This might be the best video you've made in terms of actual insight. Every single photographer has done this, and not enough people talk about it. They all justify the dumb purchase. It's so rare to see someone say something like this instead. Very cool!
True.. but a lot of the time it's not entirely "dumb". Until you own a product and live with it for a while, it's hard to make a definitive judgement as to whether it's "worth it". But sure, the stakes are higher the more you spend!! We all feel great when a budget purchase exceeds expectations, and we feel bad when an expensive one doesn't meet expectations!
The funny thing is that my 35 Summicron ASPH is the one piece of gear that I really really regret selling. I know it was the right thing to do, but I miss how perfectly balanced it while still giving me a really great rendering.
I don’t regret buying my own copy of Summicron 35 2 Ver.4. I bought it at 2014 for $1400 include the original box. Now I can easily selling it for more than $2000. Buying Leica is a good investment. And it is no doubt a good tool to use.
I have a different experience. Most of the time, I’m regretting buying cheaper alternatives for what I was thinking in the first place. In the end, I’m spending money twice, which is the dumbest way possible ;)
@@toniwonkanobi You know.. what you just said would probably offend the majority of film shooters but in my experience, I have learnt that it is true. As much as it can sound kinda snobbish/unrealistic.. Through the years I've learnt that buying Good (meaning great quality for its price) cheaper glass is totally cool and will get you great results.. but just don't pair it with a Leica body. I find that it is borderline more pretentious to shoot with mediocre lenses on M bodies than the other way round. And of course everyone would say.. its more "value" to buy from their lower priced competitors and get "90%" of the result. Please do your homework. Leica lenses are not just 10-20% better and asking double/triple price. Through all my leica/non-leica glass purchases.. I've never regretted leica quality. It will hurt your pocket for sure.. but that is about your income/spending power balance, NOT a measurement of whether it was worth its own asking price. Most youtubers come at this topic with the wrong perspective. The inherent value of an item does not change just because you feel comfortable or not spending on it. Instead, a better (and arguably more financially sound) way would be to find a system you can fully enjoy AND support in its lens selection. Don't be a poser who scrapes together enough to buy a supercar but complains at the cost of servicing/maintenance. Leica is known for their great glass and others might be better in other areas so move in the direction that you can financially support. Objectively flawed video imo.
@@popcorny11 "Don't be a poser who scrapes together enough to buy a supercar but complains at the cost of servicing/maintenance." Good lord yes! Excellent point. Zeiss, VoigtländerVoigtländer Nokton whatever with an M6 (non TTL, because the latter is more expensive now). I dunno. Hard to explain without sounding like an arse.
@@toniwonkanobi Totally legit pov. I've spent quite a bit on Zeiss, Voigtlanders.. even Ricohs. Back then.. I thought Hey come on can't be majority of the world shooting this stuff that's really that much worse right? They are "good".. but they usually give me an extraordinary picture worth printing 1 in maybe 60-80 frames. In that time, imagine how much film/pro development/scanning money would have been spent. And when you sell them.. they take a ridiculous drop in value and be prepared to answer all sorta stupid questions. When you wanna do a service, good luck finding Proper technicians who are willing to risk their rep doing it. On the other hand.. I could have saved EVERYTHING.. waited longer, cut spending on other bullshit and just bought a Leica lens and have EVERY image bloody fantastic, with the only weakness being your technical experience and artistic ability. In the long run, its a safer financial choice.. you enjoy using it more in the years you spend turning some metal cylinder.. you have a drastically higher chance of making "nicer looking" pictures even if you shoot like shit.. and you eventually get back a higher percentage in depreciation when you sell it. If you can feel so hurt about the price of a leica lens to the point you make decisions based on comparisons to a $350 lens.. you deserve to feel the pain. I don't wanna sound like an ass but I think he was insecure in stating that he could "afford it but not multiple times" like.. lol why are you making such a far fetched hypothesis just to say you're not THAT broke but at the same time.. wanna sell the lens cos.. he thought the $350 lens giving him "90%"? Jeez.
It’s called GUILT. Not regret. You sound like you’re feeling guilty for buying it. You certainly like the results, you don’t regret owning it. It’s just guilt.
I think it is regret, to an extent. We've all done it, bought something that was expensive, and then wondered if we could have used the money better elsewhere.
Thing is, the best costs more. Especially Leica's best, where it's expensive cos they have always gone the extra yard starting with their glass and including not scrimping in paying their employees. So yeah, when there are situations where only a cron will do, then nothing else will do. Grew up on an M2 cron, used M4 luxes for work, Leicaflexes, Nikons, Canons, Olympus... still shoot Nikon D850s, Fuji XT and X Pro (yes, Fujicrons), and sold my M9/cron to move on... Only I didn't. Bought an M240/35 Ultron, then M10... Now back to an M9 snd selling my Ultron... for a summicron again. It's mostly the feel in the hand and the sense of history. And the knowledge that if I mess up a shot... it's all me, not the equipment.
I love the 35mm Summicron. I purchased it used 10 years ago, and I use it 80%+ of the time. When I bought it I had the same qualms you express in this video. Today, I consider it a brilliant purchase and probably my best decision ever made based on emotion. When all sense is expressed in dollars and cents, you will not buy Leica :) I have an M9 that is 10 years old, still works like new, and I cannot put it aside or replace it - 10 years later :) Enjoy, photography is for life and your lense will accompany you trough every stage of it
We’re film photographers. If we had to justify any of our purchases, we’d lose every time. “Your phone has a camera, and you don’t even need to develop the pictures!” “Just buy a disposable camera. It covers 90% of your film needs.” Etc.
Exactly the whole endeavor of film photography and photography in general is not cheap and honestly most of us are hobbyists anyway. Buy whatever you want if you have the money and there's no need to justify your purchases to anyone. There are far worse things to blow you money on.
Here's the thing...if you can notice the 10% difference and it matches your vision in photography then it's worth every penny. I have A LOT of lenses for a LOT of systems (digital, medium format film, 35mm film) and for me, the 35mm Summarit f/2.4 ASPH (not the 'Cron) hit the perfect spot for me in rendering as it's not always about f/stop and this kind of absurd quest for sharpness, it's just this overall look that just comes from the lens itself. I have plenty of lenses I have adapted to my Leica digital that get me 90-95% of the look of the Summarit f/2.4 ASPH, but nothing comes close in that price range overall for the that transition from in focus to out of focus, technical "rightness" and even bokeh...yes, I wish it wasn't so expensive, but now I never have to worry about a 35mm lens for my Leica, yes even the Summicron...thankfully, no matter the price, I prefer the look of the 'rit for what I do. Often we film shooters tend to be thrifty as most of us got some amazing deals over the years (my RB67, ETRSi, Rolleiflex, Iskra 6x6, and Maxxum 7 to name a few), but if I've learned one thing, once you start honing your look and what you like, being thrifty is a habit that you might want to curtail...and I know, it's HARD.
The 35 Summicron ASPH is the best 35mm lens I’ve used, despite it being like $2200 or whatever. If you’re shooting wide open and use it on digital, that’s where you’ll really start to see the differences on lenses. Film is a little more forgiving in that way in terms of sharpness. Luckily, it seems like Leica glass definitely isn’t dropping in value, so even if you make a mistake, you can often sell it again for what you paid.
I don't agree that film is more forgiving in terms of sharpness. With resolutions exceeding 5000dpi, pro low ISO films can match a 36MP FF sensor for detail and sharpness... I know, I shoot both. But you DO NEED a bloody good film scanner!!!
Sure. But even something like Portra 400 (a fantastic film) is going to have more grain than the vast majority of digital files at iso 400 too. The processing in a digital sensor just does weird things to files too. I’ve shot thousands of rolls of film and upwards of a million digital photos professionally too and while my comment might not be scientific, that’s still my overall feeling from doing both.
@@benjhaisch I was talking about slow ISO 100 or less films, like Velvia, Provia, Ektachrome and Ektar. I think Ektar generally has a tad less detail, and ditto Porta 160; although pixel peeping 5000 dpi scans of these films reveals 36MP detail on a 35mm frame area. Of course faster films of ISO 400 and upwards will have more grain than 'noise' on an equivalent digital ISO. This is the strength of digital IMO, the super sensitivity of the sensors, and their ability to shoot in low light. But with good light, well exposed low ISO pro films have immense detail that rivals 36MP FF sensors. What I will say, is that even in the low ISO case, digital images are more consistent at the pixel scale. A film image will have subtle variations in colour at the pixel level, whereas the Bayer interpolated digital image far less so. So the detail is there in the film image, but the (scanned) pixel level colour is a little more stochastic. This, IMO, along with the general way a given film chemistry reacts to light to give colour depth and saturation, is what makes film images look different to digital. The ironic thing is that we rely on digital scanning equipment to reveal those film characteristics; the film is essentially a chemical intermediary to our final scanned digital images, if you like. When you also throw into the equation that you can shoot a Medium Format negative (or positive) that contains 120MP+ of information (scanned at 5000dpi), you have what is still an amazing artistic medium. The film look, huge detail potential on massive prints; and for a fraction of the price of digital MF cameras.
