Leica Summilux-M 35mm f/1.4 ASPH lens vs. 7Artisans 35mm f/1.4 lens

  • Thread starter Thread starter Henry Richardson
  • Start date Start date
Those of us who have a Leica lens know there is just something very magical about it and the photos we get from it. There is nothing else like it. The Leica look is not a myth! I wrote a review awhile back about my camera and superlative, mystical Leica lens:

https://www.dpreview.com/forums/post/62337549

Some people, as we know, rag on Leica lenses. Say they aren't special, not worth the money, etc. Just ignore them. We obviously know something they don't.

I think a 7Artisans lens can, of course, make good photos, but use a Leica lens and the world is your oyster!
Except you don’t own a Leica lens.
Yes, I do. A humdinger!
You have a Panasonic lens with a Leica label.
The lens has the Leica name and brand and that by definition means it is a Leica lens. The only lenses that might say Leica, but not be Leica, are ones that a company has illegally put the Leica name on. My lens is not illegal and you can bet your sweet a$$ that if it was then Leica would have sued the cr@p out of the company, which has deep pockets, to get billions in damages and also an immediate cease and desist order.
It is simply a rebranded lens manufactured by Panasonic with stricter standards. You wouldn’t know a Leica lens if it bit you in the a$$.
So the Leica Digilux 2 lens everybody loves is a “real” Leica, or also a rebranded lens?

What is true is that I have never see Leica m43 lenses at any Leica store...
It’s a Leica design manufactured by Panasonic under stricter standards.
Leica brand products in any way they see fit, like the Summicron 50mm f2 which is actually made and finished in Portugal but it has in tiny letters (no paint, just engraved) "made in Germany" anyway. That's why the m43 Panasonic lenses are clearly branded as "Leica".

However, with Panasonic full-frame lenses is another story, they say "Certified BY Leica".
 
I have always considered Voigtlander and some Zeiss to be the low cost alternative to Leica primes (and some of them are very, very good). Then come the chinese knock-offs. They're not the first replica. Those didn't interest me either. I'm sure they'll find some sort of niche to sell to but for those that can afford M-mount body's to shoot with, the current Leica, Voigtlander, Zeiss offerings shouldn't present a financial hurdle. Guess I'm left wondering who the market is...
 
I have always considered Voigtlander and some Zeiss to be the low cost alternative to Leica primes (and some of them are very, very good). Then come the chinese knock-offs. They're not the first replica. Those didn't interest me either. I'm sure they'll find some sort of niche to sell to but for those that can afford M-mount body's to shoot with, the current Leica, Voigtlander, Zeiss offerings shouldn't present a financial hurdle. Guess I'm left wondering who the market is...
“Chinese knock-offs”... “they are not the first replica”

You have no clue. Those are not “replicas” pretending to pass as Leica lenses, and many M users have no problem using them, it is not only about money.
 
The Leica lens was not designed for the sensor stack thickness of the Fujifilm camera. This results in obvious peripheral color drift towards blue/cyan, and - less obvious - smearing (astigmatism) towards the edges.

Thus, the Leica is put at a disadvantage, and I doubt that you can actually learn much from comparing the pictures in this quiz.
 
The Leica lens was not designed for the sensor stack thickness of the Fujifilm camera. This results in obvious peripheral color drift towards blue/cyan, and - less obvious - smearing (astigmatism) towards the edges.

Thus, the Leica is put at a disadvantage, and I doubt that you can actually learn much from comparing the pictures in this quiz.
Smearing is only an issue at the corners. The 7A is perfectly sharp where it matters.
 
