OK, need 35mm Summilux advice!

[rwchisholm]

Advertisement (gone after registration)

Hello! The new M9 is coming in the morning!!! Very excited.

 

Anywho, need some 35mm advice.

 

I was a long time user of the M8. Sold it for reasons other than photography... Neither here nor there. Missed the cam, so am now in a good place for an M9.

 

I love the portrait. People. The bokeh.

 

The 35 asph Lux seems to have a bit of more "rigid" bokeh than the 35 pre-asph lux... I need your thoughts and input about these lenses... My decision is whether to buy the new 35 Lux Ash vs the 35 Lux Pres Asph PLUS the 24 Summilux. I am really loving the FLICKR 24 Lux group photos. Can't do both.

 

Anyone have any good shots with the M9 and either 35 (or the previous 35 lux asph)? Want to see wide open, people, get a sense of center sharpness. Thanks-rob

[ldhrads]

When I bought my M8.2 I carried over my 35 lux from my M6, it didn't focus to infinity, a now known problem. I ended up selling and getting a 35 cron. Very Very happy with the cron, its tiny and a great lens. You could probably afford the 24 lux then!!!

[lars_bergquist]

I have tried every 35mm Summilux there is, except the elusive 1990 Aspherical. The pre-ASPH is a dog at apertures wider than f:4. The 1994 ASPH is a lovely lens on film, but has a lot of focus shift when it is stopped down. This became evident when the lens was paired with an unforgiving digital sensor. So I sold it, making do with a refurbished and retro-coded 1983 Summicron while I waited for the new v.2 Summilux ASPH. I now have it, but the camera went to Solms with a cracked sensor! Maybe it will be back home next week.

 

The v.1 is plenty sharp and with a pleasant fingerprint -- as long as you avoid apertures 2--4, where increasing focus shift is not yet covered by increasing depth of field. The new version should be as good, and without noticeable focus shift. It damn well has to, at that price.

 

Earlier versions too have the shift, but were used on film, so nobody complained.

 

I may say that unless you are a dedicated low-light fanatic, with the night vision of a cat (for focusing), f:2 will serve just fine. I have got lots of mileage out of the old 'cron, which is better on the M9 than it ever was on my M4 -- due to digital compensation for vignetting. I try to stop it down to f:4, but a Summicron ASPH or a Summarit can be used wide open with full confidence. Unless you are a cat with photographic inclinations, you may do well by keeping off an extreme lens like the 'lux. Your piggybank will be healthier, too.

 

The old man from the Spherical Age

[BRJR]

Hello! The new M9 is coming in the morning!!! Very excited.

 

Anywho, need some 35mm advice.

 

I was a long time user of the M8. Sold it for reasons other than photography... Neither here nor there. Missed the cam, so am now in a good place for an M9.

 

I love the portrait. People. The bokeh.

 

The 35 asph Lux seems to have a bit of more "rigid" bokeh than the 35 pre-asph lux... I need your thoughts and input about these lenses... My decision is whether to buy the new 35 Lux Ash vs the 35 Lux Pres Asph PLUS the 24 Summilux. I am really loving the FLICKR 24 Lux group photos. Can't do both.

 

Anyone have any good shots with the M9 and either 35 (or the previous 35 lux asph)? Want to see wide open, people, get a sense of center sharpness. Thanks-rob

The "New (revised) Leica 35mm Summilux-m lens", is scheduled to ship anyday now (at least, here in the USA); and, it's supposed to be perfected for use on both digital (M9) and analog Leica-m Bodies. I have had this new/revised Leica Summilux-m 35mm lens on "pre-order", since it's announcement, and hope to have it soon.

[Anguish]

I struggled with substandard lenses on my M8 & M9 before chucking it all and putting out for a 35 mm 'cron asph.

Once you have the camera, it's all about the lens and it became obvious to me I was missing shots with old or funky glass that wasn't completely compatible with the camera.

My most interesting pictures are taken on the edge where focusing at f2 is critical or where backlight flare can rear its ugly head.

I am finally satisfied, after 3 years of dilly-dallying around, to have a solid trio I can count on (90 mm Elmarit + 21 mm Elmarit also).

[dseelig]

For some reason or other the chrome and titanium versions have less focus shift I have the titanium and have not had a focus shift problem. I am however going after the new lens as it ahs a smaller fingerprint less intrusion in the viewfinder. I have not sold mine yet by the way.

