35mm Summicron Versions

[krooj]

Advertisement (gone after registration)

I've got an M240 that I'm really enjoying (one of those situations where you don't know from the onset, but just fall for it harder each time you use it), and I'd like to get some 35mm Leica glass. Right now I've got a C-Biogon that's out for service (was brilliant on the M9), a 50mm Zeiss Planar, and an adapted 35mm Ultron which I got on a whim to see me though the Zeiss repair. I think I am alright with the modern aspherical version of the summicron, but what do I lose/gain with earlier versions? Are they more or less sharp, contrasty, flare resistant? The only thing that irks me about the aspherical version are reports of focus shift - if it's a design flaw, then I might just look at older versions without that issue.

[Jeff S]

The only thing that irks me about the aspherical version are reports of focus shift - if it's a design flaw, then I might just look at older versions without that issue.

 

It's the nature of many fast-ish, wide-ish, lenses. As a practical matter, though, I find the slight shift (f 2.8 - f4) to be of no consequence in prints. It's a very capable lens, which is why it has been around so long. Best way to know is to rent one or see if a dealer will let you try one.

 

Jeff

[Advertisement]

The Leica Q3 is available for pre-order at B&H Photo Video and Adorama

[elgenper]

I own both the old, 8 element one (version 1) and the new Aspherical. The one I use now is the Asph (with my M9), and I´ve never had any problems with it that I can relate to focus shift; never think of it, in fact. I don´t find lare to be a big problem either, using the original shade that came with it.

 

The old V1 certainly has a beauty of its own, but generally it´s just too soft for my taste wide open (which was my main reason for buying the new one). From f/4 or so, I´d be hard put to tell the difference between them when looking at the images. Still, the Asph has relegated the V1 to the cupboard for me.

[krooj]

Isn't the V1 googles-only?

[wizard]

Isn't the V1 googles-only?

 

No, it was made with and without goggles.

[TomB_tx]

I have a v2 that I bought in 1969, a v1 I added a couple years ago for my M3, as well as an f2 Zeiss, VC 1.4, and most recently a used Summarit.

The v2 does have more contrast than the v1, and has been a nice lens over the decades. My VC 1.4 is actually "better" at f2 than my v2 Summicron (yet does focus shift stopped more), but the Zeiss outdoes them, except for size.

The Summarit is now my favorite (once I tightened a loose retaining ring). With it I see no need for a new asph lens.

[Jean-Michel]

Advertisement (gone after registration)

I have an 8-element version 1 with the 'goggles'. I happen to like the goggles as I wear glasses. There is a marked difference in the rendering between f/2 and f/2.8.

Jean-Michel

[luigi bertolotti]

I own both the old, 8 element one (version 1) and the new Aspherical......

 

Hey Per... same here... (and, indeed, the old is a step under... and at f2 really another matter)

Welcome, dear visitor! As registered member you'd see an image here…

Simply register for free here – We are always happy to welcome new members!

Edited December 11, 2013 by luigi bertolotti

[krooj]

I have a v2 that I bought in 1969, a v1 I added a couple years ago for my M3, as well as an f2 Zeiss, VC 1.4, and most recently a used Summarit.

The v2 does have more contrast than the v1, and has been a nice lens over the decades. My VC 1.4 is actually "better" at f2 than my v2 Summicron (yet does focus shift stopped more), but the Zeiss outdoes them, except for size.

The Summarit is now my favorite (once I tightened a loose retaining ring). With it I see no need for a new asph lens.

 

I actually thought about the summarit, but I think it's pretty well matched against the C-Biogon I already have. Certainly, the Leica lenses are built to a higher standard (I don't think I'll ever find plastic in one, for example), but used, the Summarits tend to fetch $1400, and for a grand more, I'd rather have a used copy of the asph and that extra 1/2 stop.

[peter_n]

I own both the old, 8 element one (version 1) and the new Aspherical. The one I use now is the Asph (with my M9), and I´ve never had any problems with it that I can relate to focus shift; never think of it, in fact. I don´t find lare to be a big problem either, using the original shade that came with it.

+1. I've had exactly the same experience as Per with the same lenses, although my v1 is pretty sharp to my eye. My copy of the ASPH renders beautifully though, I sold my 35mm Summilux a couple years after I got it because I just wasn't using it.

[krooj]

+1. I've had exactly the same experience as Per with the same lenses, although my v1 is pretty sharp to my eye. My copy of the ASPH renders beautifully though, I sold my 35mm Summilux a couple years after I got it because I just wasn't using it.