I have always considered Voigtlander and some Zeiss to be the low cost alternative to Leica primes (and some of them are very, very good). Then come the chinese knock-offs. They're not the first replica. Those didn't interest me either. I'm sure they'll find some sort of niche to sell to but for those that can afford M-mount body's to shoot with, the current Leica, Voigtlander, Zeiss offerings shouldn't present a financial hurdle. Guess I'm left wondering who the market is...
“Chinese knock-offs”... “they are not the first replica”

You have no clue. Those are not “replicas” pretending to pass as Leica lenses, and many M users have no problem using them, it is not only about money.
Of course it's about the money. Why would someone choose chinese knock-off over a Leica if not for the money?
 
The Leica lens was not designed for the sensor stack thickness of the Fujifilm camera. This results in obvious peripheral color drift towards blue/cyan, and - less obvious - smearing (astigmatism) towards the edges.

Thus, the Leica is put at a disadvantage, and I doubt that you can actually learn much from comparing the pictures in this quiz.
Smearing is only an issue at the corners. The 7A is perfectly sharp where it matters.
The astigmatism (smearing) is apparent from 8mm and increases towards the corners. It would bother me even if I had that kind of astigmatism in the bokeh.

If the smearing is not an issue for the given use case, buy the 7Artisans, or a used 35mm for half the price. But in this case, there is no point in comparing it with the Leica in the first place.

The test can only be useful if it can show potential differences. However, the test conditions make this impossible.
 
I have always considered Voigtlander and some Zeiss to be the low cost alternative to Leica primes (and some of them are very, very good). Then come the chinese knock-offs. They're not the first replica. Those didn't interest me either. I'm sure they'll find some sort of niche to sell to but for those that can afford M-mount body's to shoot with, the current Leica, Voigtlander, Zeiss offerings shouldn't present a financial hurdle. Guess I'm left wondering who the market is...
“Chinese knock-offs”... “they are not the first replica”

You have no clue. Those are not “replicas” pretending to pass as Leica lenses, and many M users have no problem using them, it is not only about money.
Of course it's about the money. Why would someone choose chinese knock-off over a Leica if not for the money?
A knock-off because it is black, has numbers engraved and glass at the front... Alright I didnt know my Zeiss and CV lenses were knock offs too 😂😂
 
Last edited:
I have always considered Voigtlander and some Zeiss to be the low cost alternative to Leica primes (and some of them are very, very good). Then come the chinese knock-offs. They're not the first replica. Those didn't interest me either. I'm sure they'll find some sort of niche to sell to but for those that can afford M-mount body's to shoot with, the current Leica, Voigtlander, Zeiss offerings shouldn't present a financial hurdle. Guess I'm left wondering who the market is...
“Chinese knock-offs”... “they are not the first replica”

You have no clue. Those are not “replicas” pretending to pass as Leica lenses, and many M users have no problem using them, it is not only about money.
Of course it's about the money. Why would someone choose chinese knock-off over a Leica if not for the money?
A knock-off because it is black, has numbers engraved and glass at the front... Alright I didnt know my Zeiss and CV lenses were knock offs too 😂😂
It is obvious how much it tries to replicate the look of the Leica. Zeiss and CV have their own style. Why would someone choose chinese knock-off over a Leica if not for the money?

Leica-Summilux-M-35mm-f1.4-ASPH-lens-vs.-the-new-7Artisans-35mm-f1.4-lens.jpg
 
I have always considered Voigtlander and some Zeiss to be the low cost alternative to Leica primes (and some of them are very, very good). Then come the chinese knock-offs. They're not the first replica. Those didn't interest me either. I'm sure they'll find some sort of niche to sell to but for those that can afford M-mount body's to shoot with, the current Leica, Voigtlander, Zeiss offerings shouldn't present a financial hurdle. Guess I'm left wondering who the market is...
“Chinese knock-offs”... “they are not the first replica”

You have no clue. Those are not “replicas” pretending to pass as Leica lenses, and many M users have no problem using them, it is not only about money.
Of course it's about the money. Why would someone choose chinese knock-off over a Leica if not for the money?
A knock-off because it is black, has numbers engraved and glass at the front... Alright I didnt know my Zeiss and CV lenses were knock offs too 😂😂
It is obvious how much it tries to replicate the look of the Leica. Zeiss and CV have their own style. Why would someone choose chinese knock-off over a Leica if not for the money?