Wow man. I’m new to the M system after renting an M-E typ 240 that I wound up buying. I’m now struggling to find the ideal 50mm lens. I’ve tested a few Voigtlanders that didn’t quite fit what I am looking for. As a result, I’ve been spending too much time hunting and lusting online for the expensive Leica lens that is going to be a ‘game changer’ for me. Seeing your video stopped me from making a big purchase that I might regret. It’s best for me to stay patient, continue to rent and try other options first, like the Zeiss Planar 50mm f/2. As for your situation, you consistently provide a wealth of knowledge by educating & sharing your experience with others. Therefore since you have the Leica lens you dreamed about, stop kicking yourself and simply enjoy the experience. You made an investment in your craft and very possibly financially as the value of your lens could increase over time if you ever wanted to sell. Regardless, you work hard and this is a reward. After some time, you won’t be thinking about how much money you spent.
The Summicron is a classic and will hold its value or even increase over time. You’re a photographer and spent your money on the best glass you can. Don’t feel guilty about that. If you blew 1800$ up your nose or on a bar tab, that’s something to feel guilty about. Enjoy your lens, you deserve nice toys once in a while :)
Couldn’t have found a better way to say it myself. People blow ungodly amounts of money on smokes, booze, and booger sugar…don’t feel bad about spending money on something positive that you love!
*King Jvpes* I can imagine how you feel about this right now, and appreciate your honest commentary; however, from my perspective as a truly ancient camera person, you do have what is said to be one of the very best lenses for your beautiful Leica camera, and eventually the expense will be long forgotten. Only your love will remain. Treasure it.
If you want to purchase M-Mount lenses that are pretty easy on the wallet, look for the Konica M-Hexanon line. The 50mm F2 looks exactly like a Summicron and makes some amazing photos.
You’ll feel fine in a few more weeks. I had this dilemma when I purchased an M10. Now, I have no regrets. Although I did go with the summarit 35 not the summicron. It’s the same glass and I felt that the extra stop was not worth another £900 (I’m from UK). I also have an M2 And have had no regrets pairing that with a relatively inexpensive voigtlander 40mm f1.4. But let’s talk Minolta! I was about your age in 1976 and had sleepless nights after purchasing an SRT 303. Soon got over it and I’m still using it to this day. Paired with my 200mm Rokkor and a roll of HP5, I’ll take the Pepsi Challenge any day so far as shallow depth of field is concerned ( sorry, bokeh. It’s the English in me). Why rangefinders? Well I started in 1972 with a gift from an uncle it was a Minolta Hi Matic 7, also still in use. I’ll say no more.
Absolutely! You know I've been working with the Voigtlander Color Skopar for 3 Years now and absolutely agree. Believe me, I WANT the summicron but i dont think i can justify it (maybe...) after using a German made V3 Summicron 35. The skopar out performed the v3 in every aspect except for sharpness and maybe the quality of the build. People are going to tear apart the voigtlander for "distortion" "bokeh" and "not leitz" but that DOESNT FUCKING MATTER when you're building/exhibiting a body of work. You think people are actively looking for those things when they view an image for the first time? No, its about the image itself (sorry objectophiles). The voigtlander is just as good as capturing photos, its just the attitude you put towards the glass. Lets stop the Leica "class-war"
I sprung for a Hasselblad 500c and a few lenses about five years ago. At the time I had dreams of making beautiful landscapes. After about a year I realized I was spending all of my shooting time on the streets or at family events - I like to photograph people. I love medium format, and the Hassie is a treat to use in the right situation. But it's not the camera I naturally reach for. The upshot is I have an expensive camera I love but I'm not IN LOVE with. The lesson to folks who haven't yet found their style - stick to the basics until you're sure you know what you want.
I had the exact feeling when I spent $800 on my contax G2 with the biogon 28mm. I felt that maybe it wasn’t best decision after all since they have a history of crapping out on you but I fell in love with it and have just decided to shoot it until it dies and then have the lens converted to M mount.
Do not be too hard on yourself. Life is full of experiences - good or bad, cheap, or not so cheap. I can understand why you wanted the lens in the first place. I own several Leica R, Leica LTM, Voigtlander and Zeiss M mount lenses. I own a Leica M1 and have decided to use a primary Zeiss Sonnar ZM, Voigtlander Color Skopar 40mm for Leica M and a MS Optics 57mm lens. I have purchased adapters so I can use the lens between the cameras, digital and film. I have no regrets thus far. I hope that you are able to sell you Leica lens at a reasonable price and recoup you investment.
This is pretty timely for me.. I was looking at M3's earlier this week as my long (long long) term goal of ownership and I figured the 50mm f/2 version of that Summicron was what I wanted to go with it.. I might be able to talk myself out of it now, by the time comes to buy in a year or two.. Maybe.. Don't be embarrassed about it, though.. Sometimes you just want nice things of quality. And it's not like you arn't using it. Sometimes it's really nice to pick something up that's splurge-y and know you're set on your Leica rig forever. Several years back, I thought I wanted to get back into photography and for whatever reason, didn't consider film. I dropped like $3k on a new Nikon D810 and $450 if I remember correctly on their 35mm prime lens.. And I lost interest in the whole package in a matter of months.. It wasn't until I tried film about 4-5 months ago, that I realized what was missing.. So yeah I felt pretty stupid about not understanding myself enough to know that a higher end digital camera wasn't going to zap life into my dying love of digital photography. Keep up the good work, you're my favorite film/photography channel by a wide margin.
You might really like the Voigtlander 35 1.4. People call it the Japanese Summilux. It is great & full of character wide open. Very versatile for shooting film at night. I suggest shooting some Cinestill 800 with the 35 1.4. Great lens! Thanks man!
You did not make a mistake. 1800 was a very good price. Can not get it for less than 2200. I owned that lens version 4 for 15 years. Sold it to get the asp version 1 which was an inferior lens to the version 4. The 35 asph vers 1 had a back focusing issue. The only 35mm ,lens for leica m that might be better than your lens ie 35mm summicron asph v 2. However that lens was made for digital photography and had a clinical look on film and used costs twice what your version 4 costs. Further your version 4 keeps increasing in value. Your lens is the best lens I ever shot and I know what I am talking about. keep the lens you got a good deal and a great lens. The best 35mm for leica film photography. The price of the 35mm summicron v4, your lens, keeps going up because film shooters like it the best, better than the 35mm asph v2
I'm a digital M shooter. I recently sold my 50mm Summilux and bought the Voigtlander 50mm 1.2 and I couldn't be happier. If I was being picky I'd say the Lux renders ever so slightly better wide open and is marginally sharper (at 1.4) But you'd have to be pixel peeping to really notice. At a 3rd of the price I can't complain :)
I constantly have the urge to replace my Voigtlander 35 Nokton 1.4 for a Summilux 35, but thinking about how little I shoot 35mm keeps me sane, but I do have a similar thing with the Summicron 50mm. I'd been using my Canon 50mm f/1.4 screwmount lens as my only 50mm for years, but couldn't resist the feeling that I "needed" a genuine Leica lens, so I bought a Summicron 50 (version 3) a while back, on ebay. It didn't help that the seller wasn't honest about it. There was a hair INSIDE the lens that wasn't in the auction photos (no idea how it got there) and the focus was so stiff it was nearly unuseable. Like you, i'm not rich and it was a pretty big purchase, so I thought "what have I done?" but the glass was perfect which can be rare on older "user" lenses, so I just decided to get a CLA on it since I paid a little less than what it was averaging, instead of sending it back, and in the end I got a perfect lens. On the first roll with it, I also had this expectation, that "OMG Leica, it's going to be awesome!" and TBH, it is, but if you put a shot from the Summicron next to a shot from the Canon, most people won't be able to tell the difference at all (unless they're both wide open, hey, it's not called the Japanese Summilux for nothin') It's smaller and lighter than Canon and focuses closer, and after a while you do notice the little differences that probably don't matter that much, but make it the awesome lens that it is. (pretty much zero distortion on the summi, sharp from corner to corner.. creamy bokeh vs swirly on the canon) so, with that said, although my expectations weren't exactly met, and I did regret it at first, i've grown to really love using it and my regrets have faded away. IMO, you should just let your regrets go, you already have it now so just embrace it and you'll probably start noticing the little differences too.