 

I don't really understand the point of extremely thin depth of field in a wide angle lens. You would want to shoot at 1.4 for extreme subject isolation, but usually those subjects will be people in the form of portraits, in which case you'd want a medium telephoto like a 50mm or a 75/85/90mm. I suppose it makes sense if you need to be up close, but the use cases are limited. Also, isn't it basically impossible to have perfect performance across the frame at very low apertures like that?

[xalo]

F/1,4 is not only about depth of field. It also means a stop faster shutter speed compared to f/2 at same iso (likely more an issue with film, which I use predominantly). In some cases it may also mean a sharper lens at f/2 (e.g. when I compared my 35/1,4 pre-asph with the 35/2 iv). Different lenses also render differently, even when the same aperture value is set. And I tend to use 35mm indoors more than 50mm for example, meaning that I more often use it in low light. Besides all that, the 35mm will simply deliver a different picture wide open than another focal length, e.g. separate a close subject by distancing the background — an effect that gets reinforced the shorter the focal length.

I retained my 35 f/1,4 asph. because of a combination of all of the above.

 

Cheers,

 

Alexander

[andym911]

I've got an M240 that I'm really enjoying (one of those situations where you don't know from the onset, but just fall for it harder each time you use it), and I'd like to get some 35mm Leica glass. Right now I've got a C-Biogon that's out for service (was brilliant on the M9), a 50mm Zeiss Planar, and an adapted 35mm Ultron which I got on a whim to see me though the Zeiss repair. I think I am alright with the modern aspherical version of the summicron, but what do I lose/gain with earlier versions? Are they more or less sharp, contrasty, flare resistant? The only thing that irks me about the aspherical version are reports of focus shift - if it's a design flaw, then I might just look at older versions without that issue.

 

what are the main subjects and lighting you shoot?

 

andy

[krooj]

what are the main subjects and lighting you shoot?

 

andy

 

Street and travel. Maybe some landscape... lighting tends to be all over the place, from indoor to outdoor, morning into the night (which makes me really thankful for the 240's spot metering).

[Guest Ansel_Adams]

Hi,

 

I went through this recently and I now have the ASPH and really like it, it is sharper and more flare resistant than the previous versions and can happily shoot between f2-f4 most of the time. f4 is the optimum. The ASPH provides greater contrast also (the higher the resolution the greater the contrast).

 

I wouldn't mind a minty V3 or V4 also, but they are hard to find in that condition and cost $$$, and for the same money you can pick up a near mint ASPH. All else being equal I would take the newer lens every time. Steve Huff has a nice ASPH review on his site.

 

Summarit is nice also but not f2, not as close focussing and has a funny lens shade that moves during use...

[andym911]

i use the v4 35 cron and the asph...the asph is sharper and more contrast, but I nearly always choose the v4 as I just prefer the look...must however say mainly use it on the M8.

 

Good luck with your choice.

andy

[lct]

...I think I am alright with the modern aspherical version of the summicron, but what do I lose/gain with earlier versions? Are they more or less sharp, contrasty, flare resistant? The only thing that irks me about the aspherical version are reports of focus shift - if it's a design flaw, then I might just look at older versions without that issue.

No significant focus shift with the 35/2 asph in my experience. Main differences between Summicrons 35 are sharpness at f/2 (better with the asph) and flare (better with the asph again). The 35/2 asph is more contrasty as well and you might find its bokeh somewhat harsher in some circumstances, but not always. No problem at f/2 anyway. If you plan to shoot a lot at full aperture, the 35/2 asph is definitely the way to go IMO.

[krooj]

This might be tantamount to heresy on this forum, but I was checking out the photozone review of the 35 ASPH, and the resolution charts seem significantly lower than contemporary DSLR lenses - specifically the Sigma 35/1.4. Is there something I am just not reading properly, or is the Sigma lens just that good? Just to be clear - I'm not a terrible pixel peeper, but I am trying to understand how a $900 sigma lens seemingly out-resolves a $3300 Leica lens. Is this trend just characteristic for rangefinder lenses in the sense that they are optically more complex than SLR lenses as a result of the close registration?

[lct]

76 x 94mm vs 35 x 53mm. Would be fun to put the Sigma on a M240 though.

[Advertisement]

Hallo,

Look here: Leica M

[Printmaker]

I've owned several 35 Summicrons over the years and a 35 Summaron (2.8) as well as a CV 35/2.5 Color Skopar. Right now I'm using a 35 Summicron M also known as a type IV. It is the one lens I would never part with. Compact and sharp, it is a trusted constant companion.

 

All of these 35s were/are great lenses and I've never seen a focus shift on any of these lenses. The 35 Summilux ASPH (last version) was famous for its focus shift.

 

Here is a link to one of the Camera Quest info pages which will give you a time line and description of many Leica lenses.

 

Leica M Lens Users Guide