The Newmmicron

In the post about the new 35mm Summicron-M, Bernard wrote, "I think Leica should be applauded for the engineering feat of developing a lens so small with such high optical performance."

Absolutely, and I'm sorry I didn't make a bigger deal of that. (I tend to get distracted by Leica's dismaying prices.) To have a diffraction-limited lens that is tiny and light is indeed a wonderful accomplishment, and maybe even a landmark in the history of camera lenses. So kudos to Leica for that!

Sorry for "missing the forest for the trees."

Mike

UPDATE: A friend-o'-TOP tells me that there's a somewhat bulkier but radically cheaper alternative coming on March 17th in the form of the new Voigtländer Apo-Lanthar 35mm ƒ/2 Aspherical. It's still what I'd consider an expensive lens, but you could buy seven of them for the price of just one Leica Newmmicron. He notes that "The MTF's show that they are aiming for the same performance league as the Leica lens, if not higher. We'll see how it pans out, but FWIW the recent C/V 50/2 Apo-Lanthar in M mount has been getting spectacular reviews, not only re value for money but also absolutely relative to all other M-mount 50's on the market, including the Leica Apo 'Cron." 

Meanwhile, it's a bit ironic that the M-mount 35mm I would choose is the still-expensive but not-so-much-so 35mm Summarit ƒ/2.4, and Jeff tells us that Leica has just discontinued that lens. It reminds me of something the chairman of Porsche once said about the then-current 944: something to the effect that a car selling for under $40,000 "dilutes the prestige of Porsche." Maybe the Summarits diluted the prestige of Leica, I don't know.

Gear o' The Week:

If I could shoot with any 50mm focal-length-equivalent lens, it would not be unobtanium: it would be the relatively modest, relatively older Pentax 35mm ƒ/2.8 DA Macro Limited on APS-C. I don't know how it measures and couldn't care less. If you care first and foremost about pictures, especially prints, it is one beautiful lens. Luverly. As a normal too. This link is a portal to Amazon, through which most anything you purchase will be credited to TOP. As an Amazon Associate I earn from qualifying purchases.

B&H Photo also has the Magic Macro, naturally.

Original contents copyright 2021 by Michael C. Johnston and/or the bylined author. All Rights Reserved. Links in this post may be to our affiliates; sales through affiliate links may benefit this site.

(To see all the comments, click on the "Comments" link below.)
Featured Comments from:

David Goldenberg: "I agree that the new 35mm Summicron is an impressive technical achievement, and I find myself much more interested in it than I do most other things that I would never consider buying for myself. But, it may be useful to put the claim of diffraction-limited resolution in context, at the cost of introducing a bit of math.

"The diffraction limit can be defined in a few different ways, leading to slightly different numbers, but a simple version is given by the equation: d = lambda/(2sin(theta)) where d is the smallest distance between two resolvable points, lambda is the wavelength of light used and theta is described as the numerical aperture. The numerical aperture is one half of the angle of the cone formed between the aperture and the point in the center of the image plane. This angle is related to the more familiar (to photographers) f number according to: theta = arctangent(1/(2f)). With a wavelength of 500 nm, a light blue or cyan, all of the math translates into resolution at the image plane of 1 micron for a diffraction-limited ƒ/2 lens. For comparison, the elements on a 24-MP 24x36mm sensor are about 6 microns across. For a 48 Mp sensor, the element size is about 4 microns. In other words, seeing the difference in resolution between a diffraction-limited ƒ/2 lens and one with more humble specifications using a digital camera is going to be somewhere between very difficult and impossible. To measure resolution at this level requires magnifying an arial image. This is realm of optical benches not cameras. Resolution is, of course, only one measure of a lens and its value to any individual. For me, the Fujinon XF 23mm ƒ/2, at 1/20 the cost of the new Summicron, is much closer to the sweet spot!"

