 years after its original release.
The LC-A Minitar-1 is produced in the Leica M mount. However, unlike the LC-A, the lens is made of metal and it feels more expensive than it actually is. The lens is so small that it looks more like a large lens cap than an actual lens. Because it is rangefinder coupled, it is possible to focus the lens precisely -something that can’t be done on the LC-A’s zone focusing system.
Of course the only thing that really matters is how the lens renders. From the very few images I shot with the Minitar alongside my Summicron I could see the lens was actually sharp in the center. Certainly sharper than I expected for a $350 lens. The edges have a pronounced smearing that actually looks pretty cool to my eyes. Remember, this isn’t a lens that you buy for its technical perfection.
I also shot a quick comparison of how the lens handled a situation where the subject was backlit and the potential for flare was great. While my Summicron didn’t produce flare, I was pleased to see that the flare was indeed dramatic on the Minitar. This alone would be a reason for me to purchase this lens -not as a replacement for the Summicron, but rather as a compliment to it.
All images were shot at f2.8 on both the Minitar and Summicron. Leica M240. ISO 1600