A few snaps with the Leica 28 Summilux ASPH by Steve Huff

TGTR

A few snaps with the Leica 28 Summilux ASPH

by Steve Huff

1432662313000_IMG_498014

It  took me a few days to get in the groove again with a Leica M and as I have been using this M-D 262 I have come to truly start to fall deep in love with it. No LCD? I do not need it, and it has been so refreshing to NOT have one. Sure if I had an LCD I could cover it up with gorilla tape or something but the M-D is so nice and smooth on the back, free of buttons, dials and distractions. I took the camera out today with the Leica 28 Summilux, which in my early uses I was not 100% sold on…but the more I use it, the better it is getting, or maybe I should say..the more I am appreciating it though it does suffer from some CA (as most fast Leica glass does).

Below are just a few fun snaps while out with the M-D 262 and 28 Lux!

E-Mail Ken Hansen if interested in the M-S 262 or 28 Lux, as the set I am using came from him 😉

Debby and I took a day to head to Prescott AZ to escape the heat of Phoenix. I also brought the M-S and 28 Lux. A portrait of Debby at f/1.4

DEBBYTIRE

From inside a restaurant…click image for better!

L1000072

The Leica glow, color and charm is intact in the 28 Summilux ASPH. Click it for a better version. 

L1000075

Corn anyone?

L1000067

I missed focus on this one but I still love the way the lens rendered the scene. 

L1000084

This old guy happily let me snap his picture after I complimented him on his beard 

oldman

Met this man and his pet parrot Zeke, of which he has had now for 18 years

ZEKE

All kinds of pets come out in the town square in Prescott, even ferrets

L1000092

Wide open!

gt5

I am so loving this combo of M-D 262 and 28 Lux. I need to get more comfy shooting with a 28, as it has been one of my least used focal length of my photographic life. I usually go either really wide or to a 35 or 50. So I am enjoying expanding my horizons with this beautiful 28. More to come!

Steve

34 Comments

  1. Ladies and Gents I just bought the 28mm F1.4 and so far and after fiddling with it for 3 hrs around 50 + pics …. I love it…. it is one of those Leica’s special lenses that has some kind of magic on how it renders the light.

    I currently have M240, M246, 50mm f0.95, 50mm f2 APO, 21mm F3.4, 35mm f2 and 90mm f2 and after buying the 28mm lux I think I get rid of the 21mm and 35mm.

    What do you think ?….

    By the way I used to have 35mm F1.4 and this 28mm F1.4 beats it by far…as Peter Karbe mentioned (outperforms) in his interview and in the 28mm F1.4 spec sheets.

    Best Regards………I will give more info after I fully test it.

      • Dear Steve ,

        Just wanted to let you know that you were my inspiration to make the change from SLR’s to Leica in 2012 when I bought my first Leica M9-P with 35mmm f1.4 Asph. Since then I became the leica Man and it gives me so much satisfaction when shoot with Leica. I never had that much feelings during shooting any other camera.

        I would like to thank you for guiding me to have much joy in my life.

        Finally I have request, since Leica has recently introduced 2 updates for 28mm lenses (f2 & f2.8) and the 28mm f1.4mm last year, could please do a comparison shoot outs same what you have done for the 50mm’s.

        Best Regards,
        Mohd….. Qatar.

  2. Steve, I always found 28mm to be a difficult focal length – too wide for portraits, too narrow for vistas. I tend to shoot 50mm and 15mm (or 16mm) for these applications. A long time ago I sold my Leica 21mm, 24mm and 28mm lenses – I simply never used them.

    Also, do you find yourself using f/1.4 a lot with this lens, or are you stopping down a bit? If so, it’s hard to justify the price premium for the ‘lux lens.

    Nice work as usual.
    Brad

    • I’m the same way. Th 28mm focal length is not one I have used too often. I remember my last love of it was many years ago with my M9 and 28 Cron, was getting into it and used to it but as always, reverted back to my 50. Using this 28 exclusively with the M-D is indeed making me open up to the 28mm FL more though. I am getting used to it, learning to frame with it better and am liking it though I will always prefer a 50. I may end up with a 28, 50 and 90 though I feel the best bet would be the new 28 cron. This Summilux, I am using 75% of the time wide open as it does give a nice separation of subject but the cron, from what I have seen has a look/IQ that is beautiful as well as different and $2k less expensive!

  3. I fully agree with Chris but shooting an M is a minimalist experience which ever model you opt for.

    • Cost favors the Q without question. Body of the M feels MUCH better to me, but some may prefer the Q. The Q is lighter, feels more “hollow”. The M feels like a solid hunk of camera. The experience is 1005 different. A rangefinder vs EVF. Now, I love EVF’s and hope and prey the new M has a hybrid RF and EVF, but shooting with an M-D 262 is so much different than shooting with a Q. With that said, the Q is $4500 or so, the M-D and 28 Lux would be $11k-$12k! ALMOST triple. Worth it over the Q…NO. Only to those who truly want a film like minimalistic approach to shooting, and the build, feel and character of the M (as well as being able to use other lenses).