Tom Burke: "I had a 35mm Summarit—and a 50mm Summarit. In fact it was owning both of these that told me that they were too close in focal length for me. I used them, together with a secondhand 90mm Elmarit, on an M6TTL which I had for a couple of years. I still look back fondly to that experience, but I would hate to go back to film now. Sorry....

"Still, I took one of my favourite travel images with the 35mm Summarit. I've got an enlargement hanging on my bedroom wall. As far as focal lengths go, I'm pretty happy with the 24mm + 54mm on my iPhone 12 Pro. (I don't use the super-wide very much.) I'd like something longer to complement those two—in fact, something like 90mm would be fine."

Comments

[William Lewis]

I have been told by lawyers that I'll be getting an inheritance of ~$2000 later this year. For me, this is big money. My plan is to get a Leica M240 as it's the best Leica digital I can afford with that much money. I won't be able to afford even a first generation Summicron (50 for me, that's my preference) but I plan to buy a Summitar 50/2 from the upcoming stimulus check so that I have a good Leica lens to use with it. A fancy modern 'cron would be glorious to be sure, yet I already know that the Summitar can do having owned one previously. Insane wide open, sharp and well controlled stopped down. The best of all worlds in many ways. So I hope to get one of them, a Leica digital and to continue on with my landscapes :)

[John Camp]

You didn't miss the forest for the trees. The *price* is the forest, the quality of the lens is the trees, because there are other lenses that cost a fraction of the Leica lens, and are just as good, if slightly bigger. As another commenter said, the lens isn't jewel-like, it is a jewel, and has the same practicality as, say, a five-carat diamond. It signals status both to people see it and say, "Mmmm, rich" and those who see it and "Mmmm, idiot."

[Eolake Stobblehouse]

Word.

Eolake

[Albert Smith]

"To have a diffraction-limited lens that is tiny and light is indeed a wonderful accomplishment, and maybe even a landmark in the history of camera lenses."

Really, and only 8000-plus Dollars. I'm sure a lot of real world photo journalist will be diving on the ground and crawling thru mud with this lens on their chest, covering wars and disasters.

I saw on another thread where someone said they bought a Leica 28mm f/1.7 for only $4000 and it came with a free camera. What self respecting photographer would be caught slumming with that setup?

[Jeff]

As noted in the comments to the earlier post, the even smaller and lighter, but still superb, 35 Summicron ASPH (v.2) is still in the product line, selling for $4500 less. Same approach for the 50 APO M Summicron and the ‘standard issue’ 50 Summicron. The less expensive M Summarit lens line was unfortunately discontinued recently. These were stellar lenses, in some ways outperforming the standard Summicrons, but never marketed as such.

[David Myers]

Mike, I hope you enjoy the 50 R experience. If you are into panoramics, the 65:24 format is the same as the Xpan and quite nice. Lenses I love include the 50/3.5, 30/4. The 45 and 63 are great, I just don't use them as much. Looking forward to hearing about your experience.

[David Lee]

Eight thousand bucks. It took me 2 weeks to decide to spend 399.00 on the new Fujifilm 27mm and I know I’m going to feel guilty for weeks.

[Dan]

What’s the smallest camera you can use with the Pentax 35mm Macro?

[Julian Behrisch Elce]

I’m hardly a paragon of virtue myself, but is there a point where an amateur should ask themselves if there’s somebody close by who could use some or all of $8,000?

[Martino]

The pentax lens is a funny one, I ended up selling it on for being too 'clinical'. I have others covering the same focal lens, that is when I will dust off the DSLR (I am too busy right now).

[Miguel Angel Garcia Martín]

Pentax lenses are not always well known, but a great amount of them deserves recognition specially if you enjoy photography more than gear.

[David Dyer-Bennet]

Way back when, I remember an ad campaign in photo magazines (that long back when!) for a new Leica telephoto (R series, for the SLRs, I'm pretty sure).

The ad showed the photographer getting out of a car, maybe a VW station wagon thing? With his camera and this lens.

