Xmas Posted January 21, 2011 Share #41 Posted January 21, 2011 Advertisement (gone after registration) Interesting thread. I've been eyeing the 35mm Summilux Pre-asph for a while now. My dealer has one and for the listed price, the balance would be very low if I give my 35mm Summicron asph in. The extra stop would be nice for night shots as would the slightly shallower DoF. But it's a tough decision to make. PS: "Made in Canada". Any comments on that? Hi Majority of earlier ones were made in Canada, dont know about later. The Ge ones if there are any will be collectors premium. Keep the asph's hood if it is the 12526, you will need it, as the lux round hood is - less than useless, with a series VII filter, and - useless without. Stretch on a elastic band into the lux retaining ring to stop hood rotating. At /5.6 the lux will be comparable but at f/2 the cron will be rather better in micro contrast, flare, veiling etc. The lux is an antique. Even a late multi coated (MC) one... Note I'm sometime in NQtr Sat/Sun you could try mine, in dim coffee shoppee, early SC. Or try the one in your camera shop, better. Noel Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Advertisement Posted January 21, 2011 Posted January 21, 2011 Hi Xmas, Take a look here 35MM SUMILUX. I'm sure you'll find what you were looking for!
jacarape Posted January 21, 2011 Share #42 Posted January 21, 2011 Interesting thread. I've been eyeing the 35mm Summilux Pre-asph for a while now. My dealer has one and for the listed price, the balance would be very low if I give my 35mm Summicron asph in. The extra stop would be nice for night shots as would the slightly shallower DoF. But it's a tough decision to make. PS: "Made in Canada". Any comments on that? The Noctilux was made in Oh Canada, the 75 Lux was made in Canada. All things Mandler, why care whats stamped on the barrel? Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
christakis Posted January 21, 2011 Share #43 Posted January 21, 2011 Hi Majority of earlier ones were made in Canada, dont know about later. The Ge ones if there are any will be collectors premium. Keep the asph's hood if it is the 12526, you will need it, as the lux round hood is - less than useless, with a series VII filter, and - useless without. Stretch on a elastic band into the lux retaining ring to stop hood rotating. At /5.6 the lux will be comparable but at f/2 the cron will be rather better in micro contrast, flare, veiling etc. The lux is an antique. Even a late multi coated (MC) one... Note I'm sometime in NQtr Sat/Sun you could try mine, in dim coffee shoppee, early SC. Or try the one in your camera shop, better. Noel Hi Noel, Thanks for the info/tips. Think I'll try the one in the shop first but I might take you up on your offer. Are you going to the Leica Weekend in February? The Noctilux was made in Oh Canada, the 75 Lux was made in Canada. All things Mandler, why care whats stamped on the barrel? jacarape, I didn't mean it in that way. I just don't know the history of the lenses and there's many "Ohh no Canada!" comments flying about in the forum for all the different lenses. I personally don't see what difference the country of manufacture makes and don't care, as long as I get the same item. Cheers, Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Xmas Posted January 21, 2011 Share #44 Posted January 21, 2011 Hi Noel, Thanks for the info/tips. Think I'll try the one in the shop first but I might take you up on your offer. Are you going to the Leica Weekend in February? The shop one will probably be later mine is 1970 or so, should be some difference, especially wide open - from the multi coating. Probably not at Stephen's too difficult to control relative position of hands and wallet. I'd have to sit in baked potato shop on floor below... I (probably) wont attend the CNY either but a group of us do do Manchester outings, NQtr fav, I'll PM you plans as and when. Suggest you need to look at the CV 35mm & 40mm f/1.4 as well. Noel Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