Leica-Summilux-M-35mm-f1.4-ASPH-lens-vs.-the-new-7Artisans-35mm-f1.4-lens.jpg
It’s not really a knock off. It has its own design different from a Leica lens.



c97f751f86cb405783bbdc611ff740f2.jpg






6129adb102c2462da3cefcbfa085ee0f.jpg.gif
 
I have the CV 35 f1.2 viii and comparing it to the Summilux, It’s at least 90% of the performance and 80% of the build quality for 6 times less
 
I have the CV 35 f1.2 viii and comparing it to the Summilux, It’s at least 90% of the performance and 80% of the build quality for 6 times less
I have the Voigtländer 21mm f/1.4. It's an excellent lens, also due to the inclusion of a floating element. And a great opportunity to save some money by not buying the Leica 21mm f/1.4 Summilux.
 
I have always considered Voigtlander and some Zeiss to be the low cost alternative to Leica primes (and some of them are very, very good). Then come the chinese knock-offs. They're not the first replica. Those didn't interest me either. I'm sure they'll find some sort of niche to sell to but for those that can afford M-mount body's to shoot with, the current Leica, Voigtlander, Zeiss offerings shouldn't present a financial hurdle. Guess I'm left wondering who the market is...
“Chinese knock-offs”... “they are not the first replica”

You have no clue. Those are not “replicas” pretending to pass as Leica lenses, and many M users have no problem using them, it is not only about money.
Of course it's about the money. Why would someone choose chinese knock-off over a Leica if not for the money?
A knock-off because it is black, has numbers engraved and glass at the front... Alright I didnt know my Zeiss and CV lenses were knock offs too 😂😂
It is obvious how much it tries to replicate the look of the Leica. Zeiss and CV have their own style. Why would someone choose chinese knock-off over a Leica if not for the money?

Leica-Summilux-M-35mm-f1.4-ASPH-lens-vs.-the-new-7Artisans-35mm-f1.4-lens.jpg
It’s not really a knock off. It has its own design different from a Leica lens.

c97f751f86cb405783bbdc611ff740f2.jpg


6129adb102c2462da3cefcbfa085ee0f.jpg.gif
Not talking about internals - but the external design. It's typical chinese knock-off.
 
I have always considered Voigtlander and some Zeiss to be the low cost alternative to Leica primes (and some of them are very, very good). Then come the chinese knock-offs. They're not the first replica. Those didn't interest me either. I'm sure they'll find some sort of niche to sell to but for those that can afford M-mount body's to shoot with, the current Leica, Voigtlander, Zeiss offerings shouldn't present a financial hurdle. Guess I'm left wondering who the market is...
“Chinese knock-offs”... “they are not the first replica”

You have no clue. Those are not “replicas” pretending to pass as Leica lenses, and many M users have no problem using them, it is not only about money.
Of course it's about the money. Why would someone choose chinese knock-off over a Leica if not for the money?
A knock-off because it is black, has numbers engraved and glass at the front... Alright I didnt know my Zeiss and CV lenses were knock offs too 😂😂
It is obvious how much it tries to replicate the look of the Leica. Zeiss and CV have their own style. Why would someone choose chinese knock-off over a Leica if not for the money?

Leica-Summilux-M-35mm-f1.4-ASPH-lens-vs.-the-new-7Artisans-35mm-f1.4-lens.jpg
It’s not really a knock off. It has its own design different from a Leica lens.

c97f751f86cb405783bbdc611ff740f2.jpg


6129adb102c2462da3cefcbfa085ee0f.jpg.gif
Not talking about internals - but the external design. It's typical chinese knock-off.
Are you blind or just a troll?
 