[jaay]

Advertisement (gone after registration)

I am intrigued by the short lived double asph summilux from 1990 (11873) that goes for a premium on eBay - was it any good? Why was it discontinued? Didvthe double asph give it a unique look?

[hoppyman]

YEP:D:D

It IS shipping in Australia. I just got mine (ordered same day you did) and I'm about 1,000 miles from the distributor. We got a significant shipment for this remote corner of the market

 

The "New (revised) Leica 35mm Summilux-m lens", is scheduled to ship anyday now (at least, here in the USA); and, it's supposed to be perfected for use on both digital (M9) and analog Leica-m Bodies. I have had this new/revised Leica Summilux-m 35mm lens on "pre-order", since it's announcement, and hope to have it soon.

[lars_bergquist]

I am intrigued by the short lived double asph summilux from 1990 (11873) that goes for a premium on eBay - was it any good? Why was it discontinued? Didvthe double asph give it a unique look?

This lens was just as good as its successor, the v.1 ASPH. But it was a nightmare to produce with the technology then available. Leica lost money on evey lens they made, and had decided from the beginning that only 2000 would ever be produced.

 

Leica did this just to tell the world that they were the leaders in lens technology. Remember, in 1990 this was actually the first M lens introduced since 1980! What has followed since then has been truly amazing, especially when you consider that compared to Canon and Nikon, Leica is a mom and pop operation.

 

The old man from the Age of Leitz Canada

[lars_bergquist]

An afterthought. The Aspherical (1990) Summilux was a radical departure, abandoning the classical double Gauss layout of which the original 1961 Summilux was a (modified) example. The 1964 ASPH (v.1) used just the same layout again, except that the previous two aspherical surfaces were now spherical, and one centrally placed surface had gone aspheric. The two lenses produced images that were impossible to distinguish from each other, except possibly under rigorous lab conditions. The critical difference was production cost. In the meantime, the blank-pressing aspherical technology had become ready to use in production.

 

I think that the designers of the 1990 Aspherical knew what was coming, and were preparing for it by trying out the new exotic design, but with existing production technology.

 

And now, twenty years later, the layout of the v.2 is still the same as it was in 1990! The pertinent change had been to make the rear half of the lens "float". We seem to be looking at a classic in the making.

 

The old man from the Spherical Age

[lct]

I am intrigued by the short lived double asph summilux from 1990 (11873) that goes for a premium on eBay - was it any good? Why was it discontinued? Didvthe double asph give it a unique look?

I have no experience of this lens sorry.

According to Jean-Marie Sepulchre the Lux 35 "aspherical" (# 11873) is softer in the angles and has more CA than the black anodized "asph" (# 11874). Vignetting, distorsion and focus shift look similar.

[jaay]

Thanks for the detailed info - I'm always intrigued by rare or discontinued lenses like the MATE or 75 lux

[01af]

And now, twenty years later, the layout of the v.2 is still the same as it was in 1990! The pertinent change had been to make the rear half of the lens "float". We seem to be looking at a classic in the making.

While the basic layout of the new Summilux-M 35 mm Asph's lens elements is very similar to its immediate predecessor indeed, it still is a whole new design. All the glass-to-air and glass-to-glass surfaces and distances between elements have been revised and many of them changed. The changes are too small to be obvious in the coarse lens cross-section diagrams we are used to see in the brochures—but there definitely are far more changes than just the new floating feature.

[lars_bergquist]

Lenses are recomputed all the time for various reasons -- unavailabilty of a glass, improved assembly techniques, whatever -- without notification. And you cannot recompute just one part of a lens; it has to be done for the whole shebang. And nobody speaks of "a new lens" unless there is a visible change in optical performance.

 

And this is not the case here, except for the focus shift issue. Look at the MTF curves. They are so identically alike that they are within the error margin. Maybe some bokeh fanatics may discern some difference; but many of these people are quite immune to factual arguments, and have indeed chosen bokeh as their favourite conversation subject because this area is marked by a dearth of troublesome hard facts to curb their discourses.

 

Yes, it is a "new" lens, but we have not entered a new realm, the way we did with that original Aspherical in 1990. Or even with the 50mm Summilux ASPH of 2004.

 

The old man who has seen lots of supposed "revolutions" -- and one or two real ones