sdai Posted July 5, 2012 Share #121  Posted July 5, 2012 (edited) Advertisement (gone after registration) call me crazy but couldn't we just name it the official name? Summilux Summilux Aspherical Summilux Asph Summilux Asph FLE  Yes but, although Leica started using floating element in many R and M lenses since long ago FLE is never part of any official name. Perhaps they should name it Mark II, Mark III? Edited July 5, 2012 by sdai Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Advertisement Posted July 5, 2012 Posted July 5, 2012 Hi sdai, Take a look here disappointed by Summilux 35 FLE. I'm sure you'll find what you were looking for!
wattsy Posted July 5, 2012 Share #122  Posted July 5, 2012 call me crazy but couldn't we just name it the official name? Summilux Summilux Aspherical Summilux Asph Summilux Asph FLE  I agree with the sentiment but FLE is not part of the official name. The current lens, like it's predecessor, is officially called the Summilux-M 35 mm f/1.4 ASPH. The FLE moniker is just an internet forum convention. 1 Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Paul J Posted July 5, 2012 Share #123 Â Posted July 5, 2012 Yes but, although Leica started using floating element in many R and M lenses since long ago FLE is never part of any official name. Perhaps they should name it Mark II, Mark III? Â problem with that is then you get people saying - which one is the Mark II again? Â Yes point taken about the FLE but it seems it's understood and simple. 1 Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Jamie Roberts Posted July 5, 2012 Share #124  Posted July 5, 2012 AA can easily be confused with the Apo Summicron ASPH 90, which is commonly called AA as well. In general I find acronyms like SX, FLE, SE, NX, VE, etc. practical, as opposed to Lux, Cron and Noct which always get my hackles up,as it suggests, to my ear, a pretension of belonging to some kind of in-crowd of connoisseurs.  I agree with the first part, but not with the second  Absolutely nothing wrong with lux, cron, nocti, etc; they're shorter and accurate to boot. If you believe the totally cryptic acronyms "SX, FLE, NX and VE" are more transparent and less elitist than the simply abbreviations, well, then, hmmm Or you really *do* want to be part of a pretentious in-crowd!  AA means APO-Aspherical. I don't care why Steve Huff named it AA, it's wrong.  I don't mind the 'net term FLE to distinguish the old ASPH from the latest ASPH. But there you go 4 Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
wattsy Posted July 5, 2012 Share #125  Posted July 5, 2012 AA means APO-Aspherical. I don't care why Steve Huff named it AA, it's wrong.  I don't mind the 'net term FLE to distinguish the old ASPH from the latest ASPH. But there you go  Agree on both points. 2 Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
SJP Posted July 5, 2012 Share #126 Â Posted July 5, 2012 call me crazy ...... (yep)Anyone found abbreviating Aspherical to asph will be punished, tortured and/or shot. Â I always feel like a geeky trainspotter quoting numbers. Torture is confirmed and wholly appropriate. Maybe we need a 'L' iron??? Â Anyway we have an suitable location in Den Haag also open to the general public. Rental tariffs on request I expect. Gevangenpoort Museum Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
horosu Posted July 5, 2012 Share #127 Â Posted July 5, 2012 Advertisement (gone after registration) Here is the link to the page 2 discussion on this site regarding FLE's focus shift and my crappy, handheld comparison shots on the M9: http://www.l-camera-forum.com/leica-forum/leica-m9-forum/183918-focus-shift-new-35-1-4-a-2.html Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
algrove Posted July 5, 2012 Share #128 Â Posted July 5, 2012 I like the Werk Nr. idea as there is no doubt which lens is in discussion, i.e., 11870 or 11663. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
nelly Posted July 12, 2012 Share #129 Â Posted July 12, 2012 I had concerns when I first purchased my 35mm Summilux fle with the overexposed red edges and even the aperture ring being quite loose I sent it in to Leica for calibration and adjustment and this lens now simply blows me away with its quality I am just careful now not to overexpose. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
lincoln_m Posted July 12, 2012 Share #130  Posted July 12, 2012 I've heard that the 35mm Summarit f2.5 lens for 1/3rd the price has good control of flare even compared with the summicron-asph f2 which is slightly better than the summilux-asph. But to be honest I've never used my 35mm f2 asph wide open and into the sun before probably because with film Ms you only have 1/1000th as the max speed and also you might burn a hole in the shutter curtain ( or your eyes ) if you take too long to get the shot.  Perhaps if I buy a £850 35f2.5 you could swap it with your 35 f1.4 asph (new expensive no focus shift lens)? But I might be waiting in a long queue!  Regards, Lincoln Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
wattsy Posted July 13, 2012 Share #131  Posted July 13, 2012 I've heard that the 35mm Summarit f2.5 lens for 1/3rd the price has good control of flare even compared with the summicron-asph f2 which is slightly better than the summilux-asph.  Yes, the 35 Summarit provides outstanding control of flare – almost too good, depending upon your objective. You can see it in this snap. 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! 2 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/182785-disappointed-by-summilux-35-fle/?do=findComment&comment=2061393'>More sharing options...
