35 Lux 'M' on the M9

[tashley]

Advertisement (gone after registration)

Mods, you may want to move this thread but please bear in mind that it is specifically about the performance of this lens on the M9 and so it might be most useful here. Your choice.

 

As I reported yesterday, my new 35 Lux arrived yesterday after a long wait.

 

There's a back story here: in November 2006 I bought one of the first M8s available. In Feb 2007 I went to Venice for a few days, having added a 35 Lux to my armory just before I went, and very quickly noticed that a lot of my shots with this lens lacked critical focus whereas my other lenses seemed fine. After bringing the problem to this forum and trying another Lux and 35 Cron, I began to realise that what I was seeing was that now famous but then almost unheard of 'focus shift'. Spirited (and that's a polite term) debate followed and the world seemed spilt between those who had perfectly focussing 35 luxes and those whose lenses did the same as mine, in other words, they shifted focus backwards as they were stopped down such that by F4, the subject on which one had focussed now stood in front of the zone of focus.

 

Leica themselves confirmed to me that this would be characteristic of the lens on the M8 so I gave up, got a CV 35 Skopar (which is excellent in most respects) and went back to my photography.

 

Then last September the M9 came to town and all my FOVs changed: I had gotten used to using a brilliant 28 Cron as my main lens but now found not only that I wanted a 35mm lens as my walkaround but that the Skopar was weak in the corners until stopped down a fair bit. So I was incredibly pleased to hear that a new version of the 35 Lux was coming and that it would be designed to display minimal focus shift on digital Ms. I ordered one and sat back to wait until yesterday.

 

I did some tests today and the results are... hmmmm...

 

Firstly: I can confirm that having had some suspicions aroused by the test shots I took on the M9 I mounted the lens on an Olympus Pen with adaptor, and used 10X zoom view to manually focus the lens wide open. I focussed on clear text 1.5 metres away and with the spines of magazines staggered into the background at 1cm intervals in the centre of the frame and I can confirm that when focussed this way, the plane of focus does indeed shift backwards as you stop down from F1.4 to a point where at F4 the original subject is very, very slightly less sharp than at F1.4: in other words there is still focus shift (I think others have found this too) but it is so very very slight that it would not bother me at all.

 

Thank heaven for these Micros 4/3rds and adaptors. They save a lot of argument about whether or not it was the RF mechanism that was somehow to blame...

 

So in terms of the lens itself, great. It has got the focus shift under control to a good enough extent for me, and is very much better than any previous 35 lux or even 35 Cron I tried.

 

BUT... focus on my sample is not calibrated correctly. Grrrr. I know this because having had my RF realigned recently under Passport warranty, all my other lenses (six of them) focus perfectly. Perfectly. And this new 35 Lux, at least at this 1.5m distance, needs to have focus pulled a tad closer than the RF indicates if it is to be sharp. Tested against the Skopar it is no contest when focused with the RF: the Skopar is sharp as all hell while the 35 Lux is pretty darned soft. However, the 35 Lux is clearly a far better lens because when focussed accurately it is just as sharp but pushes that sharpness much more effectively to the corners.

 

I have also briefly tested the Lux at a distance of 10 metres and the story is the same: focussed as per the RF, it looks like a total duffer I'm afraid. But with focus bracketing one quickly discovers that it is in fact extremely sharp.

 

I should add that I used a Leica 1.4 x magnifier for all focussing.

 

There's probably a bit more to this: comparing the RF focussed shots to the 'best of bracketed' shots, the central zone of the latter is undoubtedly far sharper - but move to 'zone two' (not the edges but not the centre either) and there's nothing in it at all. So there are as we would expect some spherical effects at play.

 

I also find the Bokeh on the Lux rather hectic at first sight though I have yet to take enough shots to be sure of that. An example is posted below, taken at F2.

 

As I say, Grrr.. at well over £3,000 I think it is disrespectful of Leica to their customers not to calibrate their gear before selling it. It's such a familiar story that all one can do is sigh, send it back for replacement or repair and bear it without grinning but I must say that I do resent being hostage to a system which is the best I know when it's properly made but is so very often not correctly QCd.

 

So Grrr again.

 

Here's the bokeh sample. What do others think?

 

 

Best

 

Tim

[leicashot]

In terms of bokeh it looks to be really no different to the previous generation, but without side by side its hard to tell. One things for sure - they didn't replicate the bokeh qualities of the 50 Lux ASPH. How about a 100% sample of the focus area so we can evaluate sharpness? - Any lens can lok sharp at this size.

[Marty]

I guess soon we will know if it is only this lens that is off or not. The bokeh here looks just a tad nervous, although I see this often with foliage irrespective of the lens. Might look much better on a different subject. Thanks for the report! Hope you can soon get your hands on a less flawed specimen...

