Leica 35mm cron v4 vs. 35mm lux

[stump4545]

Advertisement (gone after registration)

is the 35mm lux just like a 35mm cron v4 except with an extra stop of speed?

 

which is the more desired lens?

 

thanks in advance.

[Advertisement]

The Leica Q3 is available for pre-order at B&H Photo Video and Adorama

[ho_co]

The 35/1.4 has an extra stop as you say, but it's pretty soft wide open. When it came out, it was a star because it was the only f/1.4 in 35 mm focal length.

 

Since it doesn't meet today's standards wide open, you probably wouldn't use it much wide open.

 

In that case, it doesn't offer any advantage over the 35/2.

 

I would personally take the Summicron v.4 instead.

[philipus]

Since it doesn't meet today's standards wide open, you probably wouldn't use it much wide open.

 

Say wat?

[lct]

...Since it doesn't meet today's standards wide open, you probably wouldn't use it much wide open...

Ouch! It's my favorite 35 for portraiture on the M8.2 and i use it mostly at f/1.4. Allied to the glow, its softness gives an unique rendition at full aperture that i can't seem to retrieve with any 50 so far. Too bad for full frame and my otherwise superb M240. Howard, if you have some not-so-young people around you, try to shoot them with the Summilux pre-asph at full aperture and they'll look younger you can trust me.

Anyway, to answer the OP's question, there are obvious common points between the Sumilux pre-asph and the Summicron v4 at f/2 and on... provided you don't shoot against the light. The v4 will flare a bit there but the 'Lux a lot more.

[Ecar]

Sorry for asking, but which Lux are we talking about? Pre-ASPH? ASPH? FLE?

[tobey bilek]

My dealer told me it was soft and flared at 1.4. I borrowed one and did some pics and Steve was correct. That was 1985. I still have the V4.

 

The 1.4 has no filter threads and takes ser7 filters inside a special shade which is fairly rare.

 

If you elect the 1.4, the shade is for sale. Nearly mint.to excellent +.

[stump4545]

Advertisement (gone after registration)

the 35mm pre asph.

 

if the 35mm pre asph lux and 35mm cron v4 perform the same from f2 and on, why not pick up the 35mm lux since they are pricing at about the same + you get 1.4 when you want that look.

[xalo]

Funny, that this discussion comes up over and over again (and I'm not around here since long). In the German section, the last thread has just ebbed, with a few nice pics posted with the Summilux 35 pre-asph at f1,4.

It's a really beautiful lens, with so many on-paper faults (soft open, flares, 1m min. focus, series 7 filters, not all do mount M8, can't be coded, you name it) that it becomes intriguing how nicely it takes pictures. It has very smooth colour transitions, I find, perhaps even smoother than the Summicron v4. My Summilux was sharper at f2 than my Summicron, but flared more, filters are not that easy to change (take off hood, unscrew two parts of hood, change filter, screw hood parts together, mount hood). Well, in the end I sold both, kept the 35/1,4 asph. and the M-Rokkor 40. But I'm very glad about quite a few pictures that I could take with this glass — also because it is so small that you actually have it with you, including the stop in 'reserve', so useful on film.

Cheers,

Alexander

[stump4545]

link to 35mm pre asph photos at 1.4?

 

super appreciated!

 

thanks.

[xalo]

The last pic: http://www.l-camera-forum.com/leica-forum/leica-m-objektive/289329-summilux-1-4-35mm-version-1960-a-2.html#post2439523

Two or three more in the posts above, also a comparison with the asph.

 

Alexander

[russell]

Allied to the glow, its softness gives an unique rendition at full aperture that i can't seem to retrieve with any 50 so far.

How about the 50mm Summarit f1.5 from the 1950s? Wouldn't that give a similar effect?

[lct]

I have no experience with it. Do you think it could?

[Shade]

the 35mm pre asph.

 

if the 35mm pre asph lux and 35mm cron v4 perform the same from f2 and on, why not pick up the 35mm lux since they are pricing at about the same + you get 1.4 when you want that look.

 

I would second this notion. The lux itself is completely a different class than the 35/2 v4.

