Jump to content

Which 35mm?


paperman

Recommended Posts

Advertisement (gone after registration)

Yes it has, particularly, if not solely post-sean reid.

 

Tim Ashley also raised the phenomenon of focus shift with the 35/F2 when there was the wider discussion/uproar concerning the Summilux (and I think that pre-dates Sean Reid's observations). I had very noticeable problems with the Summilux (bought and tried many examples), and have therefore been quite sensitive to the issue, but my 35 Summicron was always fine in this regard – at least for "real world" use. The Summicron is a great lens for both film and digital.

 

As an aside, I've noticed how a couple of my Leica lenses (including the much vaunted 35 Summilux FLE but, more especially, my 28 Summicron) are more impressive when used on a film camera.

Link to post
Share on other sites

 

p.s. Pardon my ignorance but what does "post-sean reid" mean?

 

Since Sean Reid commented on focus shift with the 35/2Asph, others have commented on it. I don't recall any comment on it prior to Sean Reid's comment. Perhaps others had, but I don't recall them doing so.

Pete

(Posted whilst Wattsy was posting above)

Link to post
Share on other sites

Sean Reid reported mild focus shift with his sample from f4-f5.6, and mine exhibits the same. It has been discussed here many times.

 

Jeff

 

My local Leica dealer seems convinced the 35mm Summicron has focus shift, indeed he warned me off purchasing one because of it.

Link to post
Share on other sites

Since Sean Reid commented on focus shift with the 35/2Asph, others have commented on it. I don't recall any comment on it prior to Sean Reid's comment. Perhaps others had, but I don't recall them doing so.

Pete

(Posted whilst Wattsy was posting above)

 

Thanks for the heads up. I have since googled him and seems he runs a private lens review website.

Link to post
Share on other sites

Yes it has, particularly, if not solely post-sean reid.

 

Well, I tested mine 'pre-Sean Reid' article, which echoed my experience. And, like him, I had already concluded that it was no big deal, especially once understood and results seen in print. No lens is perfect….and samples vary….nothing new, Sean Reid or not.

 

Jeff

Link to post
Share on other sites

Well I bought a new CV 35 F1.4 SC on Friday, I haven't seen the results yet to recommend it but the haptics are wonderful, this is important to me. Almost everyone seems to hate on that lens but I did my research and decided to try it anyway :D

Link to post
Share on other sites

Advertisement (gone after registration)

Summicron-M 35 mm f/2 ASPH is the short answer. I say this owning this great lens myself, and testing the newest Summilux-M prior to buying the Summicron.

 

My Summicron is dead sharp (even wide open), fantastic contrast, free of distortion, handles colors very pleasantly and is a great overall performer.

 

It's so compact and has such a nice character that your love to the lens will grow (even more) as time goes.

Link to post
Share on other sites

It's a great lens - very well made and as smooth as any Leica.

I have the MC version and it reminds me very much of the pre asph 35mm Summilux.

I think it performs very well wide open and I can't really fault it in any way.

 

I agree. I have the MC also, and find its results at 1.4 as nice as my '69 Summicron at 2.0, and at 2.0 it is sharper and has less vigneting. Yet it does have more distortion and focus shift. Wonderful handling on an M.

However, in good light I prefer my Summarit 35.

Link to post
Share on other sites

I have had all three and rate them all BUT I love the MkIV, the ASPH is technically better wide open, particularly the edges. That's it for the ASPH over the MkIV I prefer the rendering, the colouring, the size and just about everything else about the. MkIV over the ASPH I bought it twice and sold it twice. I won't buy it again

 

Add to this the fact that the MkIV has real magic around F4 it will remain in my little lot for good. I have used the ASPH. Summilux and love that lens as well I sold that one only because I found a rare Aspherical

 

Recently I have used the MkIV the most out of my 35's it's fab....

Link to post
Share on other sites

I have had all three and rate them all BUT I love the MkIV, the ASPH is technically better wide open, particularly the edges. That's it for the ASPH over the MkIV I prefer the rendering, the colouring, the size and just about everything else about the. MkIV over the ASPH I bought it twice and sold it twice. I won't buy it again

.

 

I own and love the IV also but I don't see how anyone cannot appreciate the massive step up in image quality you get with the ASPH, the rendering, colour and handling are just so much nicer with the newer lens.

 

Have a look at Emanuelle Smague's work. He uses the 35 Cron ASPH with film and a Leica M240

 

The following image is a great example of the ASPHs wonderful ability to convey colour and texture:

Link to post
Share on other sites

I own and love the IV also but I don't see how anyone cannot appreciate the massive step up in image quality you get with the ASPH, the rendering, colour and handling are just so much nicer with the newer lens.

 

Have a look at Emanuelle Smague's work. He uses the 35 Cron ASPH with film and a Leica M240

 

The following image is a great example of the ASPHs wonderful ability to convey colour and texture:

 

I have owned two and did a lot of comparisons. I prefer the MkIV, the ASPH has a tendency towards pink which I am not so keen on. If I'm after steller resolution I'd take my 28 Summicron

Link to post
Share on other sites

Archived

This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.

  • Recently Browsing   0 members

    • No registered users viewing this page.
×
×
  • Create New...