New summicron asph 35mm. How and why did they improve the current one?

[Rick]

Advertisement (gone after registration)

Okay, but we’re talking about a niche of a niche.

 

 

Poor Zeiss.  Relegated to making niche lenses.

[Paulus]

Hmmm....sorry, but here is the poll (not started by me!) which exactly focuses on this. The poll started today, check out the results.....clearly says that many use Leica and M lenses on alternative mirrorless cameras. Good for Leica I believe - a new market which they might have already recognized. 

http://www.fredmiranda.com/forum/topic/1408846

I can't answer this poll. I don't use leica lenses on a mirrorles camera , only on a Leica M. This group is excluded. Doesn't that give this poll a non valid argument in this thread?

[Advertisement]

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

[lct]

It's a poll for mirrorless users seemingly. I would have voted "i use rangefinder lenses on my mirrorless camera, but i also own a digital rangefinder" if i knew how to vote but i'm not clever enough for that...

[jaapv]

I think the last question applies to most of us.

[BjarniM]

Gaffer tape would be an option though!

Could be, but not for me.

[BjarniM]

Do you know if anyone has done a side by side comparison between the new ASPH and the previous ASPH?

[microview]

Advertisement (gone after registration)

I don't think it's released until February.

[BjarniM]

I don't think it's released until February.

Yes, i know. I was asking because i think i've been reading somewhere about people testing equipment before it's released. Or maybe that's 'only' for cameras?

Edited January 20, 2016 by BjarniM

[semi-ambivalent]

Yes, i know. I was asking because i think i've been reading somewhere about people testing equipment before it's released. Or maybe that's 'only' for cameras?

I'm sure the usual suspects will be seeded, perhaps with an NDA.

 

s-a

[paulsydaus]

Sorry if this question has already been answered, but does the new 35/2 share the same optical design as the old version with regard to the number of lenses/groups etc? I understand the shape/number of aperture blades is different? Are there any other differences?

[Hayek]

Several months back, there was a thread referring to a quote from Leica that they might reference older designs in new lenses. This may be one of those instances, preserving the characteristics, perhaps even the fundamental design of the known quantities but eliminating the issues that compromised performance on digital.

[michali]

"New summicron asph 35mm. How and why did they improve the current one?"

 

In my experience there's is plenty of room for improvement on the current lens.

 

I went through 3 brand new versions of the 35mm Summicron. I returned each one of them for various reasons, ranging from back focusing, to poor construction- rattling and loose elements. FWIW also had similar construction issues with a brand new out the box 75mm Summicron a few years ago, and also recently sold my 35mm f1.4 Summilux ASPH (2010 vers.), the lens barrel at the aperture ring kept coming loose.

I've never had any of these issues with any of my Zeiss lenses.

 

Finally gave up on the 35mm Summicron and went back to my  35mm f2.5 Summarit.

Edited January 24, 2016 by michali

[maralatho]

Poor Zeiss.  Relegated to making niche lenses.

 

 

Nice straw man argument posed for no reason whatsoever.

[Jeff S]

Apparently Mr. Puts is not impressed with the recently announced M lenses (and many other things).... http://www.imx.nl/phot/files/c00b8df660bd93e87f4209-25.html

 

Jeff

[Hayek]

Thanks for that link, Jeff.

All falls in line with the pattern set by the 28 Summilux; somewhat better on the SL than the M240 and so with these three marginally refreshed wides, they're easy fillers until the AF's are ready. Speculation, but the 35 will probably resolve the focus shift issue many report on digital M. Hard to see how the 28 Elmarit ASPH can be improved upon

 

In the same blog entry, Puts addresses the high MP pressures on Leica. My reason for not jumping from a 12 to 36MP Nikon was that I don't care to shoot with tripods. Absent new pixel-shifting technology or IBIS, a 40 or 50 or 75MP 'M' doesn't make a whole lot of sense to me for the same reason. Might be meaningful for a studio-bound S or SL, though. The MM1 that I presently have punches well above its 18MP and sensor resolution is not one of the issues I have with it..

[microview]

Apparently Mr. Puts is not impressed with the recently announced M lenses (and many other things).... http://www.imx.nl/photo/blog/files/440d3fe8c00b8df660bd93e87f4209-25.html

 

Jeff

A well argued and interesting piece I thought

[jaapv]

"New summicron asph 35mm. How and why did they improve the current one?"

 

In my experience there's is plenty of room for improvement on the current lens.

 

I went through 3 brand new versions of the 35mm Summicron. I returned each one of them for various reasons, ranging from back focusing, to poor construction- rattling and loose elements. FWIW also had similar construction issues with a brand new out the box 75mm Summicron a few years ago, and also recently sold my 35mm f1.4 Summilux ASPH (2010 vers.), the lens barrel at the aperture ring kept coming loose.

I've never had any of these issues with any of my Zeiss lenses.

 

Finally gave up on the 35mm Summicron and went back to my  35mm f2.5 Summarit.

Well, my 21 mm ZM developed a loose lens element which was a pain, as the elements are screwed in and shimmed individually.

[michali]

Jaap,

Please, I think we're both a bit too long in the tooth to become involved in one of these: http://www.urbandictionary.com/define.php?term=pissing+contest

 

The point I'm making and which you don't seem to get, is that given the high cost of Leica lenses, my own "painful" experience tells me that there's plenty of room for improvement in their quality control. There are no excuses. 

 

Best,

[skinnfell]

I have been a heavy user of this lens for the last year and a half (like 10K frames on my monochrom with it). Compared to the (Current) summicron 28 It has got slightly less microcontrast and slighly more flare, and a slight dip in sharpness in the extreme corners. On the other hand, it is very uniform in its character - no distortion and vignetting to speak of, and the sharpness is uniform across almost the entire frame. (All of which plagues the 28).

And this, to me means more than the utmost extreme sharpness. Sharpness is good to have, but the whole matters more. All in all the 35/2 has a very pleasing, relaxed look. It is also in my opinion the best handling of all M lenses. Not too small, not too large, fast and precise focusing, etc.

 

I can not say I will not upgrade, but the improvements better be significant. That said, the price hike is just a minor one so I suspect the improvements are minor as well, kind of like when they "improved" the summarit from f/2,5 to f/2.4.

Edited January 26, 2016 by skinnfell

[Advertisement]

Hallo,

Look here: Leica M

[lincoln_m]

If the "new data sheet" is accurate then I agree with Mr Putts that the optics are identical from the MTF graph. The plots are identical. But the lens housing has been changed and the number of aperture blades changed. I notice that the data sheet in UK/Europe is still the old 35F2ASPH judging by the date. The silver version is now much lighter because it's aluminium (instead of brass) but can hold the silver paint without flaking off. They used heavier brass for the chrome lenses before. The body has changed to allow the screw-in hood instead of the old clip on hood. The chrome 50 Nocti and 35 summilux are already sporting the lighter casings, I expect the new body on the 35 summicron will also follow this trend.

New screw-in hood, new Lens body, extra aperture blades, same optics.

 

It's possible they do have new optics but they don't have the MTF yet and they might slip it into the data sheet later.

 

But they are still showing the 35F2.5 data sheet (in Europe) when it should be the F2.4 version. These inconsistencies in the data sheets posted make it difficult to speculate on what will actually be delivered in February.

 

Regards, Lincoln