50mm Summilux Pre-A Version 3 vs ASPH

[jmui852]

Advertisement (gone after registration)

Hey guys, I just bought my first Leica (M240) and am planning on purchasing a 50mm Lux. However I cannot decide whether I want the ASPH Version or the pre-A version as I ahev heard mixed reviews. How would you guys compare the two, in terms of bokeh / sharpness / rendering etc? Any kind advice would be much appreciated. Thanks!

[bocaburger]

I have used the ASPH extensively but never owned one.  I have a v.2 pre-ASPH.  The v.3 differs mainly in the mount, which has a more common e46 filter size, and an integral pull-out shade.  It was mechanically configured to focus to 70cm vs 1m but the optics are identical, and at 1m the v.2 already needs to be stopped down for best performance away from the center.   As to differences between the pre- and ASPH, they are quite notable, as the pre- dates from the 1960's.  The pre is very sharp in the center, with the outer areas improving significantly by f/11, but even then it doesn't quite reach the level of the ASPH wide open IMO.   I happen to like the rendering of the pre-, it has enough residual aberrations to give it that so-called "Leica Glow", and I find it lends itself better for my purposes in low-light "mood" shots.  I also own the current optical version of the Summicron and it is my all-round 50.  Mine is the tabbed version and is very light, compact and takes an e39 filter same as my other travel lenses.  However if I were limited to just one 50 and size, weight and filter size weren't issues, I would prefer the ASPH.  In fact I would prefer it to the APO Summicron, as the Lux has the full added stop and costs significantly less on the used market. 

[Advertisement]

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

[pico]

My advice is to ignore APO and all similar metrics and look for renditions that you enjoy. Technical charts will not lead you to satisfaction.

 

Lens metrics entirely ignore what human beings appreciate. Leica's Pete Karbe designs are perfect lenses based upon the requisites of optics, and he succeeds,  but his effort does not correspond with aesthetics.

.

Edited August 14, 2015 by pico

[MarkP]

 

Leica's Pete Karbe designs are perfect lenses based upon the requisites of optics, and he succeeds,  but his effort does not correspond with aesthetics.

.

Brutal :-)

[jmui852]

How do they compare in terms of bokeh and sharpness? Anyone here who has used both lenses can give some pointers? Thanks!

[michael.mu]

I use a 50mm Summilux version 2 that dates from 1962 on my M240.  My father gave me the lens along with his M3.  It's a very good lens and I've  wondered if I should 'upgrade' to a new 50mm Summilux asph sometime but I'm still undecided.   I discussed this in the Leica store in Berlin.  Rather than trying to sell me a new lens they looked at my old lens and told me that I should get the lens serviced since the focusing was a bit stiff.  I did and the focusing is very smooth. This should last another 50 years.

 

Here is a link to photos taken using the 50mm pre-asph Summilux

 

https://www.flickr.com/photos/81529091@N04/albums/72157656887275878

[farnz]

Advertisement (gone after registration)

I am fortunate to own both the last pre-sph 50 Summilux (v3?) and its asph sister and to me the difference is simply Walter Mandler vs Peter Karbe.  Personally I prefer the look of pictures produced with Mandler-designed lenses but I also deeply respect the skill and expertise that underpin Karbe-designed lenses.  The Karbe-designed lenses push the boundaries of physics to produce lenses with as close to optical perfection as possible, which means high contrast, faithful colour reproduction, sharpness in the corners and minimal vignetting. The Mandler-designed 50 Summiluxes produce more character (which is not used here as a synonym for poor performance) and deliberately have lower contrast, which allows pictures to capture more detail in shadow and highlight areas, and the colours are slightly warmer.

 

Both lenses are exceptional and produce out of focus areas that are very appealing to me.  The asph is 'almost' too sharp for some subjects such as portraits of elderly ladies and to my mind is a razor blade to the pre-asph's carving knife; both sharp but you wouldn't use one for the other's job.  I haven't yet decided which of the two I shall keep.  I may still be deciding in 10 year's time ...

 

Pete.

[jip]

Read my short article about the ASPH 50mm Summilux-M it goes with some large images, from the M240 with the lens.