Yo bro, I def feel you. I got the fuji x100f 35mm point and shoot and really enjoyed 35mm. I came from a 50mm lens and started thinking that 35mm wasn't wide enough after a while. So I went ahead and bought the 28mm adapter. 7 measly mm for $400 more. I regretted it at first but then I started falling in love w/the 28mm look and while I wasn't happy to spend the bread, I am enjoying shooting more now. If you haven't already, I think you'll start to enjoy picking up your camera more w/the new lens and shooting more, which will make the investment worth it over time. Thanks for posting, I feel a lot better about my purchase now!
I had this lens back when they were $500-$600 used (late 90s). I was poor though and prices were going up then, so I sold both the lens and the M2. I got maybe $1300 for both. If only I had waited another 10 years! No doubt the Summicron V4 is a wonderful lens. And I actually really hated that 35/2.5 Voigtlander (so bland). Nowadays I would feel too anxious walking around with a $2K lens. I shoot a Canon 7 now and have an old Nikkor 35/2.5 (which I love) among 4 other great old lenses (the whole kit, plus a Nikon F2 outfit, all together cost far less than that Summicron). I'm possibly a better photographer because I've matured and I no longer need such a lens to do good work. Having it, however briefly, was all part of the process
I spent around 700 Euros to get a Nikon F2AS and its motordrive fixed. Did I regret it? No, this camera is now the smoothest of my three F2s and is in a really nice shape again (ready for the next 30+ years). I also spent 852 + 185 for the hood (that I never use, just to have it complete) on a SUPER-ANGULON 1:4 M, which is by far my best little wide angle lens and I love to shoot it. Some things cost a little more but you will get it back in the long run as long as you spend the bucks on things that you love. I am also constantly looking at a M4 but I just don’t see me burning more than 600 Euros on this camera body. I generally don’t look for things that burn a giant hole in my wallet, just for good value.
Mine was a Canon EOS L 50mm f1.2 . . . . . .only 1 out of 10 shots were sharp . . . . . .. returned to shop for a chit chat about my problem only to be told not to use it at f1.2 !!!!! . . . . . .result, lens sold at a slight loss to me and replaced with 1.8 model at huge saving and the only unsharp shots are my fault . . . . . .you have it now, enjoy it and keep up the GREAT work . . . . .thanks.
My wife got me a Canon F1 with a 55mm f1.8 lens for $800 in very good condition. I shoot digital and been wanting to shoot film for a while now. Will you consider this a win or loss??
You've made the purchase, now just enjoy it. Know that if you ever decide to sell it, you will probably get your money back. This is the nice thing about shooting Leica lenses. I bought a Noctilux f/1.0 at some point, shot it for a year, but felt guilty about all that money tied up in one lens. I ended up selling it and making a nice profit (nearly $1000). That got me over the guilt of shooting with this kind of expensive equipment. Had I kept the lens and sold it now? Ohhh boy. Most (not all) Leica lenses can be seen as some kind of investment, which can't be said for lenses from 3rd party manufacturers.
Is the summicron really sharper? The 35/2.5 voigtlander ist super sharp and a very underrated lens. Try the Zeiss Biogon 35 or Planar 50. I prefer them over the equivaltent Leica lenses. The square Leica shade is very nice though.
I appreciate the honesty, J. Good on you for sharing this. I couldn't afford the Summicron and for whatever reason, the Color-Skopar market is high right now. I'm not embarrassed to admit I picked up the 7artisans 35/2 for my CL. Not quite as sharp as the VL, but I got it open box for $204 shipped. When I'm shooting street, the last thing on my mind is barrel distortion. I'll be good with it for a long time I think.
2:12 with the big grin I thought that was Bello for a second I got the VM35 and then found an amazing deal on a new Summarit (cheaper than the KEH trade-in price), but I talked myself out of it. The VM is great, but I'd like to get a Leica M lens one day - probably either the 28mm Elmarit (useful across various platforms) or the beautiful 90s 90mm Summicron (not really useful, and very heavy, yet somehow very enticing).
Yup. I’ve had the exact same feeling. Leica M6 … nice camera, used it a bunch, no complaints but the cost always are at me. I finally sold it and it was a huge relief.
I use a Canon 35 1.8 and love it! Initially I regretted buying my M2, because I was underwhelmed when I got it. I am glad I decided to keep it, because now I love it!
Leica glass will allow you to break even or come up a bit so it's not a total loss since you learned a valuable lesson from it. However you could have learned allot more for allot less from some of the photography education books I recommended in a previous video...maybe I can contribute something useful though. Photo basics 101: a stop of light is a halving (-50%) or doubling (+100%) of the current measured amount of light. So when you push it two stops (underexposing) your reducing the amount of light hitting the film by -100% and compensating by increasing your developing time (usually +20% or more), conversely when pulling (overexposing) your film say 1 stop (+100%) , your increasing the amount of light hitting the film and compensating by decreasing your development time (usually -15 to -20%). This information was gleaned from a single page of a single photo technique book, purchased for the stately sum of $4.57. Hopefully those of you who have read this far may understand how valuable critical thinking is to your photography and more importantly, your life...
I'm thinking of buying a zoom lens for Pentax K1000. Can you suggest me how to choose one. What are the factors I should consider and things to check while buying one
In your defense, the Leica lens will hold its value really well over time, so if your needs outgrow the lens, you should be able to sell it for the same if not more than you bought it for. They don’t manufacture that lens anymore and film photography doesn’t seem to be losing momentum anytime soon. So just don’t break it. 😂
I would get rid of it for the ASPH. The V4 is known to have loose front barrel after prolonged use. Also the king of bokeh title only apply to the front OoF. If you like the look of the V4, you should try the 40mm cron (38.5mm actual FL) it's very similar in lens design and size.
I thought I was being extravagant buying a 7Artisans 50mm f/1.1 for my M2. Now less so. I spent more on a Summicron R 50mm for my Leica R6 and didn't feel so bad, partly because it's such a great lens (and no where near as expensive the M mount equivalent).
That 35mm Summicron f/2 version iv, king of bokeh and the Canadian 35mm f/1.4 pre-ashperical were Leica's best ever 35s for film work. You got a beaut lens there bro, small, light very compact, a great lens and 1800 a great price too!!! - sadly you don't seen to appreciate it. Some folks dream for years for a lens like that.
You are wrong. A better negative is a better negative. I develop my own film and all images are printed on silver gelatin paper where you can see the difference in quality. If the owner ever had a show in a gallery he should want to make the best prints possible and either learn wet darkroom work, have a master printer print silver gelatin for the show, or get the negs scanned by a high quality drum scanner. The negative is the original and that is where the quality is necessary if you later want to make the best quality prints . My further advice is that film shooters should develop their own film, very easy to do, and learn how to print a silver gelatin print in a wet darkroom
Full marks for your honesty! I have recently been thinking about buying an expensive camera item that I really, really want but deep down, know that I actually don't need. Your video has brought me to my senses - for now!
When I first got into vintage lenses, I got into a rhythm and was making a purchase every two to three weeks. Deals are everywhere and I have never spent more than $80 on a lens, even picked up some nice camera bodies along the way, but this one time I was itching to get something and decided on a camera and lens combo someone was selling. I ended up getting a camera and two lenses for $20. Camera didn't work, one lens was all scratched up, and the other was feeling very loose. Some of the issues I hadn't spotted when meeting the seller, but my gut was telling me to walk away. Should've listened to it but I didn't want to have made my way there for nothing. My regret isn't as costly as costly as yours but it goes to show how Gear Acquisition Syndrome toys with our reasoning.
I went with the middle of the road option for my 35mm lens for my Leica. I bought a used Zeiss 35mm f/2 for around $650 & I couldn't be happier with it! The sharpness, color rendition and function are amazing. I also have the 50mm f/2 lens from Zeiss but I bought it new. If you ever get a chance to try the Zeiss lenses you owe it to yourself to try them. They're well worth the money!
Just enjoy the lens for what it is. Yes, it has a high initial cost but when you come to sell it (if you ever do) the market price will most likely be the same as when you bought it. No regrets man!
I once bought a Voigtländer 40/1.4 and I was not satisfied. I also regret the purchase of a Voigtländer 75/1.8. Both are for sale along with a Zeiss 50/1.5, which I was very happy with. Just ordered a Summilux 50/1.4.
One reason to get a high-priced lens like the Leica Summicron 35mm f/2 is psychological: the belief that our photography is worthy of such a high quality lens.
I always regretted buying my Leica M6. Back in 2016 it cost me $1400 in mint condition. Two years later I was still questioning my decision especially because I was having more fun shooting with the Nikon fm2n so I sold the M6.
Yep, once I have bought a broken Nikon FA in order to make some money, but didn't manage to repair it. So now I still have it and make me believe that I am a really bad merchant.
I have the exact same feelings about a Pentax 6x7 kit I recently purchased. The images that come out of the takumar 105 f2.4 are insane and I absolutely love it, but I regularly think about how much I spent on the whole kit and regret it lol.
