Jump to content

M9--35 Lux or cron


david berry

Recommended Posts

  • Replies 99
  • Created
  • Last Reply
I must say, for anyone who has been lusting after the Summicron Pre-Asph V.4 -- the so-called "Bokeh King"-- I found one at Keh.com for a decent price, and it is a gem of a lens.

 

M9, ISO 80, wide open.

 

I agree. Last week I used it as my only lens on the M9 when doing some classical street shooting -- indoors, at the Stockholm Photo Fair, at that. My lens is a 1983 uncoded one, but I created a user profile just for it (have you noticed that when you change user profiles, you erase the manual lens identification?) I was amazed by the results I got. So now this lens will be pulled out of semi-retirement and sent to Solms for coding -- it is the ideal 'walk around lens'.

 

One funny observation is that when given a chance to try some other lenses at the Leica stand, I shot both the new Noctilux and the 21mm Summilux, both wide open, while forgetting to change the 35mm f:2 lens setting. Success was complete. No vignetting or other problems. Speak of universal lenses ...

 

The old man from the Age of Walter Mandler

Link to post
Share on other sites

Love you Lars. Your experience is extensive. You're right on most things. And the tinge of humor you bring to most of your posts is a welcome bit of levity in an arena where sometimes folks take things a little too seriously.

 

But for the life of me I can't understand how you've fallen prey to "mine doesn't misbehave, so others who claim such must be mistaken." Seems to me you're too smart to fall victim to such parochial thinking.

 

My chrome 35 Lux ASPH doesn't seem seem problematic. But then I shoot it predominantly either at f1.4 or f8, so I'll be the first to admit that my f2 - f4 usage, where focus shift would be most apparent, is lacking.

 

I also suspect that those of us with "good" Lux's also have the benefit or the curse, depending upon one how you look at it, of having a lens that front focuses ever so slightly at maximum aperture. Not enough to be noticeable, perhaps. Not enough to be a problem. But just enough that it serves to ameliorate the effects of focus shift as we stop down. Voila, we seem to have a copy that "doesn't".

 

I think it's indisputable that classic-design high-speed lenses all focus shift. That is one of the primary reasons why Leica has moved to a floating element in all their recent ASPH designs. It's the singular reason for the new 35 Lux heavily-rumored to be released in 2010.

 

To the OP question, I think there are enough "good" copies of the current Lux out there that the lens certainly merits consideration. It was my most-used lens on my film M's and I look forward to re-acquainting myself with it on my M9. But there are also enough "bad" copies out there to give one pause. Were it me, I'd wait until early next year, when the new Lux is rumored to be out; buy a CV pancake if you desperately need a 35 to temporarily serve in the meantime. Or else buy the Cron ASPH.

Link to post
Share on other sites

[ ... ] But for the life of me I can't understand how you've fallen prey to "mine doesn't misbehave, so others who claim such must be mistaken." Seems to me you're too smart to fall victim to such parochial thinking.

I have never claimed that my Lux is better than anybody else's Lux. I have only suggested that the reaction to the problem (which does exist, see below) is slightly out of proportion. The phenomenon was invisible on film. It is small. Practical tests have convinced me that it is of no consequence except under somewhat unusual conditions, which I know and can guard against. The 'unusual conditions' are as a rule attempts to use the lens for purposes that are marginal to what Leica M lenses are for.

 

This said, there is of course sample variation with this lens, as with all others. Leica lenses vary less than most any other brand, however (I could tell you stories ...) So I simply do not think there are 35mm Summiluxes that do not exhibit any focus shift at all (see below, here too). The corollary is that I do not think there are any real 'focus shift dogs' out there either.

 

I think it's indisputable that classic-design high-speed lenses all focus shift. That is one of the primary reasons why Leica has moved to a floating element in all their recent ASPH designs. It's the singular reason for the new 35 Lux heavily-rumored to be released in 2010.

