35 summicron asph. or 4th gen?

[rondeb]

Advertisement (gone after registration)

Anyone care to comment on which is the lens to choose for my M8? I've heard great things about the 4th gen., but does it REALLY measure up to the aspherical's performance?

Thanks for you help on this matter.

 

Best,

Ron

[rondeb]

OK. More specifics. I posted over at RF forum and got some suggestions, none of which were the 35 summicron.

 

Here's what I have:

M8

CV 28 Ulton(backfocusing!)

CV 50 Nokton - love it!

Leica 40 Summicron(just got it tonight, but love it so far!)

 

I REALLY want a 35, but I'm not sure which. I'm considering:

35 Summicron non-asph. 4th gen

35 Summicron Aspher. NEW

35 Summilux New or used.

 

or maybe the 28 Elmarit and Summicrons!

 

Any and all comments are greatly appreciated.

 

Thanks for your time.

Best,

Ron

[lars_bergquist]

Of course the V.4 35 mm Summicron does not 'measure up' to any of the later aspherical 35 mm lenses on the optical bench. MTF tests do show this. But we cannot eat MTF. Lots of differences that can be seen in charts and tables cannot be seen in actual pictures, given the limitations of actual picture-taking – hand-held camera, unavoidable focusing errors, subjects that cannot stand still as if freeze-dried. Make no mistake, that 'spherical' Summicron is no slouch.

 

You should however avoid earlier versions (before # 2,974,251). These are of different construction and while more than respectable for their time, they all below the performance of the legendary 4th generation Summicron.

 

The old man from the Age of the M3

[Mauribix]

Hi Ron,

I think it's quite hard to make a choose between those lenses.

Same name 35 'cron but almost nothin' in common.

I personally liked much more in the past the 35 asph cron because of its details and incisivity,but as soon as i got my M8, i tryed the 3rd and 4th generation...Shock!

They gave me that "magic", a little of "vintage" touch who gives me the impression of using a real "old" camera!

Now i sold the 35 ASPH and bought 2 pre-asph 'cron and a 40mm summicron-c (which is my favourite.... I don't know why!).

I may personally say that pre-asph ones, do their best in B/W, while in colour pictures, maybe it's just a metter of.... you!

 

If you want a comparison of those lenses with M8 take a look at my web MAURIZIO BEUCCI.com - Official web site , the section "Genova" has been done with pre-asph 35 , summicron c 40, and CV15 only, while the Section "venezia" it's just a matter of 35 ASPH, 28 ASPH and CV15.

Even the section "people &..." it's just a matter of 35ASPH (excluding some older pictures made with an Olympus".

 

Hope this was helpfull

regards

Maurizio

 

 

 

 

QUOTE=rondeb;261944]Anyone care to comment on which is the lens to choose for my M8? I've heard great things about the 4th gen., but does it REALLY measure up to the aspherical's performance?

Thanks for you help on this matter.

 

Best,

Ron

[lct]

If you like the 40/2 you will be happy with the 32/2 IV (#11310) as well for they have roughly the same 'fingerprint', i.e. good sharpness, reasonable contrast and smooth bokeh, but they are somewhat flare prone as well.

The 35/2 asph is sharper and more contrasty with a harsher bokeh but i did not keep it long enough to check its flare resistance sorry.

Now are you sure you need both 35mm and 40mm lenses? The 40/2 matches well the 35mm frame lines of M rangefinders at long and medium distance so if you want to keep your 40/2, a 28mm lens could be a better idea IMHO.

Which 28mm? Depends on the fingerprint you like. If you want the same as that of 40/2 or 35/2 IV, a pre-asph Elmarit 28/2.8 could suit you. But if you're after a more 'modern' look, the Summicron 28/2 asph is the very best. The Elmarit 28/2.8 asph is great as well but it is a bit more contrasty with a slightly harsher bokeh.

[andym911]

I agree with Lars, well nearly.

I bought the 35 asph but after using it for a couple of weeks I returned it as it was 'too clinical' for me.I am now completely happy with v2 35 Cron ((before # 2,974,251) which gives a lovely look and is plenty sharp!On the M8 it really shines.

It really is a matter of taste.

 

regards

andy

[bill vann]

Advertisement (gone after registration)

fwiw i like the v4 pre asph, had both the asph is likely technically better but the pre asph paints sooooo nicely, but i also opted for the last 90 cron the 75 lux the last 50 and a vintage 135 tele elmar. my 28 is a cv ultron also have the 12 and 15 cvs but with the WATE on order will likley sell the 21 asph and the 15 cv

 

the only asphs i liked and kept are the 21, disappointed in the pre, and the tri elmar for the convenience.

 

the pre asphs seem to make my M8 images less "clinical" and more film-like.

 

the pre cron 35 and 75 lux are getting really expensive though and very hard to find, seiing within minutes/hours of showing up on a board.

 

kindly,

 

bill vann

[James Mitchell]

I have both of these lenses and prefer to use the 35 'cron ASPH more on my film Ms and the 35 'cron v4 on the RD-1s and M8. Most of the reasons have been stated above, except that I love the look of the ASPH 'cron on color transparency film. Very sharp, bright colors and a flat field that I like in most scenes.

[t0tor0]

here is a comparison

 

http://www.jimarnold.org/galleries/leica_35_test/

[lars_bergquist]

I agree with Lars, well nearly.

I bought the 35 asph but after using it for a couple of weeks I returned it as it was 'too clinical' for me.I am now completely happy with v2 35 Cron ((before # 2,974,251) which gives a lovely look and is plenty sharp!On the M8 it really shines.

It really is a matter of taste.

 

regards

andy

I do not own a 35 mm Summicron ASPH – but a Summilux! And that is a hell of a fine lens. That V.4 Summicron is part of a set of M4-P, Tele-Elmarit and 35 Summicron with 1983 jubilee engraving. But because of its compactness and fine performance, the 'cron had become my 'walkabout lens'. I like the FOV.

 

As for the V. 2/3 Summicrons (they are really the same) they are plenty sharp on center, slightly softer than the V. 4 around the edges, but above all, known for a fairly harsh bokeh. This seems to be caused by over-corrected spherical aberration. The V. 4 however was immediately lauded for its pleasant rendering of out of focus areas, and rightly (the expression 'bokeh' was not current in the West whan this lens was introduced).

 

The old man from the Age of the M3

[andym911]

Lars hi,

 

I agree with all your comments and regarding the bokeh on the version 2/3 I take your word for it having never used V4.

For me the v2 that I have has simply become my favourite, I can't completely put my finger on why, just usability and it's certain look appeals to me.

I am sure that later versions including the current are far superior in many aspects however.

 

You know when I want real pleasure at the weekend I drive my 1974 VW Beetle Cabrio, for driving to work I take the BMW.

 

andy

[rondeb]

Thannk you all for your comments. The LUF is the modern day virtual "little camera shop", isn't it.

With much consideration, I stumbled accross a sliver chrome v4(German made) in gorgeous condition and went with it! It is a joy to use and the images I'm producing with the lens so far are beautiful.

Many thanks and all the best,

Ron

http://www.realphotony.com

 

Here's a quick snap with the lens. Not high art, but I still like it!

 

M8, 35 Summicron IV at ASA 160

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!