Sell Summicron 35mm 'Bokeh King' for Summilux w/Infintity Lock?

[bocaburger]

Advertisement (gone after registration)

I know these types of threads are pretty subjective... like you know what I should do, right? but:

 

I have the 35mm pre-asph V3(?) Bokeh King lens- It is really a great lens- I love it. However I have the chance to sell it- add a few hundred dollars of my own and get a V1 Canadian Summilux with the infinity lock.

 

a virtual penny for your thoughts.

I guess you mean the v4 Summicron.  The v2 and v3 are very similar in performance.  The v2 has a little tab on the aperture ring.  I have the v3 and v4 (kept the former as a backup as it's kind of shabby although the glass is perfect, but mainly use the v4).  I also had the ASPH and sold it because I like the v4 better.  No way I would sell that lens but YMMV.  I never cared for the pre-ASPH 35 Summilux and so have not owned it.  I did own an ASPH and sold it also.  I did not find the extra stop useful enough on a 35 (for me it's a matter of higher shutter speeds to counter camera blur) and the size and e46 filter made it less appealing than the Crons.  Again YMMV. 

[menos I M6]

 

actually menos- I have to admit- I am already well past the 5 focal length threshold for 35mm... I am spoilt! the 35 1.2 V2 CV lens means its not like I need the close focusing of my v1 summicron- or the fast apperture of the summilux... and for size the LTM summaron cant be beat by much 

 

I heard the Bokeh King legend had a faulty basis- but maybe it never would have stuck if their wasn't a kernel of truth in there somewhere- wide open I like the Bokeh:

 

Ok, then raise that number from 5 to a more reasonable number of say 10 … 20 ?  ;-)

I myself am as guilty as anyone could be.

On my blog I even posted about pursuing the search for "The Perfect 35mm Lens" for some time until I realized (many, many lenses later) that there is no such thing as "The Perfect 35mm Lens".

 

I have a large collection of 35mm lenses and even went so far to proceed to buy certain fixed lens 35mm cameras in order to explore their lenses.

One benefit from this several year long 35mm GAS stunt is that I have now a pretty clear picture for myself which 35mm lens designs I generally like best for what purpose.

 

I still have most of these lenses from that period. I even went so far back then to buy SEVERAL samples of the same lens just to find out how these samples derivate.

 

Here is my short list of favorite 35mm lenses:

 

1) Konica UC-Hexanon 35/2 LTM

- a special edition, just 1000 made

- stemming from the landmark W-Nikkor 35/1.8 which blew everything on the market away back then by its performance and was not equaled by it's competition until several decades later

- my first choice when I want 35mm nowadays - tiny, light, sharp, perfect contrast

 

2) Leica 35/1.4 ASPH

- the one the internet almost imploded over a few years ago, when the word "focus shift" was invented and this FUD was injected in every camera nerds subconscious - normal people were not harmed by this scenario fortunately and the Leica 35/1.4 ASPH survived the plot nicely ;-)

- the almost perfect workhorse lens - less sharp close up than it's successor but with MUCH nicer out of focus rendering, hence my choice over the newer lens

- only downside is the badly shaped highlights in out of focus areas when shooting slightly stopped down (f2 - f2.8)

 

3) Voigtländer 35/1.2 v1

- personally my most liked rendering in a 35mm lens - on par with the Konica yet offering blistering f1.2 aperture and closer focus

- why not higher on the list? exclusively for it's ungainly size, weight and it's too fast focussing action for such a very fast lens

 

4) Leica Summicron v1

- beautifully sharp

- interesting low contrast and wonderful character, paired with the MM

- tiny size, great built quality and modern lens features (close focus .7m, E39 filters)

- biggest downside: flare

 

5) Leica Summilux pre ASPH

- the drama queen

- would never be my choice for an only 35mm lens as of it's severe optical shortcomings

- choice is for character - unpredictable flare, it's character wide open, when wanted and:

- it's most lovely rendering at f2 - f4 (this slight unsharp veil - I think for this lens the term "Leica Glow" was invented)

- it's a special effects lens in my book - great at f4 - f5.6, yet unlimited potential of funkiness wide open, no other lens can provide

 

You see, no v4 in that short list ;-) … and a Leica Summilux almost on top of it (how surprising - haha).

 

 

No.     Unless you wish to buy the new and try it out and then decide.   

 

I tried a Lux in the 80`s  at the largest Leica dealer in the USA.  I was not impressed with wide open performance.  Lots of flair which everyone will admit to and not terribly sharp.   Leica Photography also did a comparison and conclusion was similar.