 

http://jipvankuijk.nl/day-summilux-50mm-asph/

[Herr Barnack]

I had a copy of the 50 Summilux version 3 in the Millennium configuration (black paint, 46mm thread, scalloped focus ring, no focus tab).  It was the same optical setup as the 50 Summilux #11868 (last non- ASPH version). 

 

The 50 Summilux ASPH will focus a bit closer, be a bit more sharp and possibly have a bit more contrast than the #11868 or the Millennium.  The bokeh is totally different, though.  The older non-ASPH lens has a smoother bokeh to my eye.  As with the Noctilux 0.95 ASPH vs the Noctilux f/1.0, the ASPH lenses have an unsettling rendering of the out of focus areas - to my eye.  Others may disagree and prefer the ASPH fingerprint, which is their prerogative. 

 

If I were shopping for a 50mm M lens, I would try to find a near mint Summilux #11868.  Failing that, I would go for a new 50 Summicron non-APO.  The 50 Summicron is what I consider to be a good all-around 50 for the M240, as lens speed is not as critical with the M240 as it is with a film M.  If you need f/1.4 speed in a 50mm, the 50 Summilux ASPH is hard to beat, even though my preference is for the non-ASPH 50mm lenses.

 

As for the 50mm f/2 APO, I will pass.  I cannot see the wisdom in paying $3744 USD more (a 100% plus premium) than the price of the 50 Summilux ASPH, which is a more than capable lens and is what many would call a 50mm lens for life.

 

JMHO/YMMV.

Edited August 18, 2015 by Carlos Danger

[adan]

For most of its life, Leitz/Leica limited the non-ASPH 50 Summilux to 1 meter or .9-meter close-focusing. And if you use the last version at .7 meters, you can see why. It gets very dreamy and soft. Which is good for some photographers in some situations - but not necessarily how a company promoting its "optical excellence" wanted to present itself.

 

The ASPH is sharper and clearer in the close-focus range.

 

Bokeh from the ASPH is consistently "good" across various subject and background distances, but sometimes to the point of boring. Bokeh from the non-ASPH is much more variable (especially with different relative distances from lens to subject to background) - ranging from "technically bad" bright-ring, busy and distracting, to exceptionally soft and smooth. Which is why the reviews may be contradictory! Sometimes the pre-ASPH produces the better bokeh - and sometimes it doesn't.

 

See attached image, from a middle-aged pre-ASPH 50 f/1.4 @ the close focus limit of .9 meters. The transitional bokeh either side of the point of focus (in the gentleman's glasses and beard) is very soft and smooth. The bokeh in the plane of the woman in the background is "technically bad", with jumbled double images (see ear, shirt edges, and shirt pattern) and bright rings (see extreme lower right corner). Further away, the framed picture in the center (and the wall between the heads in general) is blurred very smoothly ("good bokeh"). The window furthest back is a bit busy again (but that is partly due to the high-contrast lighting there).

 

The "rendering," then, is the sum total of all these characteristics. The ASPH is more clinically precise and consistent, the pre-ASPH has more humanistic "moods." One simply has to decide which one prefers.

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!

[philipus]

I have both (the pre-asph in LTM). Both are fantastic. Wide open both are sharp in the centre, the asph also in the field. The asph has the edge technically, I've read (as it should have). From an image quality perspective however one would be happy with either of them all one's life.

 

In practical use there are some differences. The closest focus distance of the pre-asph may be a limitation to some (even moreso for the LTM which goes to 1m). The focus tab is a difference, too, that people tend to have views about. 

 

As for "rendering" one has to decide for oneself. The pre-asph (and I believe there are optical differences among the pre-asph versions) can produce very clean out of focus areas but sometimes gives nicely "busy" backgrounds at the wider f-stops. The asph is more or less always the same, it is a very well-corrected lens.

[run23]

I've owned both (v.4 for pre-asph, use an M9).  I eventually sold the pre-asph because I loved the super-sharpness on the ASPH at 1.4, but I sometimes regret selling the pre-asph because it had a really special look that I loved-- a little less modern than the ASPH. In the end both are great and I'd be happy with either.

[uhoh7]

If you shot M9, I would say the asph is a no brainer as that is a very potent combo.

 

The asph comes across differently on the 240, though some editing may bring it back toward the more organic look it has on the M9.