 

I personally like the glow at times, and can be easily stopped down to F2 for better sharpness. You also have the option of going wider for better light when it gets darker.

 

I also personally think the 35/2 is not "bokeh king", it's at F2 and I can hardly produce enough bokeh to justify it's price. I would rather shell out a little extra and get the 35/2 asph.

 

But each to their own.

[01af]

... can hardly produce enough bokeh ...

Using this expression means your notion of the term 'bokeh' is flawed. Bokeh isn't something you can have more or less of. It's a quality, not a quantity.

 

Often, bokeh gets confused with blur.

 

Moreover, the term 'bokeh king' was coined for this lens' out-of-focus rendition at medium apertures like f/5.6, and only in comparison to other 35 mm lenses (on 35-mm-format cameras) at medium apertures, not in comparison to lenses with other (longer) focal lengths. It was never meant as having particularly nice bokeh at full aperture. So after the term 'bokeh king' has slipped and went viral, the original author of this was not very happy with it because it was basically a huge misunderstanding.

[gjames9142]

That was Mike Johnson, no? A phrase that has been a boon to sellers of used lenses, as well as to amateur photographers everywhere. If the word bokeh had not been coined, more people might be exploring the full potential of their lenses.

[Shade]

Using this expression means your notion of the term 'bokeh' is flawed. Bokeh isn't something you can have more or less of. It's a quality, not a quantity.

 

Often, bokeh gets confused with blur.

 

Moreover, the term 'bokeh king' was coined for this lens' out-of-focus rendition at medium apertures like f/5.6, and only in comparison to other 35 mm lenses (on 35-mm-format cameras) at medium apertures, not in comparison to lenses with other (longer) focal lengths. It was never meant as having particularly nice bokeh at full aperture. So after the term 'bokeh king' has slipped and went viral, the original author of this was not very happy with it because it was basically a huge misunderstanding.

 

I stand corrected.

 

What I meant was there is hardly enough "blur" on a 35mm lens with an f2 aperture to be able to view the quality of the bokeh from the lens. So far I understand that bokeh is a term that describes the blur area of distant backgrounds.

[01af]

What I meant was there is hardly enough "blur" on a 35 mm lens with an f/2 aperture to be able to view the quality of the bokeh from the lens.

"... the quality of the bokeh"? Sigh.

 

Please note that bokeh is a quality. So "the quality of the bokeh" makes as much sense as, for example, the size of a height ... or the speed of a velocity.

 

Anyway—of course a picture taken with a 35 mm lens on a 35-mm-format camera at f/2 can have plenty of out-of-focus areas, so considering the bokeh definitely makes sense. Hey ... even at f/5.6, there usually is not everything in focus, unless shooting at or near infinity distance.

 

 

So far I understand that bokeh is a term that describes the blur area of distant backgrounds.

It describes the quality of the blur, not the degree thereof—i. e. the smoothness, the uniformity, the harmony, the absence of spurious detail that isn't supposed to be in a blurred area such as double lines or wiriness. And of course any blurred areas are considered—be them near or distant, foreground or background.

[jaapv]

Olaf, the best translation of "bokeh" is "confusion"...

[Advertisement]

Hallo,

Look here: Leica M

[Stein K S]

Hi

 

For what it is worth... I keep the 35 Cron IV and the 35 Lux asph pre-FLE... and they really complement eachother. Would not depart with any of them!

 

The Cron being "full of faults"... especially in the corners wide open... but so nice expression (sharp AND soft at the same time... "glow" I guess...). And the Lux still keeping some magic (this glow wide open), but still offering corner sharpness at all apertures a lot better than the Cron. The Lux also offering a limited DOF which I tend to enjoy....

 

Stein

[Paul J]

"... the quality of the bokeh"? Sigh.

 

Bokeh is not an actual word with a direct translation.

 

Bokeh is a term made up by an editor of a magazine in order to help with the pronunciation of the word derived from it's Japanese origins.

 

Boke, in Japanese simply means blur.

 

Boke-aji is Quality of blur.

 

Bokeh, is made up of many qualities and it is quite right to speak in terms of quality of Bokeh. Quality of blur.

 

Sigh indeed.