I don't know how long I've been watching your videos... a while. Just wanted to compliment on how great your photos are now and how far you've progressed. nice work!
I don't own it anymore and passed it on but I bought a full Pentax 645 kit with a bunch of lenses for 800 dollars if memory serves. I ended up not really being a fan of it and sold it within 2 years.
Sharpness also becomes moot if you're using a flatbed scanner for 35mm. Side by side comparison, bet I wont be able to tell them apart. Stick to voigtlander and invest you money in things that actually will have better return.
Yep, I think we've all experienced this once or twice. If you're not hard-pressed for money right now I'd keep it around, but if there's anything you should be getting with that cash I'd switch back to the Voigtlander. I really like their lenses. Personally I've done this a couple times during my worst GAS period - I bought new cameras every month and of course didn't use them too often cause my collection kept growing. I've whittled it down a good bit by now. The only thing I own that even gets close to that price tag is my Mamiya 7 though (about $1450) and I'm not letting that go anytime soon (unless someone wants to trade for a 7ii ;)
I had the Zeiss 50mm Planar for my M2, and picked up a Summicron Dual Range, and had to sell the Zeiss in order to pay for the Leica; and while the two lenses do render completely differently from one another, and my personal use of the Leica is more suited to the way it renders, there are times I miss the look that Zeiss gave me. It was a far more punchy of a lens for contrast and colour; the Leica is sharper, but a LOT LESS contrast. Different tools for different needs.
I was in to get a Leica M6 and I am pretty compulsive, ended up going to a local camera store the M6's they had were way above my budget, so I ended up setteling for a M4-2 for $1700 it had a dent on the top plate. After a few days all I could think was... Was this dent worth $1700 dollars??? Regret 100% so I decided to return it, didn't get all the money back cuz of some stupid fees. But I kept saving and found the sweetest deal on a M6 new in the box!
It's done now Jonathan . Don't regret it, enjoy it. And don't feel guilty or embarrassed. You put a lot into the art and you should have dope gear. If you feel like you'd rather use the funds for something else, move back to what you had. You thought you were making a good investment in your craft. Now you know. Just think if you never took the plunge for your Leica. OR, what if you got this lens and it was miles ahead of anything? You don't know until you try. I would buy used though. That's what I've learned. I bought the 28mm Sumicron and I just don't shoot it. I got it new and .. ouch. I love my 35mm and it's just not that different and it's much bigger and heavier so it rarely makes it out with me. I should have borrowed one to test it out or got one used. Thanks for the video, it took guts.
I owned the Summicron 35 mm V4 vor several years. It is a very good lens but not that much out of this world as current prices suggest. Sell it, make a fortune. Get a used 2/35 Ultron asph. Ver. II and still have more than a grand in your pocket and never miss that Summicron again.
Nothing in this price range but I remember buying a Yashica T2 which eventually died on me. I remember looking at the pictures compared to my cheaper point and shoots and I honestly didn't understand why I purchased it as any increase in sharpness was pretty meh to me. It was a good lesson in understanding that my favourite images will always boil down to the subject and composition, not how much money I spent on the camera that is taking the photo
I remember back then when I wasn’t sure what way I should go with my canon 5d mark2, had only by then a 50mm f1.4 lens and the 24-70 seem so creepy expensive that I brought the darn 28-135mm, which is the worst.
I bought this Leica 35mm F2 twice and end up sold it twice and buy the zeiss zm 50mm F2 and 35mm 1.4 and the Voigtlander 28mm F2 MKii for the same money of the Leica . Never regretted !
My experience is similar to yours. I’ve purchased multiple Leica M lenses for M9 and M2, and then became disillusioned with their price performance ratio and regretted the purchases. Were they good? Sure. Were they noticeably better in everyday picture-taking? Hardly. I also disliked the “features” or rendering of some of them (50 Lux ASPH, looking at you), and also the rather inconsistent construction quality and therefore reliability. In parallel with them I tried several Voigtlanders and Zeiss lenses of the same focal length, only to find than in most circumstances I can’t tell the difference in my pics, or that I even like their rendering way better (Planar 50/2, looking at you; Nokton 40 too, Snapshot Skopar 25/4 too). So I sold all the Leica lenses, also the Planar, which I later started regretting, purchased few more Vogitlanders (28/2 II, 35/2.5, 35/1.4 II) and one TTArtisan (50/1.4), and I’m very happy with the kit. The only reason why I regret selling the Leica lenses now is that I sold them when the prices were relatively low compared to where they’re now… well, that’s life. I feel the price difference is better spent on traveling or film, at least in my case… those two factors are much more important for my photography than some lab test results, or social status.
I did the same thing. First M2 then Skopar, bought a Summicron and after years I dont notice a venefit except I spent 1800$ for it. That Skopar is gold.
Dude don't feel bad. Five years ago I made a mistake of selling a whole OM setup to get into Leica and don't regret it. It obviously doesn't make me better, but having something that you know you'll keep for the rest of your life that passes. It is expensive but you straight up pay for the quality. Same goes for watches. Why do people pay $20k+ for a Rolex when you can get any watch for $5? Or people don't even do the watch thing anymore because everything is on your phone now.
love the video and your honest approach! The good thing about those leica lenses that the dont drop their value, so if at one point you will want to get rid of it, you can do it FOR EASE for the same amount of money, so consider your purchase as a deposit. Kind of converting some savings into lenses, and (if need) you can convert it back again 1:1. Speaking about 35mil lens, i was also torn apart by deciding either buy this 35/2 summicron (already owning a 50\2 sum) or a Zeiss Biogon 35\2 and decided to grab a Biogon. Never regret about this move. Outstanding lens
I've been subject to this. Bought a superwide 20mm lens and figured it'd be worth it in the long run but I don't use it as much as my 50mm/100mm. My 28mm is actually the widest I'd prefer. So I ended up selling it. No regrets, but at the time, I def didn't need it, just more of an impulse buy. Thanks for sharing man!
I "regret" buying the X700, because three months later I bought the A1, which has more features. The X700 was intended to be the replacement for my K1000, and the only thing that I like is that it's lighter and smoother than the Pentax and Canon. Then again, the A1 is a war horse. I'll sell the Pentax and keep the Minolta if I get mugged (I live in South America).
Your video helped me out today...almost did the same thing! Thanks ;) I bought a used Leica M8 in 2018, which makes that camera more than a decade old at that time, and instantly had a gut feeling of regret. What have I done! Thankfully, it turned out to be a great camera and some of my favorite photos have been with the M8 and the Voigtlander Nokton 35mm f1.4 classic. Sometimes, we just gotta take a plunge!
I also bought the 6bit 35mm summicron and had it for about 1 month before selling it because I felt like it wasn't that much better than my 35mm voigtlander f2.
This might be the best video you've made in terms of actual insight. Every single photographer has done this, and not enough people talk about it. They all justify the dumb purchase. It's so rare to see someone say something like this instead. Very cool!
True.. but a lot of the time it's not entirely "dumb". Until you own a product and live with it for a while, it's hard to make a definitive judgement as to whether it's "worth it". But sure, the stakes are higher the more you spend!! We all feel great when a budget purchase exceeds expectations, and we feel bad when an expensive one doesn't meet expectations!
@@zx7-rr486 True. Also, ZX7-RR = +1 :-) Always wanted to own one, never did....
I love the honesty here, we’ve all bought expensive pieces of kit and then questioned the decision.
The funny thing is that my 35 Summicron ASPH is the one piece of gear that I really really regret selling. I know it was the right thing to do, but I miss how perfectly balanced it while still giving me a really great rendering.
I don’t regret buying my own copy of Summicron 35 2 Ver.4. I bought it at 2014 for $1400 include the original box. Now I can easily selling it for more than $2000. Buying Leica is a good investment. And it is no doubt a good tool to use.
I have a different experience. Most of the time, I’m regretting buying cheaper alternatives for what I was thinking in the first place. In the end, I’m spending money twice, which is the dumbest way possible ;)
Totes. This guy seems like super genuinely nice and all, but the whole buying less-than-Leica glass and pairing with Leica bodies is just kind of 🤦♂️
@@toniwonkanobi You know.. what you just said would probably offend the majority of film shooters but in my experience, I have learnt that it is true. As much as it can sound kinda snobbish/unrealistic.. Through the years I've learnt that buying Good (meaning great quality for its price) cheaper glass is totally cool and will get you great results.. but just don't pair it with a Leica body. I find that it is borderline more pretentious to shoot with mediocre lenses on M bodies than the other way round.
And of course everyone would say.. its more "value" to buy from their lower priced competitors and get "90%" of the result. Please do your homework. Leica lenses are not just 10-20% better and asking double/triple price. Through all my leica/non-leica glass purchases.. I've never regretted leica quality. It will hurt your pocket for sure.. but that is about your income/spending power balance, NOT a measurement of whether it was worth its own asking price. Most youtubers come at this topic with the wrong perspective. The inherent value of an item does not change just because you feel comfortable or not spending on it. Instead, a better (and arguably more financially sound) way would be to find a system you can fully enjoy AND support in its lens selection.