[tashley]

In terms of bokeh it looks to be really no different to the previous generation, but without side by side its hard to tell. One things for sure - they didn't replicate the bokeh qualities of the 50 Lux ASPH. How about a 100% sample of the focus area so we can evaluate sharpness? - Any lens can lok sharp at this size.

 

I'm posting that shot to show bokeh, not sharpness... to show all aspects of sharpness in a meaningful way would require me to crop, export, upload and link about twenty files and I have some degree of fatigue on that one after nearly four years of dodgy Leica products! Sorry! In any event people will need to make their own evaluations on their own systems, what I'm really doing here is a) giving a heads up that QC might not yet be all it should be and venting!

[wattsy]

If I was to be polite about the bokeh I'd say I've seen better. Being rude, I'd say it looks a little like the bokeh you get from Russian lenses. The miscalibration of the lens (being a good reason to return it) might actually be a blessing in disguise.

[tashley]

If I was to be polite about the bokeh I'd say I've seen better. Being rude, I'd say it looks a little like the bokeh you get from Russian lenses. The miscalibration of the lens (being a good reason to return it) might actually be a blessing in disguise.

 

That did make me giggle: except I have a MF Hartblej super rotator in Mammy 645 mount and it has nicer bokeh!

[rosuna]

Advertisement (gone after registration)

I have an "old" 35mm Summilux ASPH. It was a very, very expensive lens in 2007, when I bought it, new.

 

It shows very substantial focus shift even at medium distances (say 4-5 meters) from f/2 to f/4. It backfocuses badly. It has been a nightmare for me. Many failed shots just because I have to guess the focusing distance! I have sent it to Solms for checking and calibration.

 

I may say, considering this experience, I wouldn't buy it again. Sharpness, contrast, etc. mean nothing if the focus "dance" depending on the aperture. Maybe with film was different, but when the M8 was presented (2006) the production of this lens should have stopped.

 

The new 35mm Summilux? I don't know. Close focusing quality never was a problem for me (the the object was properly focused). The most important point is the focus shift problem. If Leica has corrected it, great. Then this lens would one of the most desirable M lenses, considering the FoV, speed and size, and overall image quality.

[leicashot]

I'm posting that shot to show bokeh, not sharpness... to show all aspects of sharpness in a meaningful way would require me to crop, export, upload and link about twenty files and I have some degree of fatigue on that one after nearly four years of dodgy Leica products! Sorry! In any event people will need to make their own evaluations on their own systems, what I'm really doing here is a) giving a heads up that QC might not yet be all it should be and venting!

 

You mentioned sharpness in your post so it was not out of line for me to ask about it. You're basically asking us to evaluate an image, and to do so, it needs to be evaluated at 100%, sharpness and/or bokeh.

 

What are you hiding? is not so great at 100%? It's very easy to upload, no harder than what you've done here, so what's the big deal? While you say we need to make those evaluations on our own systems, you're the one posting for us to evaluate 'your' system, so why not do it properly instead of getting defensive?

[tashley]

You mentioned sharpness in your post so it was not out of line for me to ask about it. You're basically asking us to evaluate an image, and to do so, it needs to be evaluated at 100%, sharpness and/or bokeh.

 

What are you hiding? is not so great at 100%? It's very easy to upload, no harder than what you've done here, so what's the big deal? While you say we need to make those evaluations on our own systems, you're the one posting for us to evaluate 'your' system, so why not do it properly instead of getting defensive?

 

You have every right to ignore my conclusions, presented as they are with minimal evidence. Please feel free. As for me, I'm just a bit bored after several years of doing diagnostics for Leica and like I said, I just can't be bothered to do it the the level of detail I used to; many of those who know me will know I do these things carefully and will trust my conclusions. Those who choose not to are very free to go buy a 35m lux and test it for themselves!

[leicashot]

You have every right to ignore my conclusions, presented as they are with minimal evidence. Please feel free. As for me, I'm just a bit bored after several years of doing diagnostics for Leica and like I said, I just can't be bothered to do it the the level of detail I used to; many of those who know me will know I do these things carefully and will trust my conclusions. Those who choose not to are very free to go buy a 35m lux and test it for themselves!

 

Ok, I can understand that. You must be extremely frustrated and rightfully so. I hope they sort this out for you nice and swiftly. Personally I don't think the new one looks any better. It seems, at least for now, Leica's Summicron ASPH and Summarit are the only rock solid 35's for Leica M.

 

I'm even considering the Biogon for it's low distortion and flat field.

[tashley]

Ok, I can understand that. You must be extremely frustrated and rightfully so. I hope they sort this out for you nice and swiftly. Personally I don't think the new one looks any better. It seems, at least for now, Leica's Summicron ASPH and Summarit are the only rock solid 35's for Leica M.

 

I'm even considering the Biogon for it's low distortion and flat field.