pop Posted January 21, 2011 Share #45 Posted January 21, 2011 There are some 35mm Summiluxes which don't focus properly on the M8 and presumably on the M9. That is, they focus nicely but at an altogether other distance than the RF seems to indicate. Mine has a front focus of 20cm for a distance of about 1m. They say it can be fixed, but that's an additional cost. I just learned the other day that it's documented in the M8 FAQ on Leica's site. The one at your dealer's might be all right. It would pay to test it beforehand. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
coup de foudre Posted January 21, 2011 Share #46 Posted January 21, 2011 I didn't mean it in that way. I just don't know the history of the lenses and there's many "Ohh no Canada!" comments flying about in the forum for all the different lenses. I personally don't see what difference the country of manufacture makes and don't care, as long as I get the same item. i have a pre-asph from 1983 and i was made in Canada. when i took it in for servicing, the repair guy wanted to buy it from me, saying it was one of the best examples he'd seen! and to think, i almost hesitated in buying it as i was new to Leica and had read all the BS about Germany lenses being superior. nonsense! it is snob appeal only. i think the whole Canada vs Germany thing is more a matter to be concerned with if you are buying the lens as an investment, rather than actually using it. if you plan to shoot with it, get the best lens you can, regardless of its origin. besides, i've heard a certain crop of lenses was actually made in Canada but assembled in Germany so they could stamp that on barrel (how silly is that?). Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Xmas Posted January 21, 2011 Share #47 Posted January 21, 2011 Advertisement (gone after registration) There are some 35mm Summiluxes which don't focus properly on the M8 and presumably on the M9. That is, they focus nicely but at an altogether other distance than the RF seems to indicate. Mine has a front focus of 20cm for a distance of about 1m. They say it can be fixed, but that's an additional cost. I just learned the other day that it's documented in the M8 FAQ on Leica's site. The one at your dealer's might be all right. It would pay to test it beforehand. Hi Christakis That is the other point if you have a M8 or M9 you need to factor a lens rebuild in any fast normal or wide angle, one form member had four out of four lux, go for hoiday in Black Forest. Noel Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
ddp Posted January 21, 2011 Share #48 Posted January 21, 2011 ddp can you post a couple shots taken with the original 35 1.4 Summilux asperical. Thanks in adavance.. Gregory As coup de foudre mentioned, I do indeed have a set on my flickr page (easiest way to view since I don't post everything on the forum) Some of these are film, some with the M8. Summilux 35 f1.4 aspherical - a set on Flickr Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
christakis Posted January 21, 2011 Share #49 Posted January 21, 2011 A group of us do do Manchester outings, NQtr fav, I'll PM you plans as and when. Suggest you need to look at the CV 35mm & 40mm f/1.4 as well. Noel Please do. Always nice to go and about and meeting new people. Any tips on where I can find second hand CV and Zeiss lenses? Apart from eBay, they seem non existent. There are some 35mm Summiluxes which don't focus properly on the M8 and presumably on the M9. Yes I have that in mind but thanks for the heads up. if you plan to shoot with it, get the best lens you can, regardless of its origin. besides, i've heard a certain crop of lenses was actually made in Canada but assembled in Germany so they could stamp that on barrel (how silly is that?). Pretty daft, totally agree. Thanks for the rest of your comments. I would never dream of buying a lens as an investment. I couldn't resist shooting with it and unless I got a better one to replace the old one, I wouldn't sell it. Buying better lenses is not a good investment strategy now is it? Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Xmas Posted January 21, 2011 Share #50 Posted January 21, 2011 Please do. Always nice to go and about and meeting new people. Any tips on where I can find second hand CV and Zeiss lenses? Apart from eBay, they seem non existent. They are lots of types but none high volume Stephens (Manchester - some times one or two) The Real Camera Shop (Manchester - Sometimes Konica LTM instead - nicer) Aperture (Musum Street, London - always some) Red Dot (forum ad - he wont have normally but will ring you when he gets one) e.g. Leica - Aperture uk The ad appears when you ring just sold, same sort of focus problems with M8 or M9... Noel Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Xmas Posted January 21, 2011 Share #51 Posted January 21, 2011 e.g. http://www.l-camera-forum.com/leica-forum/market/listing/3397/Voigtlnder_25mm_Skopar_Snapshot_Lens.html Noel Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