Don't be a poser who scrapes together enough to buy a supercar but complains at the cost of servicing/maintenance. Leica is known for their great glass and others might be better in other areas so move in the direction that you can financially support. Objectively flawed video imo.
@@popcorny11 "Don't be a poser who scrapes together enough to buy a supercar but complains at the cost of servicing/maintenance." Good lord yes! Excellent point. Zeiss, VoigtländerVoigtländer Nokton whatever with an M6 (non TTL, because the latter is more expensive now). I dunno. Hard to explain without sounding like an arse.
@@toniwonkanobi Totally legit pov. I've spent quite a bit on Zeiss, Voigtlanders.. even Ricohs. Back then.. I thought Hey come on can't be majority of the world shooting this stuff that's really that much worse right? They are "good".. but they usually give me an extraordinary picture worth printing 1 in maybe 60-80 frames. In that time, imagine how much film/pro development/scanning money would have been spent. And when you sell them.. they take a ridiculous drop in value and be prepared to answer all sorta stupid questions. When you wanna do a service, good luck finding Proper technicians who are willing to risk their rep doing it.
On the other hand.. I could have saved EVERYTHING.. waited longer, cut spending on other bullshit and just bought a Leica lens and have EVERY image bloody fantastic, with the only weakness being your technical experience and artistic ability. In the long run, its a safer financial choice.. you enjoy using it more in the years you spend turning some metal cylinder.. you have a drastically higher chance of making "nicer looking" pictures even if you shoot like shit.. and you eventually get back a higher percentage in depreciation when you sell it.
If you can feel so hurt about the price of a leica lens to the point you make decisions based on comparisons to a $350 lens.. you deserve to feel the pain. I don't wanna sound like an ass but I think he was insecure in stating that he could "afford it but not multiple times" like.. lol why are you making such a far fetched hypothesis just to say you're not THAT broke but at the same time.. wanna sell the lens cos.. he thought the $350 lens giving him "90%"? Jeez.
@@popcorny11 Haha. Dude. This is so💯. I love it. I'm glad I'm not the only wanker on TH-cam who thought this way.
It’s called GUILT. Not regret. You sound like you’re feeling guilty for buying it. You certainly like the results, you don’t regret owning it. It’s just guilt.
I think he said he was ashamed to show it, so shame is probably the emotion here
I think it is regret, to an extent. We've all done it, bought something that was expensive, and then wondered if we could have used the money better elsewhere.
This dude has both regret and guilt. There is no rule that you can't have two negative feelings 🤣🤣
Thing is, the best costs more.
Especially Leica's best, where it's expensive cos they have always gone the extra yard starting with their glass and including not scrimping in paying their employees.
So yeah, when there are situations where only a cron will do, then nothing else will do.
Grew up on an M2 cron, used M4 luxes for work, Leicaflexes, Nikons, Canons, Olympus... still shoot Nikon D850s, Fuji XT and X Pro (yes, Fujicrons), and sold my M9/cron to move on...
Only I didn't.
Bought an M240/35 Ultron, then M10...
Now back to an M9 snd selling my Ultron... for a summicron again.
It's mostly the feel in the hand and the sense of history. And the knowledge that if I mess up a shot... it's all me, not the equipment.
I love the 35mm Summicron. I purchased it used 10 years ago, and I use it 80%+ of the time. When I bought it I had the same qualms you express in this video. Today, I consider it a brilliant purchase and probably my best decision ever made based on emotion. When all sense is expressed in dollars and cents, you will not buy Leica :) I have an M9 that is 10 years old, still works like new, and I cannot put it aside or replace it - 10 years later :) Enjoy, photography is for life and your lense will accompany you trough every stage of it
We’re film photographers. If we had to justify any of our purchases, we’d lose every time. “Your phone has a camera, and you don’t even need to develop the pictures!” “Just buy a disposable camera. It covers 90% of your film needs.” Etc.
Exactly the whole endeavor of film photography and photography in general is not cheap and honestly most of us are hobbyists anyway. Buy whatever you want if you have the money and there's no need to justify your purchases to anyone. There are far worse things to blow you money on.
I regret the 50mm Noctilux. Great lens, just not worth the money. So i sold it and got two new cameras and 3 lenses.
50 Noctilux is really pointless. Good decision to sell and you probably didn't lose any money on it right?
You'll get that money back you invested in good glass which is most important. You actually got it for a decent price. Ive seen some for 2-3 bands
Here's the thing...if you can notice the 10% difference and it matches your vision in photography then it's worth every penny.
I have A LOT of lenses for a LOT of systems (digital, medium format film, 35mm film) and for me, the 35mm Summarit f/2.4 ASPH (not the 'Cron) hit the perfect spot for me in rendering as it's not always about f/stop and this kind of absurd quest for sharpness, it's just this overall look that just comes from the lens itself. I have plenty of lenses I have adapted to my Leica digital that get me 90-95% of the look of the Summarit f/2.4 ASPH, but nothing comes close in that price range overall for the that transition from in focus to out of focus, technical "rightness" and even bokeh...yes, I wish it wasn't so expensive, but now I never have to worry about a 35mm lens for my Leica, yes even the Summicron...thankfully, no matter the price, I prefer the look of the 'rit for what I do.
Often we film shooters tend to be thrifty as most of us got some amazing deals over the years (my RB67, ETRSi, Rolleiflex, Iskra 6x6, and Maxxum 7 to name a few), but if I've learned one thing, once you start honing your look and what you like, being thrifty is a habit that you might want to curtail...and I know, it's HARD.
The 35 Summicron ASPH is the best 35mm lens I’ve used, despite it being like $2200 or whatever. If you’re shooting wide open and use it on digital, that’s where you’ll really start to see the differences on lenses. Film is a little more forgiving in that way in terms of sharpness. Luckily, it seems like Leica glass definitely isn’t dropping in value, so even if you make a mistake, you can often sell it again for what you paid.
I don't agree that film is more forgiving in terms of sharpness. With resolutions exceeding 5000dpi, pro low ISO films can match a 36MP FF sensor for detail and sharpness... I know, I shoot both. But you DO NEED a bloody good film scanner!!!
Sure. But even something like Portra 400 (a fantastic film) is going to have more grain than the vast majority of digital files at iso 400 too. The processing in a digital sensor just does weird things to files too. I’ve shot thousands of rolls of film and upwards of a million digital photos professionally too and while my comment might not be scientific, that’s still my overall feeling from doing both.
@@benjhaisch I was talking about slow ISO 100 or less films, like Velvia, Provia, Ektachrome and Ektar. I think Ektar generally has a tad less detail, and ditto Porta 160; although pixel peeping 5000 dpi scans of these films reveals 36MP detail on a 35mm frame area.
Of course faster films of ISO 400 and upwards will have more grain than 'noise' on an equivalent digital ISO. This is the strength of digital IMO, the super sensitivity of the sensors, and their ability to shoot in low light.
But with good light, well exposed low ISO pro films have immense detail that rivals 36MP FF sensors.
What I will say, is that even in the low ISO case, digital images are more consistent at the pixel scale. A film image will have subtle variations in colour at the pixel level, whereas the Bayer interpolated digital image far less so. So the detail is there in the film image, but the (scanned) pixel level colour is a little more stochastic. This, IMO, along with the general way a given film chemistry reacts to light to give colour depth and saturation, is what makes film images look different to digital.
The ironic thing is that we rely on digital scanning equipment to reveal those film characteristics; the film is essentially a chemical intermediary to our final scanned digital images, if you like.
When you also throw into the equation that you can shoot a Medium Format negative (or positive) that contains 120MP+ of information (scanned at 5000dpi), you have what is still an amazing artistic medium. The film look, huge detail potential on massive prints; and for a fraction of the price of digital MF cameras.
Wow man. I’m new to the M system after renting an M-E typ 240 that I wound up buying. I’m now struggling to find the ideal 50mm lens. I’ve tested a few Voigtlanders that didn’t quite fit what I am looking for. As a result, I’ve been spending too much time hunting and lusting online for the expensive Leica lens that is going to be a ‘game changer’ for me. Seeing your video stopped me from making a big purchase that I might regret. It’s best for me to stay patient, continue to rent and try other options first, like the Zeiss Planar 50mm f/2.
As for your situation, you consistently provide a wealth of knowledge by educating & sharing your experience with others. Therefore since you have the Leica lens you dreamed about, stop kicking yourself and simply enjoy the experience. You made an investment in your craft and very possibly financially as the value of your lens could increase over time if you ever wanted to sell. Regardless, you work hard and this is a reward. After some time, you won’t be thinking about how much money you spent.
