wattsy Posted May 3, 2016 Share #21 Posted May 3, 2016 Advertisement (gone after registration) Many Leica lenses have recently been updated often with a major objective of minimising focus shift and field curvature. The results may be subtle but they are very real. The 35mm f/1.4 Summilux-M ASPH FLE is a very good example and a superb lens for digital use. Yes, the current 35mm Summilux (so called FLE) is a superb lens (I used this lens almost exclusively for a number of years) but it has some of the most pronounced field curvature I have ever seen from a Leica lens. Crazily so as you start to stop it down. 1 Quote Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Advertisement Posted May 3, 2016 Posted May 3, 2016 Hi wattsy, Take a look here 35 Summilux FLE or pre-FLE?. I'm sure you'll find what you were looking for!
Peter Branch Posted May 3, 2016 Share #22 Posted May 3, 2016 Yes, the current 35mm Summilux (so called FLE) is a superb lens (I used this lens almost exclusively for a number of years) but it has some of the most pronounced field curvature I have ever seen from a Leica lens. Crazily so as you start to stop it down. Therein lies the problem with digital. With virtually any lens it is now relatively easy to find the "faults". There is no perfect lens - especially any f/1.4 lens - so look for problems and one is certain to find them. It was much more difficult in the film era. All I can say is that I have use the 35mm f/1.4 Summilux-M ASPH FLE in all manner of circumstances since its introduction and any defects due to field curvature have never troubled me. 3 Quote Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
wattsy Posted May 3, 2016 Share #23 Posted May 3, 2016 There is no perfect lens - especially any f/1.4 lens Yes, given it's size and fast maximum aperture, the 35 Summilux ASPH 11663 is certainly a remarkable lens – a reportage lens par excellence if ever there was one. However, I have tended to use mine largely as a landscape lens and, depending upon composition and aperture, focussed distance, etc., field curvature is often all too readily apparent (even if it has not been something that has ever led to me reject a "keeper"). 1 Quote Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Peter Branch Posted May 3, 2016 Share #24 Posted May 3, 2016 Yes, given it's size and fast maximum aperture, the 35 Summilux ASPH 11663 is certainly a remarkable lens – a reportage lens par excellence if ever there was one. However, I have tended to use mine largely as a landscape lens and, depending upon composition and aperture, focussed distance, etc., field curvature is often all too readily apparent (even if it has not been something that has ever led to me reject a "keeper"). The 35mm f/1.4 Summilux-M ASPH FLE, (11663) was a significant improvement in many respects to the then current 35mm f/2 Summicron-M ASPH. I know from experience that this f/2 lens was never a great performer on digital though it seemed perfectly OK with film. It may be that the recently revised 35mm f/2 Summicron-M ASPH, (11673) would be a better choice for landscape work. This is just a small example of how all lens manufacturers are gradually adapting to the demands of digital. The new 35mm f/2 Summicron-M ASPH is claimed to have been updated specifically to minimise problems with digital. 1 Quote Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
james.liam Posted May 3, 2016 Share #25 Posted May 3, 2016 (edited) However, I have tended to use mine largely as a landscape lens and, depending upon composition and aperture, focussed distance, etc., field curvature is often all too readily apparent (even if it has not been something that has ever led to me reject a "keeper"). The more portable ZM 2,8/35 or 35 Summarit with their flatter fields would acquit themselves better in this role, I'd imagine? I know from experience that this f/2 lens was never a great performer on digital though it seemed perfectly OK with film. It may be that the recently revised 35mm f/2 Summicron-M ASPH, (11673) would be a better choice for landscape work. My unfortunate experience as well, along with more apparent focus shift at ~5 meters and less. From what's been already published, it seems that the "new" 35 is the least changed of the trio, the only modification being an 11 blade aperture. This is a shame, given its wonderfully small size. I never warmed to the 35 Summicron ASPH on digital (was the ƒ/2-2.8 and ƒ/8 option), though on film, it was my primary lens. Edited May 3, 2016 by james.liam Quote Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