ho_co Posted January 21, 2011 Share #52 Posted January 21, 2011 There are some 35mm Summiluxes which don't focus properly on the M8 and presumably on the M9. That is, they focus nicely but at an altogether other distance than the RF seems to indicate. Mine has a front focus of 20cm for a distance of about 1m. They say it can be fixed, but that's an additional cost. I just learned the other day that it's documented in the M8 FAQ on Leica's site.... Partially correct, but mixing a couple ideas, Philipp, if I follow you: All M lenses that focus correctly on one camera will focus correctly on another camera. The shroud at the rear of some of the 35/1.4's projects too far and will not allow infinity focus on M8 and M9. Leica will remedy this at no charge. Question 2.4 from M8/M8.2 FAQ of September 2008: 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! If your lens doesn't focus properly over a certain range, that could be a problem of the camera or of the lens, and Leica may charge for a repair. Link to post Share on other sites Simply register for free here – We are always happy to welcome new members! If your lens doesn't focus properly over a certain range, that could be a problem of the camera or of the lens, and Leica may charge for a repair. ' data-webShareUrl='https://www.l-camera-forum.com/topic/141884-35mm-sumilux/?do=findComment&comment=1565279'>More sharing options...
roguewave Posted January 21, 2011 Share #53 Posted January 21, 2011 Just to sort it all out properly. There are by now THREE aspherical 35mm Summilux lenses. (1) Summilux Aspherical. This was the first "testing the waters" version, launched in 1990. It had an optical layout, revolutionary at that time, that was very similar to that of the later two versions. It had however two aspherical surfaces, one in the front and one in the rea half. These (quite large) surfaces were ground by a semi-manual process that was very slow and laborious, identical (I'm told) to that used for the first Noctilux 1:1.2 in 1966. The venture was economically suicidal, and Leica announced from the outset that only 2,000 lenses would be produced. This was a clear case of optical territory-pissing. The lens is now a sought-after collectors' item. (2) Summilux ASPH (v.1). 1994–2010. The commercially successful version with one aspherical surface (the first after the iris diaphragm) made by hot die-pressing. This lens was a wonderlens with film, but digital revealed problems with focus shift on stopping down. Can be instantly recognised by its snap-on, rectangular part-plastic lens hood. (3) Summilux ASPH (v.2). 2010 and current. One aspherical surface as above, but re-computed and with the entire rear half of the lens designed as a "floating group". Screw-on all metal hood. And as has already been pointed out, the original 1961–1995 non-aspherical double-Gauss type version, which was flarey, astigmatic and comatose ... A very compact, near-pancake lens with a round metal snap-on hood which took Series VII filters. The anastigmatic old man My head is spinning with all this dry clinical chatter. In the end it's the image. I've used every version of this lens. The newest is a very poor instrument for portraits. Way too clinical & sharp. The original Mandler, mine's 2992342, is my all time favorite M lens. It has such a unique signature that hasn't even a whiff of sterility. Here's an example. You just can't get this look from the new lens. This woman looks real, not invented. M2 35 Lux pre wide open 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 Simply register for free here – We are always happy to welcome new members! ' data-webShareUrl='https://www.l-camera-forum.com/topic/141884-35mm-sumilux/?do=findComment&comment=1565447'>More sharing options...