 

If you have a nice Summicron,  keep it as they are fairly hard to replace in nice condition.  The trade is chasing moonbeams.

 

The only reason to go for a pre ASPH Summilux nowadays truly comes down to taste of it's unique rendering.

Back when it was a current lens, there was not much choice, people could do when really needing such a fast 35mm lens on a Leica M, so people ate up the optical shortcomings and went for it if they needed that f1.4 aperture.

At any aperture the respective then current Summicron version would eat the Summilux pre-ASPH for breakfast (not true anymore since the Summilux 35 Aspherical entered the scene which was the first time, a 35mm Summilux could perform on a even level with a current 35mm Summicron, so the choice was not limited only to having f1.4 available or not but the Summilux could actually act as a jack of all trades).

 

I understand Jaques is attracted by the pre ASPH Summilux for it's characteristics and not mainly interested in it's clearly documented optical shortcomings - how illogical some of use choose their lenses, myself very guilty as well ;-)

 

 

The infinity lock was mentioned a few times.

It is interesting, the infinity lock has changed in design a few times over the years.

The latest design, inherited by the v1 Summicron and the then current Summilux lens, if maintained properly is the smoothest and nicest infinity lock one can possibly wish for.

If the lens is held correctly (focussing the lens by it's lens tab), the middle finger is always resting right on the spring loaded tab of the infinity lock. This way the lock can be disengaged smoothly without any issue at will (it really is not a conscious operation you have to think about but it just happens).

 

I really prefer the v1 Summicron and the infinity lock version of the Summilux over later "lock-less" versions for this aspect.

The one and only benefit of the infinity lock on these lenses is that once set to shoot the horizon, the lens will not be knocked out of focus when handling the camera.

There is no other practical benefit any longer.

 

It is not something though I would think of as a negative feature, slowing me down - it is just … different (yet in it's most perfect mechanical execution and built quality).

 

Some photos are coming up, I will post some if I can find typical examples online for these lenses:

 

The typical lens flare of the v1 Summicron (similar with the contemporary Summilux, yet with the Summilux the flare is more often not that geometrically beautiful but more severe):

night worker, Leica M2 Black Paint + 35/2 v1 + Neopan, pushed in D76 stock

 

The UC-Hex - this shows how contrast on the UC-Hex is different form modern Leica lenses - it is a very modern looking lens, yet it has not the deadly high contrast of latest ASPH lenses (it is a spherical design, stemming form the original W-Nikkor of the late 1940's after all):

fish seller, Leica MM + 35/2 UC-Hex:

 

35 Summilux ASPH - just always works (except f2-2.8 for star shaped highlights):

couple, Leica MM + 35 Summilux ASPH:

 

[Advertisement]

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

[menos I M6]

That typical Summilux pre ASPH look wide open:

Leica M9 + Summilux vII:

 

The qualities of the Voigtländer 35/1.2 (if it wouldn't be that large and heavy, it might very well be the perfect 35mm):

Leica M9 + 35/1.2 v1

[jaques]

wow: great little 35mm lens review Menos! Thanks.

 

I agree about the CV 35 1.2- it really is an astounding lens- The only issue is the size/weight- but that is made up for by the wide open 1.2 possibilities. I have compared it alongside my Noctilux f1 and wide open the look is very similar with the VC being sharper. It is pretty much the current 35mm 'Noctilux' if you ask me. The 0.5 close focus is also very good with the liveview on m240.

 

Just out of interest- anyone know why this ebay summilux sold for such a fortune- it isn't the chrome rim version- though it does have the Ollux hood:

 

http://www.ebay.com.au/itm/Rare-early-Leitz-Canada-35mm-Summilux-35mm-f1-4-black-/271873454018?pt=LH_DefaultDomain_0&hash=item3f4cebafc2

Edited June 3, 2015 by jaques

[pgk]

2) Leica 35/1.4 ASPH

- the one the internet almost imploded over a few years ago, when the word "focus shift" was invented and this FUD was injected in every camera nerds subconscious - normal people were not harmed by this scenario fortunately and the Leica 35/1.4 ASPH survived the plot nicely ;-)

- the almost perfect workhorse lens - less sharp close up than it's successor but with MUCH nicer out of focus rendering, hence my choice over the newer lens

- only downside is the badly shaped highlights in out of focus areas when shooting slightly stopped down (f2 - f2.8)

 