The text explained that, if you bought the lens, they would throw in the car for free.

It's an interesting idea, advertising that people can't afford your products! (Clearly Leica had already committed to that road quite a long time ago.)

[Steve Biro]

This new 35mm Summicron-M is yet another reason why if I bought a digital Leica, it would be the Q2. No reason to join the Leica lens chase.

[Tom Duffy]

I recently got a new 50mm Summarit f2.4 for a very good price. It's now my only lens for my Leica M6 TTL. A test roll of Fuji Acros II proved the lens to be very sharp when making 6x9 inch prints. Beyond bragging rights, how sharp does a lens need to be?

[Michael Hill]

My favourite lens of late is the Sony Zeiss Sonnar T* FE 35mm f/2.8 ZA Lens which is smaller and lighter than the above Summicron and quite possibly just as sharp/contrasty etc. Oh, and did I mention it is 1/10th the price. :)

[Peter Wright]

Interesting that you say that you would choose the Summarit 35mm f/2.4. As someone who owns that lens (and the Zeiss 35mm f/2.0 Biogon, and Zeiss 35mm f/1.4 Distagon), I would choose the new APO instantly. From the tests I have seen it does outperform everything else. I take it as a promise for the future from Leica: when the 200 mega pixel monochrom comes out in 20xx, this lens and others will be there in support.

I take issue with John Camp. Nobody, but absolutely nobody will look at this lens and think you either wealthy or an idiot, as even someone familiar with Leica lenses would need to examine the writing on the front to tell what made it any different. If you want to show either wealth or idiocy, then the funds would be better spent as a down payment on a Rolex Submariner or some such.

[Bernard]

More interesting, perhaps, than the size and price is the close-focus ability, going beyond the rangefinder coupling of M-mount cameras down to 0.3m, perhaps the main advantage over the new Voigtlander 35f2 APO? Whether that's worth the price difference is up to those that want & can afford one of these lenses.

It's hardly surprising that disparaging the price of new Leica products is the only comment of many folks, but insulting the photographers who can afford & choose to buy & use them reeks of sour hypocrisy. We all spend money on things we think are worth it and others don't. For me, the SL2-S was worth the cost (using it happily with the Sigma 45 f2.8), the SL lenses are not. I would never spend money on your pool table endeavor, Mike, although I'd enjoy playing pool with you on it!

[Mark Sampson]

Hmmm. I suspect the real trouble with the $8k 35mm is that in order to afford it, the people who disparage it would have to sell all their other 35mm lenses. and what self-respecting hobbyist could get by with only one lens of a given focal length/fstop combination?
(full disclosure alert: I used to own 35/2 lenses for both Leica-M and Nikon-F mount; as posted earlier, I had to sell the Leica gear ten years back.)

[Herman]

I always felt that the most useful class that I had in high school was a typing class. As I recall, the typewriters that we used had no letters on the keys.

[Zach]

Smallest is probably the recently discontinued KP, which is well loved by many of its owners.

[Andrew Kochanowski]

The smallest Pentax you can currently get for the 35 Macro is the KP. It makes a beautiful match, as it does with the 21mm, the 31mm, the 40mm pancake, and the 43mm pancake, or the 20-40mm zoom. All metal, all small, good.
I'm quite excited about the new APS-C K-3ii coming, though it's delayed. It's going to be a mini-K1, with the big selling point supposed to be an OVF that is the size of, or nearly the size of, a full-frame OVF.

I still prefer an OVF to an EVF if given the choice. But back to the lenses, I think they each have a lovely character, and Pentax really do know how to design software to make the files look more like film out of the box. Most of the older designs are screwdrive, which is fine by me, less weight in the lens and smaller size.

For the price of one of the Leica lenses you can buy the entire system. Thanks for reminding people this little gem still exists.

[Al C.]

How does it do re vignetting? Compact dimensions necessitate a few compromises.