ALL 'classical' lenses do shift focus, simply because spherical elements do. Period. Both the speed, i.e. the diameter of the optic, and the design, influence how much they shift, but slow view camera lenses do actually shift, though the effect is very small. So the Summicron does shift, too, but less than the 'lux. It is with this phenomenon as with linear distortion and vignetting: There is no absolute, quantitative criterion to decide how much cold steel you can take ... I am pretty sensitive to distortion, other people seem to be able to ignore any amount of it.

 

The only way to eradicate shift in even a moderate-speed lens is probably to use two or more aspherical surfaces, or floating elements as in the 50mm Summilux ASPH, which has only a negligible shift. The problem is economical: Both large asphericals and floating-element mechanics are expensive. And even Leica have to find buyers for their products. They are threading a very tricky balance even now.

 

The old man from the Age of 'Spherical' Mandler

Link to post
Share on other sites

And even Leica have to find buyers for their products. They are threading a very tricky balance even now.

 

The old man from the Age of 'Spherical' Mandler

 

Indeed they are. It is notable how much more expensive the latest fast-lens designs are versus their previous-generation counterparts. Not that any of us are complaining about the additional options now available. But navigating that balance between function and affordability is fraught with danger and difficulty.

Link to post
Share on other sites

Advertisement (gone after registration)

Tonight I tested my 35 lux asph on my new M9 for the first time. It's a black sample, bought about 6 months before the M8 was released, and sent to Leica (New Jersey) for coding. On the M8, the focus shift never interfered with critical sharpness so I knew this wasn't an issue with my sample. But, on the M9, this lens really sings. I like the look and feel of the 35mm framelines on the M9 which of course is true for whatever 35mm lens one uses, but it's a factor in my liking it more on the M9 than M8. There's enough room outside the framelines to experience that all important RF quality of moving the subject out of the "world" and into the frame. By comparison the 28mm framelines are a bit too far in the periphery for this on the M9 . On the M8, the 28mm framelines were "just right" for me. As to IQ of the lux asph, the full frame allows it to breath more shooting wide open allowing you to incorporate more of the wonderful transition to OOF and splendid bokeh. Contrast is just right, as is saturation, just a beautiful look. I love my 50 lux, but I think the 35 may compete for time on the M9 much more than I thought it would! best....Peter

Link to post
Share on other sites

Peter, it IS a great lens. And when it is finally discontinued, it will be a classic.

 

This said, another real classic is the v.5 35mm Summicron. Mine was made in 1983. I used it un-coded on my M8, with results that were good, but not remarkable. Recently I dug it out and used it, manually identified, for some 'street photography' indoors, in artificial lighting, in the Stockholm Fair halls. The result was astounding. That lens sang -- and the corners were quite good too. This lens is now on its way to Solms for coding and a general health check.

 

The old man from the Age of 'Spherical' Mandler

Link to post
Share on other sites

It comes done to depth of field issues. I doubt anyone actually needs the extra speed of a summilux for a digital camera. Film is different.

 

Actually I'm one of those (and I can't believe I'm just the only one) who think that 1 stop of advantage, even with a digital camera, is much of a difference.

Then, at the same time, there's the DOF issue and the way it "draws" at full aperture.

 

But that's just me then. ;)

Link to post
Share on other sites

Actually I'm one of those (and I can't believe I'm just the only one) who think that 1 stop of advantage, even with a digital camera, is much of a difference.

Then, at the same time, there's the DOF issue and the way it "draws" at full aperture.

 

But that's just me then. ;)

 

 

 

Right. Agree fully.

 

What about a 35 Noctilux M f/1.2?

That would be fine, that would be mine.

Consider the possibilties indoors!

Link to post
Share on other sites

Right. Agree fully.

 

What about a 35 Noctilux M f/1.2?

That would be fine, that would be mine.

Consider the possibilties indoors!

Well, you could make do with the Nokton 35/1.2. Would save you about 10.000 Euro, I guess.;)
Link to post
Share on other sites

What I'd really wish, is a 35 1.4 with the same size of the actual one without focus shift, and a better resistance to flare.

Then, and it's just wishful thinking, a smaller size would be my dream/need.