wattsy Posted May 3, 2016 Share #26 Posted May 3, 2016 The more portable ZM 2,8/35 or 35 Summarit with their flatter fields would acquit themselves better in this role, I'd imagine? Probably but the optical foibles of the Summilux (or the Summicron ASPH which I largely use now) are not really a crucial limiting factor for me. I mentioned my observations about the field curvature simply because Peter brought the subject up. Quote Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
lct Posted May 3, 2016 Share #27 Posted May 3, 2016 Advertisement (gone after registration) Focus shift is a flaw of the lens that is less visible on film for various reasons. No problem with the 50/1.4 pre-FLE if you intend to use film all your life. Otherwise you have plan A and plan B. Plan A: choose the FLE it is an excellent lens you can use on both film and digital. Plan B: look for a pre-FLE titanium or silver version, they are said to have less focus shift than the black one. Better check it in person before ordering the lens though. 1 Quote Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Hayek Posted May 3, 2016 Share #28 Posted May 3, 2016 They presumably share the same optical cell, so why would a silver or platinum version have less focus shift than a black one? Quote Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
lct Posted May 3, 2016 Share #29 Posted May 3, 2016 No idea sorry. Pre-FLE black & titanium (below). Source: J-M Sepulchre http://tinyurl.com/6bjmngt. I have no personal experience with either version though. 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/186384-35-summilux-fle-or-pre-fle/?do=findComment&comment=3038653'>More sharing options...
wattsy Posted May 4, 2016 Share #30 Posted May 4, 2016 They presumably share the same optical cell, so why would a silver or platinum version have less focus shift than a black one? There is some speculation (though that it is all it is) that the silver and titanium versions, being built using a brass shell, are put together using finer tolerances or calibrated slightly differently. My only contribution to the debate is that my experience with the black version (which I have owned twice and tried out many more times in the shop) confirms that the focus shift is very much real and a problem if you like your subject to be in focus most of the time. Quote Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
asiafish Posted May 9, 2016 Share #31 Posted May 9, 2016 If price isn't an issue, get the FLE. It is a vastly improved lens up close, and all but identical at distance. 1 Quote Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Carduelis Posted May 29, 2016 Share #32 Posted May 29, 2016 On a slightly different tack, during a recent touring holiday to hot and humid Java and Bali, I found that my Leica M240 with EVF kept tripping out with my 35 mm ASPH Summilux Pre-FLE lens (later model with 6 bit code) attached. There was absolutely no problem with the other lenses (24 mm Elmar; 50 mm ASPH Summilux and 90 mm Summarit) that I took. I cannot figure out why this happened to this lens in particular. Perhaps using the FLE version of the lens may have been more successful. The Pre-FLE lens worked OK with the EVF in cooler conditions during walks to the crater edges of volcanoes. As I am particularly interested in landscape photography, I just wish there was a 35 mm Leica lens that was universally accepted as having negligible or very little field curvature. If the FLE version of the 35 ASPH Summilux was better than the pre-FLE version in this respect, then I would buy it. Quote Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest )-( Posted May 30, 2016 Share #33 Posted May 30, 2016 As the OP is using only film (enjoy your new lens philipus) - it'd be really interesting to see any shots from the 35 FLE on film and/or any direct comparison with pre-FLE here. I don't think I've seen any shots on film that I knew came from the 35 FLE. In general people tend to recommend against the latest ASPH, APO etc. lenses for film but here we have a resounding yes to such a lens? But then I guess the question was a straight ASPH v ASPH choice. I agree the FLE has a weird curvy focal plane for digital landscapes but personally I prefer weird curvy 35mm lenses (tend to get used more closer in?) over perfectly sharp landscapes. Sharp far away things are overrated imo. 1 Quote Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
