joern Posted February 26, 2007 Share #21 Posted February 26, 2007 Advertisement (gone after registration) Another difference to consider is that the pre-ASPH 50 lux has a minimum focusing distance of 40 inches, whereas the 50 ASPH has close focus of 27.5 inches. I find that significant for a lot of my work. Brent, I have a pre asph 50 Lux with about 0.60 cm (not engraved). The shortest engraved number is 0.70 cm. So i believe it is the same with the actuell asph. Version. The serial is 36899XX. I once told this a dealer and he couldn´t believe this, too. So i tested this against the noctilux and found the bokeh generated by the pre Lux not so much different against the noctilux (actuall new version). I have the canon 1.0/50 and was searching for a comparable look with leica. But the character of the smooth, slight vignetting outer areas is cut because of the crop factor. So i decided to take the 50 lux because of its shorter focussing distance and the (for me) similar bokeh. jørn Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Advertisement Posted February 26, 2007 Posted February 26, 2007 Hi joern, Take a look here 50/1.4 asph vs pre-asph - one more 50 thread. I'm sure you'll find what you were looking for!
carstenw Posted February 26, 2007 Share #22 Posted February 26, 2007 It was exactly the same light, otherwise i would't have lost my time to take those pics.I don't try to prove anything here, just sharing my experience. I own both lenses and i like both. Hmm, then the 50 Lux Asph pulls a lot more out of the shadows. If you look at the images again, the difference is mainly light and dark, not wild or unruly bokeh. Do you see what I mean? Could you try some test portraits instead? I think that is what more people would use the pre-Asph for, at least I would. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
ibogost Posted February 27, 2007 Share #23 Posted February 27, 2007 Glad I found this thread. Can anyone offer any more general comments about the pros/cons of the non-asph vs the asph (not just the asphericality, but more subjective things)? I'd like to pick up a fast 50 but the asph is a bit expensive for my current tastes and I'm trying to pick and choose compromises. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
colorflow Posted February 27, 2007 Share #24 Posted February 27, 2007 Here are photos I shot to test the focus of the M8 and various lenses. All at f2 in the sequence: Lux 50 1st version (1959-61) Lux 50 ASPH Cron 50 current version Lux 75 APO Cron 90 Alan 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/17268-5014-asph-vs-pre-asph-one-more-50-thread/?do=findComment&comment=184147'>More sharing options...
tom0511 Posted February 27, 2007 Author Share #25 Posted February 27, 2007 Thanks Alan, For this image I like the 50lux pre-asph shot a little over the asph one. One thing regarding the 50asph: I have the feeling that it renders colors a little more towards red (compared to the Tri-Elmar or the Summicron for example. I think it also can be seen in the flower shot. By the way, on what point did you focus? Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
tom0511 Posted February 27, 2007 Author Share #26 Posted February 27, 2007 Now the question: which is the pre-asph Sumilux to get: The latest with the colapsable hood or the version before that ? Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
carstenw Posted February 27, 2007 Share #27 Posted February 27, 2007 Advertisement (gone after registration) All 50 Lux versions between '62 and the Asph version are the same optically. The one Alan has is the first version, which is significantly less sharp wide open, although similar at f/5.6. The earliest serial number of the new version is 1844001. There are various bodies. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
cbretteville Posted February 27, 2007 Share #28 Posted February 27, 2007 Now the question: which is the pre-asph Sumilux to get: The latest with the colapsable hood or the version before that ? My ponderings exactly. Older mout has a stick-on hood, uses e43 filters and focuses to 1m. Newer mount has a built in hood (that some here this is just annoying and use a screw on anyway), uses e46 filters and can focus down to 70cm. Neither have a focusing tab, unfortunately or the choice would have made itself for me. You can still find new ones of the last mount, but if cost is an issue the older can be found at a lower price. I'm considdering trading my 1985 'cron i for a pre-asph 'lux, but I haven't decided yet. The 'cron is a great lens, but flares on me. I really like how the 'lux II draws, despite it's lower contrast. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
