I shoot film - Portra, Velvia and T-Max - and currently use the Summilux 50 pre-Asph (in screw mount actually). I like this lens a lot but I have considered replacing it with the aspherical version.
I read with interest the 50mm lens comparison in LFI 6/2011 and noted the comment that some consider the Asph to have a "sterile" image character or "clinical" look and that it lacks the famous Leica "glow".
The photos used in the article are interesting. The bokeh of the Asph (p. 36) seemed very smooth, even "relaxing" or "non-distracting". Though it does not have nice "glowing" highlights of the Summilux I and II, it is pleasant to look at. That said, in the images on page 38 the bokeh varied much less between the Summilux II and the Asph.
It also seemed to me that the Asph showed "clearer" colour, if that makes sense.
Look at the images on page 37. The Summilux II image of the cherries looks slightly "dull" or yellowish (though not as much as the Summilux I), whereas the Asph image is clearer and lacks the slight "veil" that seems present in the other images (I guess this could be a result of images being printed on paper but at least the relative difference between the images is clear, the medium notwithstanding).
Another interesting comment was in the article's conclusion: that the Asph delivers
"excellent contrast-richness starting from f/1.4, not to speak of a three-dimensional image appearance".
When I googled for information about how the Asph would be on film, I came across the well-made review at Lavidaleica. There it says that the Asph
has rather high contrast - something not always welcome when shooting film such as with black and white or slide.
This is precisely what I am interested in - how would the Asph be on film in ordinary, every-day, non-testing usage?
Perhaps I should add that I don't use f1.4 all the time so bokeh, though interesting, is not the reason I use a Summilux. Rather, I use it to have greater flexibility with my camera in low-light situations.
Realising that it is difficult to put words to how a lens draws (which the above likely shows), could you help me understand how these two Summiluxes differ when used on film, benefits and drawbacks of either etc?
Thanks very much in advance