wattsy Posted July 13, 2012 Share #132 Â Posted July 13, 2012 Although the 35 Summilux FLE is no slouch either. Â Ian_Watts, on Flickr 3 Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
wattsy Posted July 13, 2012 Share #133  Posted July 13, 2012 (edited) the summicron-asph f2 which is slightly better than the summilux-asph.  I'm not sure if you are just making this up, Lincoln, or whether that is your direct experience. In my experience, the Summilux ASPH (both non-FLE and FLE varieties) has better overall flare control than the Summicron ASPH. The latter is much more prone to spectacular gobs of flare in the frame (though it does still retain an impressive amount of contrast). Example below. 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 July 13, 2012 by wattsy 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/182785-disappointed-by-summilux-35-fle/?do=findComment&comment=2061400'>More sharing options...
nelly Posted July 14, 2012 Share #134 Â Posted July 14, 2012 I'm not sure if you are just making this up, Lincoln, or whether that is your direct experience. In my experience, the Summilux ASPH (both non-FLE and FLE varieties) has better overall flare control than the Summicron ASPH. The latter is much more prone to spectacular gobs of flare in the frame (though it does still retain an impressive amount of contrast). Example below. Â Â Did you get much red fringing on the bright areas in these shots On my 35mm Summilux fle I am always having to deal with it in processing on strong backlit shots. Thanks Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
wattsy Posted July 15, 2012 Share #135 Â Posted July 15, 2012 Did you get much red fringing on the bright areas in these shots On my 35mm Summilux fle I am always having to deal with it in processing on strong backlit shots. Â No, I don't find red or purple fringing a problem with the 35 Summilux FLE. That said, I rarely shoot wide-open against a strong backlight. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
frogfish Posted August 5, 2012 Author Share #136  Posted August 5, 2012 Here two more testshots to make it clear.  first Leica 35 Summilux FLE at 2.0 second Nikon 28/1.8 at 2.0  both shot against the sun at ISO 200 at 2000/sec, cropped a bit.  I don´t want to talk down the lens, people who shoot "normally" probably will not notice, but for me, this is going to be a deal braker.   heiko 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/182785-disappointed-by-summilux-35-fle/?do=findComment&comment=2079828'>More sharing options...
insomnia Posted August 5, 2012 Share #137  Posted August 5, 2012 Here two more testshots to make it clear. first Leica 35 Summilux FLE at 2.0 second Nikon 28/1.8 at 2.0  both shot against the sun at ISO 200 at 2000/sec, cropped a bit.  I don´t want to talk down the lens, people who shoot "normally" probably will not notice, but for me, this is going to be a deal braker.   heiko  The second is 1/4000s. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Mauribix Posted August 5, 2012 Share #138 Â Posted August 5, 2012 The second is 1/4000s. Â It doesn't mean anything in this case. The problem shown is a sensor issue, not a lens' fault. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
01af Posted August 5, 2012 Share #139  Posted August 5, 2012 ... both shot against the sun at ISO 200/24° at 1/2000 s, cropped a bit. [...] for me, this is going to be a deal breaker. Different light, different angles, different exposures, different cameras—huh!? What is this supposed to prove? 1 Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
jaapv Posted August 5, 2012 Share #140 Â Posted August 5, 2012 Overexposed and exposed properly. What has this to do with the lens? 1 Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Create an account or sign in to comment
You need to be a member in order to leave a comment
Create an account
Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!
Register a new accountSign in
Already have an account? Sign in here.
Sign In Now