jaapv Posted January 22, 2011 Share #54 Posted January 22, 2011 I'm not sure, Ben - the look is in the subject - That is a lovely shot with any lens. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Mauribix Posted January 22, 2011 Share #55 Posted January 22, 2011 The "signature" or "fingerprint" of v.3 is extremely similar to that of v.2. The main difference is that the focus shift problem is absent. Lars, the signature of v.3 is "realtively" similar to v.2 Being the OOF rendering way different, I do believe they do no looks similar (even if the share the "same" optical scheme"). At least at full aperture. Anayway, you said: One aspherical surface as above, but re-computed and with... I never heard that the lens was re-computed. Please may you tell me what does that mean? Anyway, FWIW, I can surely recognize v.1, v.2 and v.3 of the 35lux ASPH in a glimpse if someone showed me the same shot made with these lenses. That's not to say I'm a superman, that's just to say that at full aperture, rendering differences are so evident that everybody could notice them. IMO Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
IkarusJohn Posted January 22, 2011 Share #56 Posted January 22, 2011 Hi Ben - I agree with Jaap. A lovely shot, but I'm not sure you can credit the lens (save with the fact that the focal point seems to be in front of the eyes) ... Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
lars_bergquist Posted January 22, 2011 Share #57 Posted January 22, 2011 I never heard that the lens was re-computed. Please may you tell me what does that mean? That means just that. According to Leica, they took the original optical layout and re-did the computations, deriving new values for the element thicknesses and surface curvatures, in order to "re-balance" the lens. They had to do that in order to fulfill the new requirements. A moment's thought shows that this was necessary. Still, this is to my knowledge (admittedly imperfect) the only re-computation of a Leica lens that has ever been made official. But while re-computations are done now and then, the reason is often technical: Easier assembly, a glass no longer available, whatever. The point is that these recomputations are normally done, not in order to change the optical performance, but to preserve it. The old man, you know who Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
hoppyman Posted January 22, 2011 Share #58 Posted January 22, 2011 Three gals grins photo - Geoff Hopkinson photos at pbase.com ..........The newest is a very poor instrument for portraits. Way too clinical & sharp. The original Mandler, mine's 2992342, is my all time favorite M lens. It has such a unique signature that hasn't even a whiff of sterility. Here's an example. You just can't get this look from the new lens. This woman looks real, not invented. M2 35 Lux pre wide open Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
IkarusJohn Posted January 22, 2011 Share #59 Posted January 22, 2011 Here's the thing - in focus/clinical/sterile? Hmmmm ... Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
01af Posted January 22, 2011 Share #60 Posted January 22, 2011 Still, this is to my knowledge (admittedly imperfect) the only re-computation of a Leica lens that has ever been made official. Re-computations of lenses are done all the time, and they are no secret. Of course, it also is nothing that gets shouted from the rooftops because customers (a) don't understand the minutiae of lens design and ( don't care anyway. The fact that the old Summilux-M 35 mm 1:1.4 Asph was a re-computation is very obvious when you compare the lens cross-section diagrams of this one and its immediate predecessor, the Summilux-M 35 mm 1:1.4 Aspherical. They are similar but clearly not identical. And after all, they are different lenses, and also marketed as such ('Aspherical' vs. 'Asph'). So it's not just a re-computation of the same lens but actually and officially the discontinuation of one lens and the launch of another. If you compared the old and the new Summilux-M 35 mm 1:1.4 Asph then their lens cross-section diagrams are so close you might be tempted to believe nothing has changed besides the addition of the floating elements. Not so. Most (if not all) of the elements' surfaces have changed, albeit in such a subtle way that the coarse lens cross-section diagrams printed in brochures and flyers cannot properly reflect the differences. Also other lenses have been re-computed before and will be in the future. It's a routine thing to do, for all lens makers, not just Leica. When a lens is manufactured for many years then glass qualities occasionally will change or become unavailable due to changes in the supply chain for raw materails and intermediate products or due to changes in environmental regulations in the country of manufacture or in the countries where the raw materials come from. Lens designers constantly have to respond to those facts of life. Sometimes lenses become discontinued due to the sudden unavailability of something but more often the lens formula just gets silently adjusted and production continues. The point is that these recomputations are normally done, not in order to change the optical performance, but to preserve it. Exactly. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Archived
This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.