tatetate Posted November 18, 2015 Share #1 Â Posted November 18, 2015 Advertisement (gone after registration) Evening Folks! Wondering if some one can shed some light on 35mm Lux vs FLE Lux lenses, Main differences in output, etc. Â Would be thankful if someone can share images. Â Thanks in advance. Â T Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Advertisement Posted November 18, 2015 Posted November 18, 2015 Hi tatetate, Take a look here 35mm Lux Aph vs Lux FLE. I'm sure you'll find what you were looking for!
farnz Posted November 19, 2015 Share #2  Posted November 19, 2015 T,  There are basically four variants of the 35/1.4 Summilux: 1) The 35/1.4 Summilux - the original version commonly referred to as the "pre-asph": very light and compact but with modest correction of aberrations producing a characteristic 'glow' when used wide open 2) The 35/1.4 Summilux Aspherical (note the "Aspherical" on the front ring) - very rare and expensive, contains 2 hand-ground elements with aspherical surfaces and produces well-corrected images 3) The 35/1.4 Summilux asph - often referred to as the 'first version asph' - contains one element with a moulded aspherical surface, well-corrected but many samples suffer from focus shift 4) The 35/1.4 Summilux asph (FLE), the current lens - usually referred to as the "FLE" - contains one element with a moulded aspherical surface and a FLE (floating lens element) which is the rear group of lens elements that move independently of the front group to compensate for focus shift and has excellent performance wide open and all round.  Pete. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest )-( Posted November 19, 2015 Share #3 Â Posted November 19, 2015 I'm guessing the question is concerning the the two ASPH versions; #3 and #4 above? Â The most obvious physical difference is the 'heavier' focus feel to the (slightly bigger) FLE, due to needing to move the floating lens element back and forth, and of course the related (possibly somewhat overstated in general?) issues relating to focus shift that this element was intended to resolve (although I don't think this was ever acknowledged by Leica as the reason for the #3 replacement?) Â I've had the FLE and now have the 'pre-FLE' or #3 'first version ASPH' as above. I prefer the way the pre-FLE balances technical perfection with a less clinical look. The FLE is very severe/amazing/unique (amend as required) in its rendering, decidedly different to the pre-FLE in any case. I'll leave it to others to better express those differences in optical terms - I just prefer the softer feeling of the pre-FLE images personally, totally subjective of course. Â Other than that, they both have E46 filter threads, they're both more or less the same size, the FLE has a more convenient (to some) threaded hood, whilst the pre-FLE has a pinch/twist arrangement. They're both fantastic lenses. There is a substantial difference in cost of course, since one is available second-hand only. They're more alike than different really, in the broader context of all M-mount 35mm lenses. Â I'd look at some images from both to get a better sense of the difference, and consider the focus shift issue as well. I'm either lucky with, or ignorant of, focus shift with #3 myself and find it irrelevant for practical use but I'm sure others would differ. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
tatetate Posted November 19, 2015 Author Share #4 Â Posted November 19, 2015 Many thanks for your input, Indeed i am referring to Last 2 Versions of of Lux! Â I would love to see some pictures if anyone can share some and share their experience and views. Indeed cost is also important and want to see if its justified between two. Â Thank you again for your input. Â Cron-r Can you shed some light on Focus shift issues of both you are aware of. Â Regards T Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
farnz Posted November 19, 2015 Share #5 Â Posted November 19, 2015 Focus shift is a rangefinder issue and occurs when the physics of a lens moves the sharpest plane of focus away from where the rangefinder (and photographer) expect it to be as the aperture is changed. As I understand it, Leica lenses are optimised to be spot on at maximum aperture (f/1.4 in this instance) but stopping down to, say, f/2.8 will cause the point the rangefinder focusses on to actually be slightly in front of the lens's true plane of focus so the subject focussed on will appear a little soft and objects just slightly behind it will be the sharpest. Â This phenomenon will continue until about f5.6 when the depth of field will compensate and both points will appear reasonably sharp. Â This also occurs with the Zeiss 50 f/1.5 ZM Sonnar but Zeiss optimises the lens to be spot on at f/2.8 so shooting wide open often produces slightly soft subjects. Zeiss will optimise for f/1.5 if requested by the owner but the design parameters of the lens and tolerances of the rangefinder won't allow the lens to be spot on at both apertures. Â Leica solved this with the floating lens element group in the 35 Summilux asph FLE. Â Pete. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Jeff S Posted November 19, 2015 Share #6 Â Posted November 19, 2015 Oh my....we've been through the FLE discussion many times....and debates about the primary purpose of the floating element... Â http://www.l-camera-forum.com/topic/198198-digital-combo-leica-m240-summilux-35-fle/?p=2244023 Â Let's just say that focus shift is ultimately improved. Â Â Regarding the OP's question, there are many threads comparing the two lenses, for instance... Â Â http://www.l-camera-forum.com/topic/233400-35mm-14-floating-vs-non-floating-element/?p=2663778 Â Jeff Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