So fast forward to 2024 and I’m fighting the urge to get this lens now. $1800 for the king of bokeh sounds like a steal today.
The Summicron is a classic and will hold its value or even increase over time. You’re a photographer and spent your money on the best glass you can. Don’t feel guilty about that. If you blew 1800$ up your nose or on a bar tab, that’s something to feel guilty about. Enjoy your lens, you deserve nice toys once in a while :)
Couldn’t have found a better way to say it myself. People blow ungodly amounts of money on smokes, booze, and booger sugar…don’t feel bad about spending money on something positive that you love!
*King Jvpes* I can imagine how you feel about this right now, and appreciate your honest commentary; however, from my perspective as a truly ancient camera person, you do have what is said to be one of the very best lenses for your beautiful Leica camera, and eventually the expense will be long forgotten. Only your love will remain. Treasure it.
If you want to purchase M-Mount lenses that are pretty easy on the wallet, look for the Konica M-Hexanon line. The 50mm F2 looks exactly like a Summicron and makes some amazing photos.
You’ll feel fine in a few more weeks. I had this dilemma when I purchased an M10. Now, I have no regrets. Although I did go with the summarit 35 not the summicron. It’s the same glass and I felt that the extra stop was not worth another £900 (I’m from UK). I also have an M2 And have had no regrets pairing that with a relatively inexpensive voigtlander 40mm f1.4. But let’s talk Minolta! I was about your age in 1976 and had sleepless nights after purchasing an SRT 303. Soon got over it and I’m still using it to this day. Paired with my 200mm Rokkor and a roll of HP5, I’ll take the Pepsi Challenge any day so far as shallow depth of field is concerned ( sorry, bokeh. It’s the English in me). Why rangefinders? Well I started in 1972 with a gift from an uncle it was a Minolta Hi Matic 7, also still in use. I’ll say no more.
Absolutely! You know I've been working with the Voigtlander Color Skopar for 3 Years now and absolutely agree. Believe me, I WANT the summicron but i dont think i can justify it (maybe...) after using a German made V3 Summicron 35. The skopar out performed the v3 in every aspect except for sharpness and maybe the quality of the build. People are going to tear apart the voigtlander for "distortion" "bokeh" and "not leitz" but that DOESNT FUCKING MATTER when you're building/exhibiting a body of work. You think people are actively looking for those things when they view an image for the first time? No, its about the image itself (sorry objectophiles). The voigtlander is just as good as capturing photos, its just the attitude you put towards the glass.
Lets stop the Leica "class-war"
bobprice1988 AGREED SIR BOBBY LETS SHOOT LATER
I sprung for a Hasselblad 500c and a few lenses about five years ago. At the time I had dreams of making beautiful landscapes. After about a year I realized I was spending all of my shooting time on the streets or at family events - I like to photograph people. I love medium format, and the Hassie is a treat to use in the right situation. But it's not the camera I naturally reach for. The upshot is I have an expensive camera I love but I'm not IN LOVE with. The lesson to folks who haven't yet found their style - stick to the basics until you're sure you know what you want.
I had the exact feeling when I spent $800 on my contax G2 with the biogon 28mm. I felt that maybe it wasn’t best decision after all since they have a history of crapping out on you but I fell in love with it and have just decided to shoot it until it dies and then have the lens converted to M mount.
How is that 28mm when converted to Leica
Do not be too hard on yourself. Life is full of experiences - good or bad, cheap, or not so cheap. I can understand why you wanted the lens in the first place. I own several Leica R, Leica LTM, Voigtlander and Zeiss M mount lenses. I own a Leica M1 and have decided to use a primary Zeiss Sonnar ZM, Voigtlander Color Skopar 40mm for Leica M and a MS Optics 57mm lens. I have purchased adapters so I can use the lens between the cameras, digital and film. I have no regrets thus far. I hope that you are able to sell you Leica lens at a reasonable price and recoup you investment.
This is pretty timely for me.. I was looking at M3's earlier this week as my long (long long) term goal of ownership and I figured the 50mm f/2 version of that Summicron was what I wanted to go with it.. I might be able to talk myself out of it now, by the time comes to buy in a year or two.. Maybe..
Don't be embarrassed about it, though.. Sometimes you just want nice things of quality. And it's not like you arn't using it. Sometimes it's really nice to pick something up that's splurge-y and know you're set on your Leica rig forever.
Several years back, I thought I wanted to get back into photography and for whatever reason, didn't consider film. I dropped like $3k on a new Nikon D810 and $450 if I remember correctly on their 35mm prime lens.. And I lost interest in the whole package in a matter of months.. It wasn't until I tried film about 4-5 months ago, that I realized what was missing.. So yeah I felt pretty stupid about not understanding myself enough to know that a higher end digital camera wasn't going to zap life into my dying love of digital photography.
Keep up the good work, you're my favorite film/photography channel by a wide margin.
Go Voigt!😂
pbbbht Yes!!!! Exactly how I feel man. EXACTLY
zeiss glass is where its at
I'd much rather see a video about someone humbling themselves and admitting some truth rather than flexing on someone with an expensive purchase.
Captain obvious over here..
"should I have done that?" - the question after every purchase ever
I dont question small purchases tbh. $20 is nothing in the grand scheme of things, as long as you dont let $20 turn into $20×20
@@ajg8600 ^this.
Picked up a Canon FD 70-210 for £25 with no regrets there
You might really like the Voigtlander 35 1.4. People call it the Japanese Summilux. It is great & full of character wide open. Very versatile for shooting film at night. I suggest shooting some Cinestill 800 with the 35 1.4. Great lens! Thanks man!
You did not make a mistake. 1800 was a very good price. Can not get it for less than 2200. I owned that lens version 4 for 15 years. Sold it to get the asp version 1 which was an inferior lens to the version 4. The 35 asph vers 1 had a back focusing issue. The only 35mm ,lens for leica m that might be better than your lens ie 35mm summicron asph v 2. However that lens was made for digital photography and had a clinical look on film and used costs twice what your version 4 costs. Further your version 4 keeps increasing in value. Your lens is the best lens I ever shot and I know what I am talking about. keep the lens you got a good deal and a great lens. The best 35mm for leica film photography. The price of the 35mm summicron v4, your lens, keeps going up because film shooters like it the best, better than the 35mm asph v2
Jupiter 12 red p you wont regret buying, image quality and the price tag..
If it's not shimmed properly so that it'll focus correctly you'll regret it..lol
I'm a digital M shooter. I recently sold my 50mm Summilux and bought the Voigtlander 50mm 1.2 and I couldn't be happier. If I was being picky I'd say the Lux renders ever so slightly better wide open and is marginally sharper (at 1.4) But you'd have to be pixel peeping to really notice. At a 3rd of the price I can't complain :)
U know a few years from now u will say that one of the best thing u bought
Correct!
god damn where you right
I constantly have the urge to replace my Voigtlander 35 Nokton 1.4 for a Summilux 35, but thinking about how little I shoot 35mm keeps me sane, but I do have a similar thing with the Summicron 50mm.
I'd been using my Canon 50mm f/1.4 screwmount lens as my only 50mm for years, but couldn't resist the feeling that I "needed" a genuine Leica lens, so I bought a Summicron 50 (version 3) a while back, on ebay. It didn't help that the seller wasn't honest about it. There was a hair INSIDE the lens that wasn't in the auction photos (no idea how it got there) and the focus was so stiff it was nearly unuseable. Like you, i'm not rich and it was a pretty big purchase, so I thought "what have I done?" but the glass was perfect which can be rare on older "user" lenses, so I just decided to get a CLA on it since I paid a little less than what it was averaging, instead of sending it back, and in the end I got a perfect lens.
On the first roll with it, I also had this expectation, that "OMG Leica, it's going to be awesome!" and TBH, it is, but if you put a shot from the Summicron next to a shot from the Canon, most people won't be able to tell the difference at all (unless they're both wide open, hey, it's not called the Japanese Summilux for nothin') It's smaller and lighter than Canon and focuses closer, and after a while you do notice the little differences that probably don't matter that much, but make it the awesome lens that it is. (pretty much zero distortion on the summi, sharp from corner to corner.. creamy bokeh vs swirly on the canon) so, with that said, although my expectations weren't exactly met, and I did regret it at first, i've grown to really love using it and my regrets have faded away.
IMO, you should just let your regrets go, you already have it now so just embrace it and you'll probably start noticing the little differences too.
Yo bro, I def feel you. I got the fuji x100f 35mm point and shoot and really enjoyed 35mm. I came from a 50mm lens and started thinking that 35mm wasn't wide enough after a while. So I went ahead and bought the 28mm adapter. 7 measly mm for $400 more. I regretted it at first but then I started falling in love w/the 28mm look and while I wasn't happy to spend the bread, I am enjoying shooting more now. If you haven't already, I think you'll start to enjoy picking up your camera more w/the new lens and shooting more, which will make the investment worth it over time. Thanks for posting, I feel a lot better about my purchase now!