4) Leica Summicron v1

- beautifully sharp

- interesting low contrast and wonderful character, paired with the MM

- tiny size, great built quality and modern lens features (close focus .7m, E39 filters)

- biggest downside: flare

 

5) Leica Summilux pre ASPH

- the drama queen

- would never be my choice for an only 35mm lens as of it's severe optical shortcomings

- choice is for character - unpredictable flare, it's character wide open, when wanted and:

- it's most lovely rendering at f2 - f4 (this slight unsharp veil - I think for this lens the term "Leica Glow" was invented)

- it's a special effects lens in my book - great at f4 - f5.6, yet unlimited potential of funkiness wide open, no other lens can provide

Very well put - I can't comment on 1 and 3 because I haven't or used owned them and would add that my v1 'glowed' at full aperture - especially about  2. 2 and 5 are my workhorses. I have a v4 due back from total rebuild (the 'plastic' section was undamaged) any day. Whether I will keep this v4 I am unsure (I've owned 2 copies previously). The forum should really have a way of storing posts like this as very good comments about much queried lenses.

[menos I M6]

wow: great little 35mm lens review Menos! Thanks.

 

I agree about the CV 35 1.2- it really is an astounding lens- The only issue is the size/weight- but that is made up for by the wide open 1.2 possibilities. I have compared it alongside my Noctilux f1 and wide open the look is very similar with the VC being sharper. It is pretty much the current 35mm 'Noctilux' if you ask me. The 0.5 close focus is also very good with the liveview on m240.

 

Just out of interest- anyone know why this ebay summilux sold for such a fortune- it isn't the chrome rim version- though it does have the Ollux hood:

 

http://www.ebay.com.au/itm/Rare-early-Leitz-Canada-35mm-Summilux-35mm-f1-4-black-/271873454018?pt=LH_DefaultDomain_0&hash=item3f4cebafc2

Jaques, your comments re. the Voigtländer 35/1.2 having lots of imaging DNA in common with the Noctilux f1 mirrors exactly my own experience ;-)

In fact during the period in time when my v4 Noctilux was my mainly used and most favorite lens of them all, I found a nice deal on a like new 35/1.2 v1 and immediately fell in love in how it renders (as you wrote - many things in common with the f1 Noctilux).

 

I still love my Noctilux but since the MM has pushed slower lenses into practical shutter speeds at night, I tend to use f2 or f1.4 lenses instead (mainly for more DOF).

 

The eBay auction you linked to shows a very early version of the pre ASPH Summilux.

Now I am no expert in these minute details of the pelter of diverse versions Leica made from this lens but it shows a clearly different built of the front rim (shared in design by the later produced "steel rim" version.

 

My infinity lock version (I believe it to be made in 1967) shows the same barrel and front rim style as all later "vII" lenses - it just so happens to have an infinity lock and different focus ring than the later versions (and I believe also different coatings, as can be seen in a difference in contrast to my later 1977 vII).

The one in the eBay auction is a very hot collectors item, hence the high sales price.

 

I am not current on prices but I believe for the price for a mint OLLUX you might be able to find yourself a beautiful 35 Summilux vII sample already ;-)

 

Very well put - I can't comment on 1 and 3 because I haven't or used owned them and would add that my v1 'glowed' at full aperture - especially about  2. 2 and 5 are my workhorses. I have a v4 due back from total rebuild (the 'plastic' section was undamaged) any day. Whether I will keep this v4 I am unsure (I've owned 2 copies previously). The forum should really have a way of storing posts like this as very good comments about much queried lenses.

Thanks for the nice words Paul, and yes, I forgot to mention the "glow" wide open at f2 of the Summicron v1.

Actually this is quite interesting in behavior - it has overall a lower contrast at any aperture than the pre ASPH Summilux and behaves at it's widest aperture quite different from  f2.8 on.

 

This is a very similar characteristic with the Summilux pre ASPH - these two lenses really have two faces - a temperamental, soft/ glowing rendering when used at their "special effects widest aperture" and a truly beautiful and mostly reliable character (only exception is the flare these older lenses are prone to as of their optical design - a trait, shared by other vintage contemporary designs).

 

It is no wonder that the Summicron v1 is such a big favorite for B&W photography with it's rather lower contrast yet very high resolution - you can record a really wide range of tones with this lens.

 

Here is a shot where the tones are represented I believe - one of the first shots I took after finding my v1 sample (after some years of search - which is part of the fun with vintage lenses).

