Stealth3kpl Posted June 1, 2012 Author Share #21 Posted June 1, 2012 Advertisement (gone after registration) Alternatively if they'd been posted side by side to start with then no finger gymnastics would be needed. I can only apologise. 1 Quote Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Advertisement Posted June 1, 2012 Posted June 1, 2012 Hi Stealth3kpl, Take a look here 35mm F2 ASPH Vs 35mm F2 Version 4. I'm sure you'll find what you were looking for!
IWC Doppel Posted June 2, 2012 Share #22 Posted June 2, 2012 For those who have not had the opportunity to see similar images I think the OP has been very helpful. I would be happy to finger toggle 1 Quote Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
IWC Doppel Posted June 2, 2012 Share #23 Posted June 2, 2012 This might help..... 1. 35 asph, adjusted with WB and tint to match the MkIV, 2 MkIV adjusted to improve contrast to match asph, 3 asph with no colour tint adjustments, I have no idea why AWB chose seemingly inaccurate settings for the asph on my M8. I have to add green tint and reduce the colour temp below that of the MkIV to get close. 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! Quote 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/180607-35mm-f2-asph-vs-35mm-f2-version-4/?do=findComment&comment=2029716'>More sharing options...
andym911 Posted June 3, 2012 Share #24 Posted June 3, 2012 I sold my asph and kept the v4... main reason was just the feel of handling the lens and the look of the images.for me v4 is the perfect 35mm.. here one from last week andy 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! 1 Quote 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/180607-35mm-f2-asph-vs-35mm-f2-version-4/?do=findComment&comment=2030433'>More sharing options...
Stealth3kpl Posted June 3, 2012 Author Share #25 Posted June 3, 2012 This might help..... 1. 35 asph, adjusted with WB and tint to match the MkIV, 2 MkIV adjusted to improve contrast to match asph, 3 asph with no colour tint adjustments, I have no idea why AWB chose seemingly inaccurate settings for the asph on my M8. I have to add green tint and reduce the colour temp below that of the MkIV to get close. The background swirl of the IV is very noticeable in #2. It looks very nice. Thanks for doing this. Pete Quote Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Stealth3kpl Posted June 3, 2012 Author Share #26 Posted June 3, 2012 I sold my asph and kept the v4... main reason was just the feel of handling the lens and the look of the images.for me v4 is the perfect 35mm.. here one from last week andy Very nice Andy. I wish I could match the richness you achieve with your developing and scanning. Pete Quote Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
philipus Posted June 4, 2012 Share #27 Posted June 4, 2012 Advertisement (gone after registration) I can only apologise. Pete, I really think you should have re-coded the entire forum to enable us to see the images side-by-side. It's a very good comparison imho because it compares the lenses in real-life usage. I think ergonomics of a lens is an important aspect so perhaps someone can help me with this. Not too long ago in the lovely shop Wibergs in Stockholm I compared the handling of the 35/2 asph and the 35 Summarit. I found the Summarit's aperture ring to be very, very narrow. Adjusting it almost always caused my finger accidentally to nudge the focusing ring. The Summarit is just over 3cm long. The 35/2 IV is just over 2,5cm long but has a wider aperture ring. The asph has an aperture ring which is at least as wide as that of the IV. I should add "it seems to me" to that because I've never handled a IV. Plus the asph is close to 3,5cm long. With the asph I felt confident in placing my finger right on the aperture ring. With the Summarit I hesitated each time and had to blindly "feel" my way on the lens. Perhaps I'm over-analysing this - fair enough - but any insight as to the handling of the IV vs the Asph in this respect would be very helpful to me. Cheers and thanks again for a very good comparison philip Quote Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
IWC Doppel Posted June 4, 2012 Share #28 Posted June 4, 2012 I might try my brothers 35 IV again, but I really love my 35 Summilux IV asph, pre FLE. The Bokeh is great And the focus is perfect at 1.4 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! Quote 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/180607-35mm-f2-asph-vs-35mm-f2-version-4/?do=findComment&comment=2030949'>More sharing options...
IWC Doppel Posted June 4, 2012 Share #29 Posted June 4, 2012 I sold my asph and kept the v4... main reason was just the feel of handling the lens and the look of the images.for me v4 is the perfect 35mm.. here one from last week andy Very nice picture Quote Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
IWC Doppel Posted June 4, 2012 Share #30 Posted June 4, 2012 (edited) This might help, on the big screen the differences might be more obvious, difficult to see on all pictures, but the asph does look a little 'flatter' and the IV a little more 3D. The first image is the IV, both shot with an 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! Edited June 4, 2012 by IWC Doppel 1 Quote 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/180607-35mm-f2-asph-vs-35mm-f2-version-4/?do=findComment&comment=2030971'>More sharing options...