35 1.2? Good to imagine, but not when it's up to eventual price!:)

Link to post
Share on other sites

It comes done to depth of field issues. I doubt anyone actually needs the extra speed of a summilux for a digital camera. Film is different.

 

Funny, the extra speed on digital was the one reason I was going to give for preferring any 'Lux over an equivalent 'cron for the M9.

 

Shooting @ f/1.4 and ISO 800 compared to f/2 and ISO 1600 is a great noise-reduction tool.

 

Not being able to afford even a used 35 'lux ASPH, I got a 35 'lux pre-ASPH instead - which does its own weirdly beautiful thing at f/1.4, and is basically a 'cron pre-ASPH in terms of performance at the other apertures.

 

If you want something cheap and in between the dreamy Leica Glow of the pre-ASPH and the oh-so-expensively-achieved crispness of the ASPH lux, there is also the c/v 35 f/1.4 - see neighboring thread.

 

f/1.4 and be there...

Link to post
Share on other sites

What I'd really wish, is a 35 1.4 with the same size of the actual one without focus shift, and a better resistance to flare.:)

I've never owned the 35/1.4 asph, although I used to have the pre-asph, but I have owned 35/2 v.1 and v.4 and now have the 35/2 asph. Out of all the 35s I've owned the 35/2 asph is the most flare resistant. How does the 35/1.4 asph compare - I assume it is more prone to flare than the 'cron asph, am I right? I ask because f/1.4 appeals in some ways but I rather nt end up with a lens which flares significantly in this instance.

Link to post
Share on other sites

Oh Lars- Please don't tempt me with another wonderful 35! ;>) But I'd love to see any images that come from the M9 + V5 summicron if you get a chance to share them. best...Peter

First of course, I mean the v.4. The 'v.5' is the ASPH. -- Here are two small shots from the fair. Top, from the Nikon stand. Typical Nikon user (he has the build, doesn't he?) Below, the Leica stand, with an Xi being demonstrated. All the visitors were not senior citizens -- but thos did know how to focus a Leica M ...

 

The old man from the Fair

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!

Link to post
Share on other sites

I've never owned the 35/1.4 asph, although I used to have the pre-asph, but I have owned 35/2 v.1 and v.4 and now have the 35/2 asph. Out of all the 35s I've owned the 35/2 asph is the most flare resistant. How does the 35/1.4 asph compare - I assume it is more prone to flare than the 'cron asph, am I right? I ask because f/1.4 appeals in some ways but I rather nt end up with a lens which flares significantly in this instance.

 

HI Paul,

in this respect for sure the 35cron ASPH seems to be the best performer. Its flare resistance, better than that of the lux ASPH, may be partly due to the smaller front element I guess.

Yet, the 35lux is an E46 lens, against the E39 of the Cron ASPH.

Anyway, I never had big issues with the lens hood, and while I almost never used a hood once, now I can't live without that, and shots lost because of flare are less and less (both with the cron and the lux).

 

Anyway, what was my concern, is not the "evident flare" with ghost images or polygons showing in the frame, I hate that subtle flare that usually cause a sort of "reduced gamma", you know, the veiling flare. That sometimes is not contrasted with just the use of a hood, and in this respect, the Cron ASPH is are less prone to flare than the 35lux ASPH.

Matter of fact, that's not an issue that could lead me to choose cron instead of the lux, not a big concern after all, but something to improve with a new version of the lens I hope. ;)

Link to post
Share on other sites

Just shot a party using the 35 lux wide open, iso 1600, 1/15 to 1/30. I started with a 28/2.0 but would have needed iso 3200 which would have been much nosier....if it existed! ;>) The more I use the 35 lux on the M9, the more I like the combo.

 

Lars- Thanks for posting the v4 images. I dig #1, I used to shoot Nikon and looked just like him....that's the real reason I switched to Leica. Beyond this confession, your lens looks very nice. But I shoot so many "no" light events, I need a 1.4 as my go to 35mm lens. best....Peter

Link to post
Share on other sites

Archived

This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.

  • Recently Browsing   0 members

    • No registered users viewing this page.
×
×
  • Create New...