  4. Sorry to sound unenthusiastic but the M2,3,4,6 body size and shape were the true Leicas. Beautiful feel, aesthetics and balance. The M9 was thicker and heavier and lost the true Leica heritage. I am a Leica M9P owner and frankly the LCD is pathetic and so is the menu and handling. I can ignore these aspects and use the camera like the 262, by ignoring the menu etc. Why does Leica make another lumpy camera when they have eliminated most of the guts. Sony, etc can make small full frame cameras, why didn´t Leica put the 262 concept into an M6 body size and shape.That would be interesting.

    • The realities is with all of the digital innards, they could not make it slim like an M6. The next Leica M, which I feel will be announced at Photokina (I could be wrong), is rumored to be thinner and more like a film M. So we shall see 😉

  5. Steve, two questions:

    -If you have a Leica (M9 or M-D) and could choose only two fo the three following focal lengths: 28-35-50. Which 2 would you choose?

    – Would you be intersting in doing a “Sane Comparison” article between the Leica M262 and M-D262 with the same lens describing the experience of handling and using them?

    • Well, I would think using the M 262 and M-D 262 would be very similar in feel, and experience. Just with one, no LCD. They have the same performance in every other way. Lens wise, I would take a 28 and 50. Those would be all I needed with an M for 95% of what I shoot.

      • Uhuh. Sill would love to see that “Sane comparison” I talked about between the two with the same lens. Not talking about picture quality or performance, just the differences in usability you encounter.
        Would you miss the screen or some menu options if you use them side by side?
        Would you love The M-D’s back to basics so much you ‘d say forget about the M9 or would you say “naah” the extra control I get with the M9 might not be a must but it’s sure handy to have.
        And then there’s the Auto-Iso question of the M-D I mentioned before. Leica claims is there, many reviews claim it’s not. “To be or not to be, that’s the question”.

    • “..choose only two fo the three following focal lengths: 28-35-50..”

      Why not choose the 28-50-35 all-in-one “Tri-Elmar” ..then you have all those three lenses in one? (Though, admittedly, its maximum aperture is f4, so you don’t get the same degree of out-of-focus background as with an f1.4) ..but it’s so compact, there’s no need to keep changing lenses, and you don’t have to carry another lens in your pocket.

      • Well, I love the Tri ELmar but for low light it is not. Other than that it is a wonderful lens with a great rendering. If you do not need low light performance, then this is a wonderful option.

      • I know about the Tri-Elmar and as Steve says, low light. I’m a big fan of large apertures and shooting wide ope.
        Also, I wonder if the Tri-Elmar doesn’t block part of your viewfinder on an M.

        • The Tri-Elmar 28-50-35 blocks about an eighth of the viewfinder’s lower-right corner. So it blocks that small amount in the 28mm view. But it hardly impinges at all into the corner of the 50mm frame lines. It intrudes a little (..a sixteenth of the view, maybe..) into the 35mm frame lines.

          But I don’t find that to be any problem, as I use the finder only for focusing ..I estimate the view of any lens by the angle which the lens covers: so a 50mm lens covers an angle of an out 45 degrees, and a 21mm lens covers an angle of about 90 degrees. So looking over the top of the camera before I focus or shoot, I know roughly what’s going to be in the image anyway.

          (..The Leica frame lines are all hopelessly out, as – for example – the M9’s frame lines are set to show the width of what any lens sees at 1 metre away ..about 3 feet. But who shoots everything from 3 feet away? It’s madness!..)

          So the Tri-Elmar intrudes a little ..but not enough to have ever bothered me, as I’m only concerned with the central focusing patch.

          [Yes, the Noctilux really does intrude ..but the same applies: imagine a view 45 degrees wide in front of your camera ..that’s what will appear in your Noctilux pics. So – to me – the intrusion doesn’t ever matter. With the old M3, of course, its viewfinder magnification was almost life size, so you just opened the other eye to see what was obscured by any lens!]

          • Thanks for the detailed explanation David.
            I’ll need to rent me a Leica and find out how it acrually works.
            The Tri-Elmar’s versattility along with a used body might actually be affordable.

  6. You’ve got a Vivian Maier type ‘obscure selfie’ going on in the guitar in the window shot if you look closely 🙂

  7. Hi Steve, I’ve owned many film Leicas over the years. They were wonderful tools to work with until Ektachrome forced me to meter all the time. Today I just can’t justify the cost of a small car for a camera and lens.
    BUT a little about your response to not being able to ‘chimp’. If, when watching TV, you instinctively hold the remote control in your hand, try this and see if it isn’t a similar sensory experience. Pay some attention to your level of anxiety while watching a show. Now, put the remote down a foot away and put your hand down beside you, empty. Check your breathing and level of anxiety. Lower? I think it’s why people still enjoy using their film cameras because it releases you from the decision response itch. I made that name up. It seems simple but not having the immediate ability to consider options frees one to enjoy the experience at hand at another level. That’s what the 262 is doing for you.
    Best shooting ever,
    Chris

  8. Hey Steve. Your exposures look good. How much correction was needed in post? Also, any special processing?

    • Well, this cam only shoots RAW, so I adjusted each one as I felt it needed it. Mostly upped the exposure on some as it did have a tendency to underexpose in my experience. So I adjust exposure, contrast, and shadow detail when needed.

    • It’s there when shot wide open, just as with all Leica fast primes (with the exception being the 50 APO). You can correct it within the raw processing though.

Comments are closed.