new Summilux 35mm [ Merged ]

[luigi bertolotti]

Advertisement (gone after registration)

If my understanding is correct, focus shift is a change in focus when the viewing aperture is changed to the shutter-release aperture during the time the camera is in the process of capturing the image. This can certainly happen in a DSLR body since the viewing aperture is often different from the image-capturing aperture.

 

On the other hand, in a rangefinder (such a Leica-M), the viewing aperture of the lens is the same as the shooting aperture since viewing is not done thru the lens. In other words, there's no change in aperture between the time you are composing and during the time the image was captured.

 

The only time I can foresee a focus shift is when photographer start changing the aperture after he/she has set the focus. Now, how often do you do that? I would think the usual workflow is pre-visualize, set the aperture, focus and shoot.

 

So, what kind of focus shift are you guys talking about in a Leica-M system? Please enlighten me, I want to learn from you.

 

The focus shift we are speaking about is related to the position of the focus plane, which varies while stopping down. Leica lenses (usually) are made to be coupled EXACTLY to the Rangefinder mechanism when wide open... so if you focus , for instance, the 35 f 1,4 at 1,5 meters, real focus is correct only with diaphragm wide open... if you set it, say, to f 2,8, the focus can be un-precise.

Of course, the more you close, the more the Depth of Field effect becomes dominant... a focus shift at f 16, in a 35mm lens, is completely "shadowed" by the DOF factor.

That's why the discussions about the focus shift of "old" Summilux 35 asph were sometimes vague... SEEING really an appreciable focus shift depends on many factors, some of them hard to be precisely measured (the exact RF calibration, the DOF...), and small differences/adjustements in RF calibration can bring to different views of the issue.

[Guest Lotw]

If my understanding is correct, focus shift is a change in focus when the viewing aperture is changed to the shutter-release aperture during the time the camera is in the process of capturing the image. This can certainly happen in a DSLR body since the viewing aperture is often different from the image-capturing aperture.

 

On the other hand, in a rangefinder (such a Leica-M), the viewing aperture of the lens is the same as the shooting aperture since viewing is not done thru the lens. In other words, there's no change in aperture between the time you are composing and during the time the image was captured.

 

The only time I can foresee a focus shift is when photographer start changing the aperture after he/she has set the focus. Now, how often do you do that? I would think the usual workflow is pre-visualize, set the aperture, focus and shoot.

 

So, what kind of focus shift are you guys talking about in a Leica-M system? Please enlighten me, I want to learn from you.

 

Since we are dealing with rangefinder, the focusing is not through the lens, but through the rangefinder where the lens is optically not taking part in the focusing process at all, let alone the apertures that are being used. Focus shift is not the result of shutter release and automatic aperture setting as a consequence, like in (D)SLR's, but is the result of stopping down as such. Quite a few enlarger lenses have this characteristic too, which is why you always have to focus with the aperture used and not wide open when focusing the negative.

[viramati]

New lens? new motorbike? new lens? new motorbike? decisions, decisions!! At least the lens would be less dangerous

On a more serious side 'red dot cameras' phoned me today to see if I wanted to place an order and at £3380 I'm really not sure as I would have to sell my 8.2 and cron 35 to be able to afford it. decisions decisions.

[Guest AgXlove]

I want one!

 

But I already have a 28/2 Summicron ASPH (2003 vintage). Would the new 35/1.4 ASPH be redundant??

 

I would likely sell the 28/2 to help fund the 35/1.4 purchase. It seems like it would be an upgrade (latest wide angle ASPH technology and glass), but I don't know if it would be a case of splitting hairs...

[Guest AgXlove]

It's a shame that Leica price inflation makes the products increasingly the preserve of the rich man rather than the dedicated enthusiast but it's ultimately just photographic gear. Get upset when the price of bread goes through the roof.

$5 large U.S. is not out of line, considering the last 35/1.4 was $4500 U.S.;

hideously expensive, yes - but not out of line. JMHO.

 

Sail boat, convertible, A. Lange & Son watch, BMW or Harley, take your pick - quality ain't cheap, never has been. It all depends on what a person wants and values. I suppose.

 

Personally, I'd spend $5K for the 35/1.4 before I'd spend $7K for an M9, but that's me...

[rosuna]

Erwin Puts on the new lens:

 

SX35FLE, part1

 

R.

[hoppyman]

Advertisement (gone after registration)

That sounds like the way the Summarit hoods work

Yes and this one has the same hood as the Elmar M 24. There is a small step bottom centre to perfectly index the hood. They have added a protective ring for the external threads, which doesn't come with the Elmar.

[hoppyman]

The current Lux already does that in some situations. Bokeh can't be judged with one picture as it depends on so many parameters IMO.

 

Which is certainly true of course. Also fair to say that one person's 'creamy bokeh' is another's under-corrected aberration. Both points of view valid for the owners.

[ho_co]

Carsten! I was wondering where you were! Good to see you checking in!

 

 

 

As for various questions raised above, see Erwin Puts' article SX35FLE, part1.

 

 

Silver Halide--

Do you sometimes need more speed? Do you sometimes want a somewhat narrower angle?

 

Personally, I prefer the 28's field of view to that of the 35. If you haven't been lusting after the predecessor of the 35 Summilux FLE (as Puts calls it), don't worry about the new iteration. The new one is the same as the previous version except for the floating group, which improves near performance and reduces focus shift. IOW, this is the 1994 lens improved. And the 1994 version was already and still among the best of Leica's lenses, as is your 28.

 

All hail Peter Karbe once again!