I had this lens back when they were $500-$600 used (late 90s). I was poor though and prices were going up then, so I sold both the lens and the M2. I got maybe $1300 for both. If only I had waited another 10 years! No doubt the Summicron V4 is a wonderful lens. And I actually really hated that 35/2.5 Voigtlander (so bland). Nowadays I would feel too anxious walking around with a $2K lens. I shoot a Canon 7 now and have an old Nikkor 35/2.5 (which I love) among 4 other great old lenses (the whole kit, plus a Nikon F2 outfit, all together cost far less than that Summicron). I'm possibly a better photographer because I've matured and I no longer need such a lens to do good work. Having it, however briefly, was all part of the process
I spent around 700 Euros to get a Nikon F2AS and its motordrive fixed. Did I regret it?
No, this camera is now the smoothest of my three F2s and is in a really nice shape again
(ready for the next 30+ years).
I also spent 852 + 185 for the hood (that I never use, just to have it complete) on a SUPER-ANGULON 1:4 M, which is by far my best little wide angle lens and I love to shoot it.
Some things cost a little more but you will get it back in the long run as long as you spend the bucks on things that you love.
I am also constantly looking at a M4 but I just don’t see me burning more than 600 Euros on this camera body. I generally don’t look for things that burn a giant hole in my wallet, just for good value.
Mine was a Canon EOS L 50mm f1.2 . . . . . .only 1 out of 10 shots were sharp . . . . . .. returned to shop for a chit chat about my problem only to be told not to use it at f1.2 !!!!! . . . . . .result, lens sold at a slight loss to me and replaced with 1.8 model at huge saving and the only unsharp shots are my fault . . . . . .you have it now, enjoy it and keep up the GREAT work . . . . .thanks.
I use all Leica M lens. Your Cron is nothing. I have a Noct 50mm 0.95 and cost me $11,000. Is it worth it?
My wife got me a Canon F1 with a 55mm f1.8 lens for $800 in very good condition. I shoot digital and been wanting to shoot film for a while now. Will you consider this a win or loss??
You've made the purchase, now just enjoy it. Know that if you ever decide to sell it, you will probably get your money back. This is the nice thing about shooting Leica lenses. I bought a Noctilux f/1.0 at some point, shot it for a year, but felt guilty about all that money tied up in one lens. I ended up selling it and making a nice profit (nearly $1000). That got me over the guilt of shooting with this kind of expensive equipment. Had I kept the lens and sold it now? Ohhh boy.
Most (not all) Leica lenses can be seen as some kind of investment, which can't be said for lenses from 3rd party manufacturers.
Interesting video. Thanks
Is the summicron really sharper? The 35/2.5 voigtlander ist super sharp and a very underrated lens. Try the Zeiss Biogon 35 or Planar 50. I prefer them over the equivaltent Leica lenses. The square Leica shade is very nice though.
I have yet to regret a film photography purchase. My most expensive was my hasselblad, and I don’t regret that one single bit.
I appreciate the honesty, J. Good on you for sharing this. I couldn't afford the Summicron and for whatever reason, the Color-Skopar market is high right now. I'm not embarrassed to admit I picked up the 7artisans 35/2 for my CL. Not quite as sharp as the VL, but I got it open box for $204 shipped. When I'm shooting street, the last thing on my mind is barrel distortion. I'll be good with it for a long time I think.
Colin Bloodworth right!! All of the minuscule things fly out of our heads when shooting 😂 doesn’t really matter
2:12 with the big grin I thought that was Bello for a second
I got the VM35 and then found an amazing deal on a new Summarit (cheaper than the KEH trade-in price), but I talked myself out of it. The VM is great, but I'd like to get a Leica M lens one day - probably either the 28mm Elmarit (useful across various platforms) or the beautiful 90s 90mm Summicron (not really useful, and very heavy, yet somehow very enticing).
You deserve it, everybody deserves to grow and evolve. The cheap options are good but this summicron can last you for many years
Yup. I’ve had the exact same feeling. Leica M6 … nice camera, used it a bunch, no complaints but the cost always are at me. I finally sold it and it was a huge relief.
I use a Canon 35 1.8 and love it! Initially I regretted buying my M2, because I was underwhelmed when I got it. I am glad I decided to keep it, because now I love it!
Leica glass will allow you to break even or come up a bit so it's not a total loss since you learned a valuable lesson from it. However you could have learned allot more for allot less from some of the photography education books I recommended in a previous video...maybe I can contribute something useful though.
Photo basics 101: a stop of light is a halving (-50%) or doubling (+100%) of the current measured amount of light.
So when you push it two stops (underexposing) your reducing the amount of light hitting the film by -100% and compensating by increasing your developing time (usually +20% or more), conversely when pulling (overexposing) your film say 1 stop (+100%) , your increasing the amount of light hitting the film and compensating by decreasing your development time (usually -15 to -20%).
This information was gleaned from a single page of a single photo technique book, purchased for the stately sum of $4.57. Hopefully those of you who have read this far may understand how valuable critical thinking is to your photography and more importantly, your life...
The photos you show from the Leica lens look great and have a real pop. I'd say the quality is apparent.
I'm thinking of buying a zoom lens for Pentax K1000. Can you suggest me how to choose one. What are the factors I should consider and things to check while buying one
what would you have bought in its place (assuming you could not keep your old lens)?
In your defense, the Leica lens will hold its value really well over time, so if your needs outgrow the lens, you should be able to sell it for the same if not more than you bought it for. They don’t manufacture that lens anymore and film photography doesn’t seem to be losing momentum anytime soon. So just don’t break it. 😂
I just spent $3k on a 28 Summicron... 😬 I do this for a living and it still took me 2 years to finally save and sell to get one.
I would get rid of it for the ASPH. The V4 is known to have loose front barrel after prolonged use. Also the king of bokeh title only apply to the front OoF. If you like the look of the V4, you should try the 40mm cron (38.5mm actual FL) it's very similar in lens design and size.
After going through a tonne of lenses, the 35cron is my most used and versatile lens I've ever owned.
VM is still the same price, if you keep you V4KOB , today it costs about 2500 sterling here in London
I highly suggest you look at the Minolta 40mm f2 lens. So much cheaper and pretty darn sharp.
I thought I was being extravagant buying a 7Artisans 50mm f/1.1 for my M2. Now less so. I spent more on a Summicron R 50mm for my Leica R6 and didn't feel so bad, partly because it's such a great lens (and no where near as expensive the M mount equivalent).
That 35mm Summicron f/2 version iv, king of bokeh and the Canadian 35mm f/1.4 pre-ashperical were Leica's best ever 35s for film work. You got a beaut lens there bro, small, light very compact, a great lens and 1800 a great price too!!! - sadly you don't seen to appreciate it. Some folks dream for years for a lens like that.
This is a baloney decision if you’re scanning with a flatbed
Could get 3 Coolscans for that money
You are wrong. A better negative is a better negative. I develop my own film and all images are printed on silver gelatin paper where you can see the difference in quality. If the owner ever had a show in a gallery he should want to make the best prints possible and either learn wet darkroom work, have a master printer print silver gelatin for the show, or get the negs scanned by a high quality drum scanner. The negative is the original and that is where the quality is necessary if you later want to make the best quality prints . My further advice is that film shooters should develop their own film, very easy to do, and learn how to print a silver gelatin print in a wet darkroom
Full marks for your honesty! I have recently been thinking about buying an expensive camera item that I really, really want but deep down, know that I actually don't need. Your video has brought me to my senses - for now!
my canon ae1 and fd 50mm 1:1.8 lens setup cost me $4 at the flea market lol
When I first got into vintage lenses, I got into a rhythm and was making a purchase every two to three weeks. Deals are everywhere and I have never spent more than $80 on a lens, even picked up some nice camera bodies along the way, but this one time I was itching to get something and decided on a camera and lens combo someone was selling. I ended up getting a camera and two lenses for $20. Camera didn't work, one lens was all scratched up, and the other was feeling very loose. Some of the issues I hadn't spotted when meeting the seller, but my gut was telling me to walk away. Should've listened to it but I didn't want to have made my way there for nothing. My regret isn't as costly as costly as yours but it goes to show how Gear Acquisition Syndrome toys with our reasoning.
I went with the middle of the road option for my 35mm lens for my Leica. I bought a used Zeiss 35mm f/2 for around $650 & I couldn't be happier with it! The sharpness, color rendition and function are amazing. I also have the 50mm f/2 lens from Zeiss but I bought it new. If you ever get a chance to try the Zeiss lenses you owe it to yourself to try them. They're well worth the money!
Yes I am going to rent a Zeiss Planar 50mm f/2 which I understand is a high quality lens on par with some of Leica’s best.