 

8 elements - stairs by teknopunk.com, on Flickr

[wattsy]

Advertisement (gone after registration)

 

 

2) Leica 35/1.4 ASPH

- the one the internet almost imploded over a few years ago, when the word "focus shift" was invented and this FUD was injected in every camera nerds subconscious - normal people were not harmed by this scenario fortunately and the Leica 35/1.4 ASPH survived the plot nicely ;-)

 

 

Pots and kettles.

 

[pgk]

Pots and kettles.

But unlike some other threads the discussion here is related to actual picture taking as opposed to absolute technicality (i.e. laboratory performance) as in some other threads. I personally find the pre-FLE Summilux to be a very viable lens to use in practice. Its focus shift is not a significant problem and I wonder how many photographers are shooting to such requirements that it is a real problem. Many will be able to identify focus shift using test charts/gear but just how relevant is this? The trouble with the web is that it produces virtual problems as easily as it identifies real one.

[jaques]

All the talk of "creamy bokeh"  reminds me of wine talk, and "silky tannins."  Maybe we could start using terms like "garrigue" when talking about lenses. It would make as much sense as bokeh king,  a term that has enriched a thousand dealers.  I was hard pressed to see any different when I replaced my V3 with a V4.  They are all pretty good. 

no one actually mentioned 'creamey bokeh' until you did... owning 3 out of 4 of the summicrons- they really all are quite different- and yes- as you say all pretty good

[jaques]

an update: I took the plunge and am very happy! I like vintage Leica lenses as much for their build quality as the performance. The Summilux is a stunner in this regard! Much more nicely made than the Summicron Bokeh king- and the size of the lens is just about perfect aesthetically speaking when mated with the digital Leica bodies. The infinity lock is superb on the Summilux- so silky you don't need to think to actuate it.

 

One thing was odd: at the camera store they tested the lens on an M9 and found that the focus was sticky near infinity. So I assumed the lens was going to need to be modified. However when I mounted in my M240 it focuses perfectly throughout the range. Is it possible the issue of the shroud only affects M8 and M9 not M240? Is there any difference in the M240 mount? Whatever the reason I am glad I don't need to modify it.

 

The example I secured dates to 1969 making it one of the last 1000 of the infinity lock luxes. It is early days- and no great photos from the lens yet:

 

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 4, 2015 by jaques

[jaques]

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!

 

 

[jaques]

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!

[stephen.w]

I would have kept the Summicron, but I like that last photo.

[jaques]

Thanks party pooper - but I won't miss it for a second . The summicron may be Bokeh King- but plastic hellicoid? Uh- oh- she has to go.  I might do a test: shoot both at f2 and post results here.

Edited July 4, 2015 by jaques

[tobey bilek]

The first Lux has poor wide open performance,  i.e. low contrast,  low color saturation, possible flair.    Next version came with focus shift issues.  Then the current with depth of field that bends around depending on distance and F stop.  I understand this has to do with floating elements.

 

I kept my V4 for the M8,  and purchased a 2.0 ASPH  for full frame.  So far,  very pleased.

[farnz]

Dirk,

 

Do you happen to know whether there is a lot of difference in how the 35/2 Hexanon draws compared to the 35/2 UC-Hexanon please?

 

Pete.

[menos I M6]

Dirk,

 

Do you happen to know whether there is a lot of difference in how the 35/2 Hexanon draws compared to the 35/2 UC-Hexanon please?

 

Pete.

Pete, unfortunately my hunt for a 35/2 Hexanon (regular) was unsuccessful during the time when I tried to get any 35mm available on a Leica M.

After I melted with the 35/2 UC-Hex (with the 35/1.4 ASPH being the other main 35mm) I gave up trying to find a regular 35/2 Hex.

 

I still wish I could compare them but it seems less and less are regularly up for sale.

In a pinch though I would wager, I'd sell all my RF lenses, get a regular 28/2.8 + 35/2 + 50/2 + 90/2.8 Hexanon kit on a MM and be set for life - if at least sensor life that is ;-)

 

These Konica lenses are wonderful and I have seen no photographs from any of those lenses, raising eye brows or showing anything I wouldn't like.

[farnz]

… In a pinch though I would wager, I'd sell all my RF lenses, get a regular 28/2.8 + 35/2 + 50/2 + 90/2.8 Hexanon kit on a MM and be set for life - if at least sensor life that is ;-) ...

Dirk,

 

I understand what you're saying; I have the 21-35/3.4-4.0 Dual M-Hexanon lens - the build quality is exceptional, it challenges my primes at 35 and 21, and it's a true zoom lens.

 

Pete.