carstenw Posted February 27, 2007 Share #29 Posted February 27, 2007 Carl, someone pointed out earlier that the 1m focus limit was only very early on. This lens was made for 40 years... Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
colorflow Posted February 27, 2007 Share #30 Posted February 27, 2007 Thanks Alan,For this image I like the 50lux pre-asph shot a little over the asph one. One thing regarding the 50asph: I have the feeling that it renders colors a little more towards red (compared to the Tri-Elmar or the Summicron for example. I think it also can be seen in the flower shot. By the way, on what point did you focus? Well that was the problem I was experimenting on. I was having trouble (still am) getting good focus. In this shot I was focusing on the left center top flower in the grouping of four. As you see I badly blew it with the 90APO, and the other ones aren't perfect either. Since then I have added a magnifier for my aging eyes, and the camera has been sent back to Solms for repair (yes, it totally broke down) and upgrade. Alan Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
fotografr Posted February 27, 2007 Share #31 Posted February 27, 2007 Sorry about the misinformation about minimum focusing distances. I guess the lens chart I was using was out of date. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
colorflow Posted February 27, 2007 Share #32 Posted February 27, 2007 All 50 Lux versions between '62 and the Asph version are the same optically. The one Alan has is the first version, which is significantly less sharp wide open, although similar at f/5.6. The earliest serial number of the new version is 1844001. There are various bodies. The first version is less sharp but I like its portraits. I am keeping it for that reason and, of course, its build quality. Here is a sample, but I think there is the same focusing problem with my M8. 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/17268-5014-asph-vs-pre-asph-one-more-50-thread/?do=findComment&comment=184693'>More sharing options...
carstenw Posted February 27, 2007 Share #33 Posted February 27, 2007 It does render very nicely. You should see the MTF charts though. What a mess wide open Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
lct Posted February 27, 2007 Share #34 Posted February 27, 2007 Summilux pre-asph # 11868 at f/ 2.8 Epson R-D1, Epson raw converter Pic 1: Full frame Pic 2: 100% crop Pic 3: 100% crop Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
carstenw Posted February 27, 2007 Share #35 Posted February 27, 2007 Those last pictures look really nice. Do you have some at f/1.4? Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
lct Posted February 27, 2007 Share #36 Posted February 27, 2007 Summilux asph # 11891 at f/ 2.8 Epson R-D1, Epson raw converter Pic 1: Full frame Pic 2: 100% crop Pic 3: 100% crop Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
cbretteville Posted February 27, 2007 Share #37 Posted February 27, 2007 It does render very nicely. You should see the MTF charts though. What a mess wide open You don't say! Here are some full frame (as in HP5+) shots taken with a 1959 50 'lux... 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! At f1.4 At f5.6 Its just a completely different animal when stopped down a bit. I'm glad I picked it up, it is in excellent condition and the price was too good to pass up. Edit: LCT, had I seen yours I'd kept mine to myself.... ;-) Link to post Share on other sites Simply register for free here – We are always happy to welcome new members! At f1.4 At f5.6 Its just a completely different animal when stopped down a bit. I'm glad I picked it up, it is in excellent condition and the price was too good to pass up. Edit: LCT, had I seen yours I'd kept mine to myself.... ;-) ' data-webShareUrl='https://www.l-camera-forum.com/topic/17268-5014-asph-vs-pre-asph-one-more-50-thread/?do=findComment&comment=184791'>More sharing options...
lct Posted February 27, 2007 Share #38 Posted February 27, 2007 Summilux pre-asph # 11868 at f/ 1.4 Epson R-D1, Epson raw converter Pic 1: Full frame Pic 2: 100% crop Pic 3: 100% crop Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
lct Posted February 27, 2007 Share #39 Posted February 27, 2007 Summilux asph # 11891 at f/ 1.4 Epson R-D1, Epson raw converter Pic 1: Full frame Pic 2: 100% crop Pic 3: 100% crop Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
carstenw Posted February 27, 2007 Share #40 Posted February 27, 2007 Hmm, from these pictures I prefer the 11868 bokeh at f/2.8 but the 11891 bokeh wide open. They are both very sharp in the middle, and there appears to be a slight IR sensitivity to the R-D1 unless you are wearing a magenta sweater. No portraits? Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Archived
This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.