 

Technically, I would just read Puts on the subject: he is very clear:

 

http://www.imx.nl/photo/leica/lenses/lenses/page57.html

 

The old Lux is optimized to shoot very fast, and looses punch as you stop down, or so Erwin claims anyway. He is usually right. The asph will seriously drop your jaw at f/8 and is a fantastic landscape lens, as well as a fast portrait lens.

 

Why do some prefer the older lens?

 

"Bo-ke aficionados will have mixed feelings about the performance of the lens. The unsharpness gradient is relatively smooth in the near focus range when the fore- and background planes are close to the sharpness plane. But when the distance between main subject and fore-/background increases the unsharpness subjects lose shape and form. Especially when the unsharpness areas are backlit, the shapes become very harsh and rough. This behaviour is due to the reduction of the astigmatism and curvature of field as is a small price am gladly willing to pay. With careful selection of the background and at full aperture, you can produce very intriguing natural portraits."

 

Puts. From the article above. He concludes:

 

"The new Summilux-M 1:1.4/50mm ASPH is the best high-speed general-purpose lens in the Leica range.[written before 50 APO]Its wide open performance is outstandingly good (in some respects like flare even better than the Sumicron at f/2). Stopped down it is better than the Summicron 2/50mm. It can be used as the universal standard lens and can be deployed without any restrictions in image quality at all apertures and over the whole image field. If you want only one lens for your M camera, this one should be the prime choice. "

 

Interesting, in this article, the 50 cron (pre-APO) has one advantage over the ASPH: closeup performance. The CV 50/1.5 is also considered, and he regards it as a "slight improvement over the pre-asph Lux", due to the aspherical elements. I can see why so many love that lens.

 

Of course, sharpness is not everything, but:

"On a more quantitative level, I made pictures with the older version of the Summilux at 5.6 and with the new version at 1.4. Even experienced users could not see a difference. I did check this again at the optical bench and indeed here the same conclusions holds. The new one is almost four stops ahead of the previous version. This is an incredible result, given the fact that the older Summilux got very high praise in the past for its performance."

Edited August 25, 2015 by uhoh7

[toyfel]

Read my short article about the ASPH 50mm Summilux-M it goes with some large images, from the M240 with the lens.

 

http://jipvankuijk.nl/day-summilux-50mm-asph/

 

Jip, beautiful images. The way you captured the light and the landscape makes me want to go there. Agree with you about the qualities of the Asph.

[jip]

The 50 ASPH is easily 4-5 stops ahead in sharpness and aberrations, coma etc., meaning the ASPH is at 1.4 just as good as the non ASPH at 4.0/5.6

Edited August 27, 2015 by jip

[bocaburger]

The 50 ASPH is easily 4-5 stops ahead in sharpness and aberrations, coma etc., meaning the ASPH is at 1.4 just as good as the non ASPH at 4.0/5.6

In the central area.  The ASPH is sharper farther out to the corners.  Pre-ASPH reaches its best corner sharpness f/8-f/11 but still doesn't quite match even the latest non-APO Cron.  Of course you would need to be shooting something with very fine detail in the corners, and making very large prints, for it to become noticeable to anyone viewing for artistic impact vs lens testing.

[jip]

I mostly prefer the ASPH because of it's better close focussing performance.

 

I shoot a lot of shots like this: 

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!

[pgk]

The Asph is noticeably better wide open. This was what decided me to change. Both are 'good' lenses, the Asph is simply better technically. If technicalities aren't everything to you then you'll have to try both to decide which fits your requirements best. Rendering, bokeh, close focus ability, etc., are complexities which have been discussed many times on the forum but are very personal choices.

[Kolossus]

Have a look at post Nr 741 and 760. Summilux 50 pre ASPH wide open.

 

http://www.l-camera-forum.com/topic/200573-spass-mit-der-m-240-bildersammelthread/page-38

 

I tested the titanium and the black version, both were good but not as sharp as the ASPH. 

They are smaller and lighter than my ASPH-crome, nice build quality and I liked the bokeh. Would have stayed with the black one, if there wasn't the occasion to buy the ASPH very low in price.

Edited August 30, 2015 by Kolossus

[Advertisement]

Hallo,

Look here: Leica M

[Raid Amin]

I would be happy to have and use either of these two lenses.  I tend to enjoy more using Mandler-type lenses. I do not own a single Leica ASPH lens.