Stealth3kpl Posted June 4, 2012 Author Share #31 Posted June 4, 2012 (edited) It's a very good comparison imho because it compares the lenses in real-life usage. I think ergonomics of a lens is an important aspect so perhaps someone can help me with this. Not too long ago in the lovely shop Wibergs in Stockholm I compared the handling of the 35/2 asph and the 35 Summarit. I found the Summarit's aperture ring to be very, very narrow. Adjusting it almost always caused my finger accidentally to nudge the focusing ring. The Summarit is just over 3cm long. The 35/2 IV is just over 2,5cm long but has a wider aperture ring. The asph has an aperture ring which is at least as wide as that of the IV. I should add "it seems to me" to that because I've never handled a IV. Plus the asph is close to 3,5cm long. With the asph I felt confident in placing my finger right on the aperture ring. With the Summarit I hesitated each time and had to blindly "feel" my way on the lens. Perhaps I'm over-analysing this - fair enough - but any insight as to the handling of the IV vs the Asph in this respect would be very helpful to me. Cheers and thanks again for a very good comparison philip My dilemma is I can't justify keeping both lenses. The performance is very similar. I like the size, weight and character of the IV. I like the OOF of the ASPH, and the size and weight of it too . My Asph is more valuable as it's mint. My IV is good condition and has just been serviced by Malcolm Taylor so is smooth to use but the aperture ring perhaps isn't as positive as I'd like. I feel I should keep the IV and cash in on the ASPH but I know that I find the ergonmics of the ASPH perfect. I prefer the wider focus tab of the Asph, and its flush, ribbed aperture ring. Sometimes I knock the pronounce aperture ring of the IV. I bet I end up keeping both . A forum member mentioned they have both using the IV for people, and the asph for landscapes, and having done this little comparison I can see why. I love to have that swirl of the IV behind people, and the softer contrast would be flattering. Summary: I think the Asph has nicer ergonomics. However, Andy prefered the ergonomics of the IV so we're no help! You'll have to get your hands on a IV. Everyone's different. Pete Edited June 4, 2012 by Stealth3kpl 1 Quote Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Double Negative Posted June 4, 2012 Share #32 Posted June 4, 2012 Definitely seems the ASPH is a bit flatter in field; more even performance. While the IV has more vignetting - which I think helps to create a "3D effect." Either way, both look lovely to me. 1 Quote Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
IWC Doppel Posted June 6, 2012 Share #33 Posted June 6, 2012 On the subject of 35's I picked up another 35mm that might prove interesting to compare The one on the right has a 12541 hood, the left 12587 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! 1 Quote 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/180607-35mm-f2-asph-vs-35mm-f2-version-4/?do=findComment&comment=2033445'>More sharing options...
ramosa Posted June 7, 2012 Share #34 Posted June 7, 2012 When I was pondering 35s, I used this site: http://www.moonsoftware.com/ahto/leica_m_35mm_bokeh/ ... See how the rendering of the house's roofline varies among the lenses and by F stop. It permits close comparison of the Cron IV, Cron ASPH, and Lux ASPH v1. I ended up with the Lux and am completely satisfied. It is the first lens I have ever gotten that I know I will never sell (and I've had some good lenses, including the Lux 50 ASPH). If hadn't gotten the Lux 35, I would have ended up with the Cron IV, as I just don't like the digital rendering of the ASPH lenses (except for the Lux 35 v1). 2 Quote Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
IWC Doppel Posted June 7, 2012 Share #35 Posted June 7, 2012 When I was pondering 35s, I used this site: Bokeh of Leica 35mm M lenses compared (Summicron IV vs Summicron ASPH vs Summilux ASPH) ... See how the rendering of the house's roofline varies among the lenses and by F stop. It permits close comparison of the Cron IV, Cron ASPH, and Lux ASPH v1. I ended up with the Lux and am completely satisfied. It is the first lens I have ever gotten that I know I will never sell (and I've had some good lenses, including the Lux 50 ASPH). If hadn't gotten the Lux 35, I would have ended up with the Cron IV, as I just don't like the digital rendering of the ASPH lenses (except for the Lux 35 v1). A very useful find, I assume you mean ASPH lux and not the early aspehrical with two hand ground surfaces ? Quote Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
pragmatist Posted June 9, 2012 Share #36 Posted June 9, 2012 Thanks for the tip on the shade, which I have been looking for my my v.4 Summicron. I appreciate it. JB Managed to get my 12504 off ebay but as mentioned earlier they are pricey for what they are! and not too common!! Quote Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
tappan Posted June 9, 2012 Share #37 Posted June 9, 2012 This was photographed today using my 35mm 'Cron version 1v with an M9. The more I use this lens the more I love it. That is not to say anything bad about the 35 asph. This is what I have now and I'm not parting with it. Mark 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! 4 Quote 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/180607-35mm-f2-asph-vs-35mm-f2-version-4/?do=findComment&comment=2035376'>More sharing options...
cornellfrancis Posted June 9, 2012 Share #38 Posted June 9, 2012 This was photographed today using my 35mm 'Cron version 1v with an M9.The more I use this lens the more I love it. That is not to say anything bad about the 35 asph. This is what I have now and I'm not parting with it. Mark <img src="http://www.l-camera-forum.com/leica-forum/attachment.php?attachmentid=319553"/> Is that lightning? How did you manage to time that?? Quote Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
tappan Posted June 9, 2012 Share #39 Posted June 9, 2012 (edited) Yes, it is lightning. Handheld. I was, of course, trying for the lightning but luck was on my side. Here is a little story about the photo.pictureboston Mark Edited June 9, 2012 by tappan addition Quote Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Double Negative Posted June 10, 2012 Share #40 Posted June 10, 2012 That is a sweet shot, Mark! 1 Quote Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Join the conversation
You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.
Note: Your post will require moderator approval before it will be visible.