This is one of my favorite videos by you just because of the honesty. Great video man
Yuan Francois thanks brother ❤️🙏🏽🙏🏽🙏🏽
Just enjoy the lens for what it is. Yes, it has a high initial cost but when you come to sell it (if you ever do) the market price will most likely be the same as when you bought it. No regrets man!
I once bought a Voigtländer 40/1.4 and I was not satisfied. I also regret the purchase of a Voigtländer 75/1.8. Both are for sale along with a Zeiss 50/1.5, which I was very happy with. Just ordered a Summilux 50/1.4.
One reason to get a high-priced lens like the Leica Summicron 35mm f/2 is psychological: the belief that our photography is worthy of such a high quality lens.
I always regretted buying my Leica M6. Back in 2016 it cost me $1400 in mint condition. Two years later I was still questioning my decision especially because I was having more fun shooting with the Nikon fm2n so I sold the M6.
Yep, once I have bought a broken Nikon FA in order to make some money, but didn't manage to repair it. So now I still have it and make me believe that I am a really bad merchant.
KingJvpes, you don't have to regret anything, you just bought a lifetime investment.
Gary William Brierley exactly.
Do you still have it mate? I bought it for 2500 🙈 and felt the exact same what you did!
I have the exact same feelings about a Pentax 6x7 kit I recently purchased. The images that come out of the takumar 105 f2.4 are insane and I absolutely love it, but I regularly think about how much I spent on the whole kit and regret it lol.
Well everyone has to go through experience like that to learn ...... You can always sell it and buy a cheaper lens
Are you going to sell it?
I don't know how long I've been watching your videos... a while. Just wanted to compliment on how great your photos are now and how far you've progressed. nice work!
I bought a 50 mm summilux last year, now I might change to a 35 summicron. the 50 is a heavy carry and not too compact
Which microphone do you use?
I don't own it anymore and passed it on but I bought a full Pentax 645 kit with a bunch of lenses for 800 dollars if memory serves. I ended up not really being a fan of it and sold it within 2 years.
Sharpness also becomes moot if you're using a flatbed scanner for 35mm. Side by side comparison, bet I wont be able to tell them apart. Stick to voigtlander and invest you money in things that actually will have better return.
Yep, I think we've all experienced this once or twice. If you're not hard-pressed for money right now I'd keep it around, but if there's anything you should be getting with that cash I'd switch back to the Voigtlander. I really like their lenses.
Personally I've done this a couple times during my worst GAS period - I bought new cameras every month and of course didn't use them too often cause my collection kept growing. I've whittled it down a good bit by now. The only thing I own that even gets close to that price tag is my Mamiya 7 though (about $1450) and I'm not letting that go anytime soon (unless someone wants to trade for a 7ii ;)
I had the Zeiss 50mm Planar for my M2, and picked up a Summicron Dual Range, and had to sell the Zeiss in order to pay for the Leica; and while the two lenses do render completely differently from one another, and my personal use of the Leica is more suited to the way it renders, there are times I miss the look that Zeiss gave me. It was a far more punchy of a lens for contrast and colour; the Leica is sharper, but a LOT LESS contrast. Different tools for different needs.
I was in to get a Leica M6 and I am pretty compulsive, ended up going to a local camera store the M6's they had were way above my budget, so I ended up setteling for a M4-2 for $1700 it had a dent on the top plate. After a few days all I could think was... Was this dent worth $1700 dollars???
Regret 100% so I decided to return it, didn't get all the money back cuz of some stupid fees.
But I kept saving and found the sweetest deal on a M6 new in the box!
It's done now Jonathan . Don't regret it, enjoy it. And don't feel guilty or embarrassed. You put a lot into the art and you should have dope gear. If you feel like you'd rather use the funds for something else, move back to what you had. You thought you were making a good investment in your craft. Now you know. Just think if you never took the plunge for your Leica. OR, what if you got this lens and it was miles ahead of anything? You don't know until you try. I would buy used though. That's what I've learned. I bought the 28mm Sumicron and I just don't shoot it. I got it new and .. ouch. I love my 35mm and it's just not that different and it's much bigger and heavier so it rarely makes it out with me. I should have borrowed one to test it out or got one used. Thanks for the video, it took guts.
For more light, buy a Noctilux. Or rent one?
Thanks for Being honest with your viewers, love your videos I learn a lot from them!!! Thanks again!!
I owned the Summicron 35 mm V4 vor several years. It is a very good lens but not that much out of this world as current prices suggest. Sell it, make a fortune. Get a used 2/35 Ultron asph. Ver. II and still have more than a grand in your pocket and never miss that Summicron again.
Nothing in this price range but I remember buying a Yashica T2 which eventually died on me. I remember looking at the pictures compared to my cheaper point and shoots and I honestly didn't understand why I purchased it as any increase in sharpness was pretty meh to me. It was a good lesson in understanding that my favourite images will always boil down to the subject and composition, not how much money I spent on the camera that is taking the photo
I remember back then when I wasn’t sure what way I should go with my canon 5d mark2, had only by then a 50mm f1.4 lens and the 24-70 seem so creepy expensive that I brought the darn 28-135mm, which is the worst.
I bought this Leica 35mm F2 twice and end up sold it twice and buy the zeiss zm 50mm F2 and 35mm 1.4 and the Voigtlander 28mm F2 MKii for the same money of the Leica . Never regretted !
My experience is similar to yours. I’ve purchased multiple Leica M lenses for M9 and M2, and then became disillusioned with their price performance ratio and regretted the purchases. Were they good? Sure. Were they noticeably better in everyday picture-taking? Hardly. I also disliked the “features” or rendering of some of them (50 Lux ASPH, looking at you), and also the rather inconsistent construction quality and therefore reliability. In parallel with them I tried several Voigtlanders and Zeiss lenses of the same focal length, only to find than in most circumstances I can’t tell the difference in my pics, or that I even like their rendering way better (Planar 50/2, looking at you; Nokton 40 too, Snapshot Skopar 25/4 too). So I sold all the Leica lenses, also the Planar, which I later started regretting, purchased few more Vogitlanders (28/2 II, 35/2.5, 35/1.4 II) and one TTArtisan (50/1.4), and I’m very happy with the kit. The only reason why I regret selling the Leica lenses now is that I sold them when the prices were relatively low compared to where they’re now… well, that’s life. I feel the price difference is better spent on traveling or film, at least in my case… those two factors are much more important for my photography than some lab test results, or social status.
I did the same thing. First M2 then Skopar, bought a Summicron and after years I dont notice a venefit except I spent 1800$ for it. That Skopar is gold.
Nicos Photography Show gold like buttah
You can sell it ?
Well said , the last 10%ish improvement of any tech usually costs 300%ish more ; thanks for your honesty .
Dude don't feel bad. Five years ago I made a mistake of selling a whole OM setup to get into Leica and don't regret it. It obviously doesn't make me better, but having something that you know you'll keep for the rest of your life that passes. It is expensive but you straight up pay for the quality. Same goes for watches. Why do people pay $20k+ for a Rolex when you can get any watch for $5? Or people don't even do the watch thing anymore because everything is on your phone now.
love the video and your honest approach! The good thing about those leica lenses that the dont drop their value, so if at one point you will want to get rid of it, you can do it FOR EASE for the same amount of money, so consider your purchase as a deposit. Kind of converting some savings into lenses, and (if need) you can convert it back again 1:1. Speaking about 35mil lens, i was also torn apart by deciding either buy this 35/2 summicron (already owning a 50\2 sum) or a Zeiss Biogon 35\2 and decided to grab a Biogon. Never regret about this move. Outstanding lens
I've been subject to this. Bought a superwide 20mm lens and figured it'd be worth it in the long run but I don't use it as much as my 50mm/100mm. My 28mm is actually the widest I'd prefer. So I ended up selling it. No regrets, but at the time, I def didn't need it, just more of an impulse buy. Thanks for sharing man!
I "regret" buying the X700, because three months later I bought the A1, which has more features. The X700 was intended to be the replacement for my K1000, and the only thing that I like is that it's lighter and smoother than the Pentax and Canon. Then again, the A1 is a war horse. I'll sell the Pentax and keep the Minolta if I get mugged (I live in South America).
What cured me was a 'beautiful imperfection' approach - now I buy really nice but cheap vintage lenses with character.
Your video helped me out today...almost did the same thing! Thanks ;)
I bought a used Leica M8 in 2018, which makes that camera more than a decade old at that time, and instantly had a gut feeling of regret. What have I done! Thankfully, it turned out to be a great camera and some of my favorite photos have been with the M8 and the Voigtlander Nokton 35mm f1.4 classic.
Sometimes, we just gotta take a plunge!
I also bought the 6bit 35mm summicron and had it for about 1 month before selling it because I felt like it wasn't that much better than my 35mm voigtlander f2.