Last edited:
The Leica lens was not designed for the sensor stack thickness of the Fujifilm camera. This results in obvious peripheral color drift towards blue/cyan, and - less obvious - smearing (astigmatism) towards the edges.

Thus, the Leica is put at a disadvantage, and I doubt that you can actually learn much from comparing the pictures in this quiz.
The Leica lens and the 7Artisans lens are designed to be used on a Leica body so they both are at a disadvantage mounted on a Fuji body.

Maybe someone will do a better comparison with them both mounted on a Leica body.
 
The lens has the Leica name and brand and that by definition means it is a Leica lens. The only lenses that might say Leica, but not be Leica, are ones that a company has illegally put the Leica name on. My lens is not illegal and you can bet your sweet a$$ that if it was then Leica would have sued the cr@p out of the company, which has deep pockets, to get billions in damages and also an immediate cease and desist order.
It is simply a rebranded lens manufactured by Panasonic with stricter standards. You wouldn’t know a Leica lens if it bit you in the a$$.
You seem to be upset with Leica and have no respect at all for some of their lenses. Sad, but there are other companies that sell stuff that may make you happier. Maybe you should write a strongly worded letter to Leica HQ and tell them just what you think about them. :-)

584eb76302f94410b69047a7d4624640.jpg


It is branded Leica so that by definition means it is Leica.


Henry Richardson
http://www.bakubo.com
 
Last edited:
Those of us who have a Leica lens know there is just something very magical about it and the photos we get from it. There is nothing else like it. The Leica look is not a myth! I wrote a review awhile back about my camera and superlative, mystical Leica lens:

https://www.dpreview.com/forums/post/62337549

Some people, as we know, rag on Leica lenses. Say they aren't special, not worth the money, etc. Just ignore them. We obviously know something they don't.

I think a 7Artisans lens can, of course, make good photos, but use a Leica lens and the world is your oyster!
Except you don’t own a Leica lens.
Lots of us know we are excellent human beings being members of the Leica Club. You have proved to me that this is a true Leica lens. How, you ask? I know because as soon as I bought it I started feeling the very same superior attitude and exhibiting the same condescending demeanor that you display. Proves to me that it truly is a Leica lens! No non-Leica lens could possibly give me this Elevated Status feeling. :-)

Travis Tritt - I'm a Member of a Country Club...err, Leica Club :-)

 
Last edited:
I have always considered Voigtlander and some Zeiss to be the low cost alternative to Leica primes (and some of them are very, very good). Then come the chinese knock-offs. They're not the first replica. Those didn't interest me either. I'm sure they'll find some sort of niche to sell to but for those that can afford M-mount body's to shoot with, the current Leica, Voigtlander, Zeiss offerings shouldn't present a financial hurdle. Guess I'm left wondering who the market is...
“Chinese knock-offs”... “they are not the first replica”

You have no clue. Those are not “replicas” pretending to pass as Leica lenses, and many M users have no problem using them, it is not only about money.
Of course it's about the money. Why would someone choose chinese knock-off over a Leica if not for the money?
A knock-off because it is black, has numbers engraved and glass at the front... Alright I didnt know my Zeiss and CV lenses were knock offs too 😂😂
It is obvious how much it tries to replicate the look of the Leica. Zeiss and CV have their own style. Why would someone choose chinese knock-off over a Leica if not for the money?

Leica-Summilux-M-35mm-f1.4-ASPH-lens-vs.-the-new-7Artisans-35mm-f1.4-lens.jpg
It’s not really a knock off. It has its own design different from a Leica lens.

c97f751f86cb405783bbdc611ff740f2.jpg


6129adb102c2462da3cefcbfa085ee0f.jpg.gif
Not talking about internals - but the external design. It's typical chinese knock-off.
Are you blind or just a troll?
Sad you resort to personal attacks. Sorry if it hurt your feelings. Enjoy your chinese knock-off!
 

Keyboard shortcuts

Back
Top