michaelwj Posted November 20, 2015 Share #7  Posted November 20, 2015 Advertisement (gone after registration)  2) The 35/1.4 Summilux Aspherical (note the "Aspherical" on the front ring) - very rare and expensive, contains 2 hand-ground elements with aspherical surfaces and produces well-corrected images   I thought this version had a single element with two aspherical surfaces, rather than two aspherical elements. This was the reason for the expense, both surfaces had to be perfect or you start again which is much harder than two independent surfaces. Happy to be corrected though!  Cheers, Michael Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
tatetate Posted November 20, 2015 Author Share #8 Â Posted November 20, 2015 Many Thanks, Â Wonder if someone can come up with feedback and review for the FLE on their recent new purchase. Â I do understand there is plenty of material availble from past on this topic however there is no harm to dig into new information. we never stop learning. Â All those members who are annoyed by this thread are more thn welcome to ignore. Â Thanks so very much everyone for your help and information! Â Can someone also comment on Current Prices off FLE and Price HIT (DROP) lately. isnt that too much of a drop for Leica Premium Glass? Â Any one from UK who have purchased lately and would like to share their buying experience and prices? Â Thanks Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
cpclee Posted November 21, 2015 Share #9 Â Posted November 21, 2015 Isn't the Pre-FLE ASPH essentially the same optical computation as the FLE but without the floating element construction? Â Can they render that differently? Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Leicaiste Posted November 21, 2015 Share #10  Posted November 21, 2015 On the SL they should work equally well.  Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
EoinC Posted November 21, 2015 Share #11  Posted November 21, 2015 I have the FLE. It is a nice lens, although I haven't used the earlier versions, so cannot compare...  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! 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/253287-35mm-lux-aph-vs-lux-fle/?do=findComment&comment=2933713'>More sharing options...
microview Posted November 21, 2015 Share #12  Posted November 21, 2015 I recently swapped the highly rated Zeiss 35 1.4 for a Leica Summilux FLE. I think the resolution and colour (M240) are amazing! 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! 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/253287-35mm-lux-aph-vs-lux-fle/?do=findComment&comment=2934136'>More sharing options...
tatetate Posted November 22, 2015 Author Share #13 Â Posted November 22, 2015 Nice!! How did you compare Zeiss with FLE? Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
tatetate Posted November 22, 2015 Author Share #14 Â Posted November 22, 2015 I had considered Zeiss As well, But recent drop in prices makes it reasonable to go for FLE! Still big price gap however alot lower then paying 3500 gbp for new FLE! Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
microview Posted November 22, 2015 Share #15  Posted November 22, 2015 Nice!! How did you compare Zeiss with FLE? Image quality? Almost indistinguishable, possibly slightly in favour of the Zeiss (not sure). But too heavy, and some blockage of viewfinder. It was the availability of a virtually unused silver FLE sample, Aperture London, that prompted the switch! Very pleased with the outcome. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Carduelis Posted November 22, 2015 Share #16  Posted November 22, 2015 From what I have read, I believe the Zeiss 35 1.4 is the best lens in terms of edge to edge sharpness and not having the field curvature that the 35 mm ASPH Summiluxes have.  I think if you are really into landscape photography and do not mind the size of the lens, I think the Zeiss might be the best bet.  I personally own a used later coded version of the  35 mm ASPH Summilux pre-FLE lens and am happy with it.  I really like the rendering of the lens and tend to shoot it at f8 for landscapes/buildings  where the depth of field offsets any semblance of field curvature.  I think the lens is sufficiently sharp edge to edge particularly when stopped down; I have been happy with the centre sharpness and quality of the bokeh when used wide open for portraiture where I always use the EVF on the M240 to avoid the focus shift this lens is noted for.  By all accounts, I believe the FLE version is a touch sharper particularly at closer distances when compared to the pre-FLE version.   For further comparisons, it may be worth having a read of the PCMag web-site where there are reviews of the various 35 mm Zeiss and Leica M lenses.  Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
tatetate Posted November 22, 2015 Author Share #17  Posted November 22, 2015 Image quality? Almost indistinguishable, possibly slightly in favour of the Zeiss (not sure). But too heavy, and some blockage of viewfinder. It was the availability of a virtually unused silver FLE sample, Aperture London, that prompted the switch! Very pleased with the outcome. Aperture is awsome! Always buy used equipment from them!! Do you have any pictures to share? Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
microview Posted November 23, 2015 Share #18 Â Posted November 23, 2015 Aperture is awsome! Always buy used equipment from them!! Do you have any pictures to share? post no 12 above! And see below. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
microview Posted November 23, 2015 Share #19  Posted November 23, 2015 Trying the FLE at Aperture last June. 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! 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/253287-35mm-lux-aph-vs-lux-fle/?do=findComment&comment=2935233'>More sharing options...
gberger Posted November 24, 2015 Share #20 Â Posted November 24, 2015 FWIW: I owned the pre FLE version; however, the focus shift really showed up on transparency projection. Sold it, bought the Zeiss 1.4 Distagon. Yes, the Zeiss in heavier, and does block more of the viewfinder, but I'm completely satisfied with it. Â (I shoot transparencies 90+% of the time) Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Archived
This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.