[rljones]

It would seem that since the lens design (based on comparing the PDFs) of the new version is the same as the last version, that users will only notice improvement for near subjects in terms of focus shift. So if the lens is used for distance objects, it is probably not worth upgrading. To me, 'much ado about nothing', and gives more value to the last version.

[Jeff S]

Given comments above about bokeh, it's interesting that Erwin Puts states (see link above): "Bokeh is a bit unruly in the background with specular highlights." Again, this is but one photo, but still...

 

Jeff

[doug_m]

Yes and this one has the same hood as the Elmar M 24. There is a small step bottom centre to perfectly index the hood. They have added a protective ring for the external threads, which doesn't come with the Elmar.

 

Does this "small step bottom center" mean that the new 35 lux hood will not tend to unscrew like it does on the 24 lux ? The 24 lux is a great lens but the hood seems to need a piece of black gaffers tape to keep it from unscrewing slightly.

[4X5B&W]

I believe that optical designs that have floating elements for corrections in the close focusing range, have inherently poorer OOF Bokeh than unit focusing designs.

 

In my experience, that has always been true. I would not expect the new design to have the same smooth Bokeh of the original design.

 

My 2 cents, YMMV

[Bo_Lorentzen]

Wilfredo,

 

NEVER tell your friends what you spend on camera gear... could ruin a great relationship.

 

leica lenses are likely to get more expensive without a bubble until people start taking out second mortgages on their lenses.

 

.

[Guest]

Progress is good for everybody:

for the ones queuing up now to get their new OOD (object of desire),

for the ones hoping to get a second hand 35Asph (or 28Cron) from spenders, who consider themselves upgraders*

and for Leica probably planing to bring out a 0.95/35mm for over 10k

 

*I'm wondering how Yanik in Paris and Jamie in Cambridge can make such great photographs with "the issues" of the current 35LuxA

imo the best way to upgrade in photography is to have more time for it.

[batmobile]

Come off it. This image tells us close to nothing about the bokeh of this lens. Chrome objects in the frame, potentially tough lighting for odd OOF effects, unknown image processing which can have an effect.

[giordano]

MTF graphs refer to best focus -- i.e., with refocusing for each aperture tested, in the case of measured MTF. The graphs we see, unless they refer to quite old lenses, are all computed data a.f.a.i.k. So in neither case does focus shift appear -- one of the really weak points of MTF data as we know them.

 

Sooner or later someone (no names, no pack-drill) will misread this as saying that the computed data doesn't reveal focus shift. The data does - or can - but the published MTF charts don't. I don't see any reason why manufacturers shouldn't publish figures for focus shift (in terms of the distance the focal plane moves as the aperture is adjusted) - except of course for the kinds of discussion it would provoke in places like this.

 

It's also worth remembering, as Erwin Puts points out at the beginning of SX35FLE, part1, that a floating element linked to the focusing mount doesn't directly tackle focus shift. For that, one needs to adjust focus as the aperture changes (which AF cameras can do, at least in principle) or else reconfigure the lens as the aperture changes - which Leica can do, at least in principle.

 

From this point of view, the new Summilux 35 is a very conservative design: take a successful design that's getting on for 20 years old and add a floating element which has been part of the wide-angle designer's repertory since the late 1960s. Where's our sense of adventure: let's "demand" a lens with direct compensation for focus shift.

[NZDavid]

That's a good summary, and Putts is well worth reading. His conclusion is interesting.

 

Instead of comparing the 35 with a 28, I would love to see more comparisons with other 35s to see which is the all-out champion!

 

The main difference appears to be "a floating group [of elements]... to ensure ... equally outstanding imaging performance at closer focusing distances."

 

So, yes, it addresses back focus issue of the previous lens when used on the M8/9. Is this a big issue? Is back focus not such an issue for film users? Is the old lens no good for digital? Will it now be worth less?! I guess, not a lot.

 

"Another new feature is a full-metal, rectangular, screw-mount lens hood that contributes significantly to the even more compact dimensions of the lens."

 

Compact is good. Yes, it is pricey. As some say, this lens will cost an arm and a leg and your first-born. M9 or 'lux ASPH? Purely as an investment, the answer is obvious: lenses don't devalue.

 

Do I need it? I already have the 35 'cron ASPH, which is a superlative lens also. But I can still appreciate the 'Lux for the quality of design and precision manufacture.

[exile]

I'm quite certain that this will be a fantastic lens.

I won't be able to afford one for a long long time, but it's nice to know that I may be able to pick one up second hand in a few years.

[Advertisement]

Hallo,

Look here: Interesting Leica gear

[carstenw]

Carsten! I was wondering where you were! Good to see you checking in!

 

Hehe, I admit to not being around much any more. The early days of the M8 were the most interesting, with lots of investigation and discussion on how to get the most out of it. Since then, I find the material covered in threads to be enormously repetitive, and so I lost interest. People who cannot be bothered to lift a finger to find information for themselves or who don't use the very good search function also got to me, and of course, add hugely to the repetition.

 

I have also dabbled in medium-format (Contax 645, Hasselblad 2000FC/M) B&W film, as well as a Linhof Master Technika (4x5), and more recently, to keep up with my increasingly speedy daughter, a Nikon D3 (a hush fell over the crowd). The M8 is still such a pleasure to shoot though, I just have very little time for travelling at the moment, and that is when I use it the most.

 

Good to see that some of the old hands are still hanging around. I would come back, but my interests have been split by having separate M8 and M9 fora, and I find it a bit much to keep up with both.

 

Personally, I prefer the 28's field of view to that of the 35.

 

Very much agreed. I am a 28/50/90 man, but having spent money elsewhere, I still have no M9, so the 28 is my 35, and gets little use. The 35 is my 50, and is my most used lens.