indergaard Posted May 30, 2016 Share #34 Posted May 30, 2016 (edited) As the OP is using only film (enjoy your new lens philipus) - it'd be really interesting to see any shots from the 35 FLE on film and/or any direct comparison with pre-FLE here. I don't think I've seen any shots on film that I knew came from the 35 FLE. In general people tend to recommend against the latest ASPH, APO etc. lenses for film but here we have a resounding yes to such a lens? But then I guess the question was a straight ASPH v ASPH choice. I agree the FLE has a weird curvy focal plane for digital landscapes but personally I prefer weird curvy 35mm lenses (tend to get used more closer in?) over perfectly sharp landscapes. Sharp far away things are overrated imo. I've made hundres of exposures on film with the 35 FLE and it works great. Some examples with different emulsion types (specified in the Flickr comment): Rollei RPX 100 by Børge Indergaard, on Flickr Summer fun by Børge Indergaard, on Flickr The Thief's Islet by Børge Indergaard, on Flickr Foggy at Trollstigen by Børge Indergaard, on Flickr Oslo City Hall by Børge Indergaard, on Flickr Hogevarde by Børge Indergaard, on Flickr Edited May 30, 2016 by indergaard 6 Quote Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest )-( Posted May 30, 2016 Share #35 Posted May 30, 2016 Thanks Børge, beautiful shots. Quote Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
colint544 Posted May 30, 2016 Share #36 Posted May 30, 2016 Here's one of mine - shot using an M5, with 35mm Summilux ASPH FLE, wide open at f1.4. Ilford HP5 pushed to 800 ISO. Never had any problems with back/forward focussing or field curvature with this lens. I think it goes well with shooting on film. Cheers, Colin 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! 7 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/186384-35-summilux-fle-or-pre-fle/?do=findComment&comment=3053476'>More sharing options...
wattsy Posted May 31, 2016 Share #37 Posted May 31, 2016 Yes, the FLE Summilux works great with film (why wouldn't it?). I do now use a 35 Summicron as first choice but only because I prefer the smaller size of the Summicron and its lighter focussing action than the Summilux. The following are all taken with the FLE on film. 6 Quote Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
asiafish Posted June 1, 2016 Share #38 Posted June 1, 2016 On a slightly different tack, during a recent touring holiday to hot and humid Java and Bali, I found that my Leica M240 with EVF kept tripping out with my 35 mm ASPH Summilux Pre-FLE lens (later model with 6 bit code) attached. There was absolutely no problem with the other lenses (24 mm Elmar; 50 mm ASPH Summilux and 90 mm Summarit) that I took. I cannot figure out why this happened to this lens in particular. Perhaps using the FLE version of the lens may have been more successful. The Pre-FLE lens worked OK with the EVF in cooler conditions during walks to the crater edges of volcanoes. As I am particularly interested in landscape photography, I just wish there was a 35 mm Leica lens that was universally accepted as having negligible or very little field curvature. If the FLE version of the 35 ASPH Summilux was better than the pre-FLE version in this respect, then I would buy it. 35 Summarit has a flatter field, and is an outstanding lens in every way. Quote Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
wattsy Posted June 1, 2016 Share #39 Posted June 1, 2016 Yes, the 35 Summarit does have a flatter field (at least it doesn't have the eccentric field of the Summilux or, to a lesser extent, Summicron). However, it does have noticeably softer edges than the Summilux (when photographing non-planar subjects). Quote Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
lct Posted June 1, 2016 Share #40 Posted June 1, 2016 My 35/2.5 is indeed softer on edges and corners below f/5.6 and has a bit of CA there. I would not recommend it for landscapes at fast apertures but f/8 or f/11 is OK for me. Very good little lens otherwise but the ZM 35/2.8 is a better lens to me. The latter is very contrasty and has more vignetting though. Compromise, compromise... I have no experience with the ZM 35/1.4 but give it the size of either Summarit or Biogon and i could be interested . 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.