 

I should look into the Biogon - I must re-read Sean Reid's reviews, though he hasn't yet published his in-depth one of the 35M lux I think....

 

I'm sort of used to Leica stuff not working first-off and have got into the habit of being patient but I suppose I was particularly looking forward to this lens. I thought the perfect travel kit, for me at least, would be an M9 with 18 super elmar, 35m Lux and 90 macro elmar along with an Oly Pen with Panny 45-200 for longer work and with the Pen as a backup to use with the Leica glass. But it is not to be: I don't trust this 35m on the M9 and through no fault of leica's, the 35m Lux doesn't impress on the Pen and the 18mm super elmar is a real no-go and is a bit colour dodgy on the m9 anyhoo.

 

So I guess it's a send-back and try to get a good 'un. There really are times when I think I should just flog everything and use my 5DII with 24-105 and one really nice prime for travel... but that way you don't get 'the look'...

 

Sigh. Esoteric results require esoteric gear and that has never been a recipe for cookie-cutter reliability at any price...

[ndjambrose]

If I was to be polite about the bokeh I'd say I've seen better. Being rude, I'd say it looks a little like the bokeh you get from Russian lenses....

 

Agreed. First thing I was reminded of as soon as I saw this was a Pentacon Six - very similar spread of coma and specular light in what I can best describe as rather angry circles.

 

I was considering whether to get a new 35 lux or a 24 lux. So thanks for the heads up. I'll leave the 35 alone for now.

[ndjambrose]

You mentioned sharpness in your post so it was not out of line for me to ask about it..... so why not do it properly instead of getting defensive?

 

Actually, I find the above image quite sufficient. Bokeh is easier to judge in smaller images than larger ones, as you need to see the effect in proportion to the whole image.

[leicashot]

Agreed. First thing I was reminded of as soon as I saw this was a Pentacon Six - very similar spread of coma and specular light in what I can best describe as rather angry circles.

 

I was considering whether to get a new 35 lux or a 24 lux. So thanks for the heads up. I'll leave the 35 alone for now.

 

The bokeh looks just like the previous one everyone raves about. The only reason people love the lux ASP is because of it's sharpness and immediate drop off to OOF at f/1.4. It's never been known for it's gorgeous bokeh, although occasionally some reviewers (one in particular who shall remain nameless) will rave on about it.

[leicashot]

Actually, I find the above image quite sufficient. Bokeh is easier to judge in smaller images than larger ones, as you need to see the effect in proportion to the whole image.

 

True, but it's nothing like a 100% sample to accompany it. Either way, this was more of a vent for the poster (rightfully so) than an evaluation, which I misunderstood.

[c6gowin]

TIm, you really have the worst luck with Leica gear of any one I know. I hope it gets sorted out quickly.

[leicashot]

TIm, you really have the worst luck with Leica gear of any one I know. I hope it gets sorted out quickly.

 

Either that or he actually knows how to test his gear to ensure it works and doesn't just accept the poor results as user error like many others...assuming he knows what he's doing, and it sounds like he does.

[Bo_Lorentzen]

Tim,

 

Interesting post, thank you, Im waiting for one of these to arrive an am delighted to hear the focus shift seems to be under control.

 

Hmm, yes, somehow i do agree that the image you have posted do seem to demonstrate a rather hectic de-focus area. there is a interesting "double image" in the far away area.

 

Really - gotta stuff a bunch of images through the box before one can really pass judgment on this piece of glass.

 

.

[leicashot]

Tim,

 

Interesting post, thank you, Im waiting for one of these to arrive an am delighted to hear the focus shift seems to be under control.

 

Hmm, yes, somehow i do agree that the image you have posted do seem to demonstrate a rather hectic de-focus area. there is a interesting "double image" in the far away area.

 

Really - gotta stuff a bunch of images through the box before one can really pass judgment on this piece of glass.

 

.

 

I don't think you quite got the gist of the post....maybe a re-read may help

[Advertisement]

Hallo,

Look here: Interesting Leica gear

[Rick]

Hey Bo, I'm waiting for one of these to arrive as well... maybe this week? I have read several reviews on the lens, including this one, and I'm also glad to hear the focus shift is taken care of (with the floating elements). I have to say that I seem to always get the good copy of the Leica products. No returns of anything so far! I hope my luck continues with this lens and it doesn't have any focus problems when mated to my camera.

 

Tim, sorry to hear about your continued bad luck with Leica products. I can understand exactly what you go through. I have a bunch of Apple buddies and they have had virtually no problems with their Macs and I've probable sent every single Apple product back for repair at least two or three times. And, that is probably a dozen different high end Apple products. Love 'em and at the same time I get pretty frustrated with them. If, they weren't so "right," I'd throw them out the window and buy PC. But, I can't. I get your venting.