Rick Posted January 19, 2016 Share #41 Posted January 19, 2016 Advertisement (gone after registration) Okay, but we’re talking about a niche of a niche. Poor Zeiss. Relegated to making niche lenses. 2 Quote Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Advertisement Posted January 19, 2016 Posted January 19, 2016 Hi Rick, Take a look here New summicron asph 35mm. How and why did they improve the current one?. I'm sure you'll find what you were looking for!
Paulus Posted January 19, 2016 Author Share #42 Posted January 19, 2016 Hmmm....sorry, but here is the poll (not started by me!) which exactly focuses on this. The poll started today, check out the results.....clearly says that many use Leica and M lenses on alternative mirrorless cameras. Good for Leica I believe - a new market which they might have already recognized. http://www.fredmiranda.com/forum/topic/1408846 I can't answer this poll. I don't use leica lenses on a mirrorles camera , only on a Leica M. This group is excluded. Doesn't that give this poll a non valid argument in this thread? 2 Quote Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
lct Posted January 19, 2016 Share #43 Posted January 19, 2016 It's a poll for mirrorless users seemingly. I would have voted "i use rangefinder lenses on my mirrorless camera, but i also own a digital rangefinder" if i knew how to vote but i'm not clever enough for that... Quote Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
jaapv Posted January 19, 2016 Share #44 Posted January 19, 2016 I think the last question applies to most of us. Quote Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
BjarniM Posted January 19, 2016 Share #45 Posted January 19, 2016 Gaffer tape would be an option though! Could be, but not for me. Quote Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
BjarniM Posted January 20, 2016 Share #46 Posted January 20, 2016 Do you know if anyone has done a side by side comparison between the new ASPH and the previous ASPH? Quote Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
microview Posted January 20, 2016 Share #47 Posted January 20, 2016 Advertisement (gone after registration) I don't think it's released until February. Quote Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
BjarniM Posted January 20, 2016 Share #48 Posted January 20, 2016 (edited) I don't think it's released until February. Yes, i know. I was asking because i think i've been reading somewhere about people testing equipment before it's released. Or maybe that's 'only' for cameras? Edited January 20, 2016 by BjarniM Quote Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
semi-ambivalent Posted January 20, 2016 Share #49 Posted January 20, 2016 Yes, i know. I was asking because i think i've been reading somewhere about people testing equipment before it's released. Or maybe that's 'only' for cameras? I'm sure the usual suspects will be seeded, perhaps with an NDA. s-a Quote Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
paulsydaus Posted January 24, 2016 Share #50 Posted January 24, 2016 Sorry if this question has already been answered, but does the new 35/2 share the same optical design as the old version with regard to the number of lenses/groups etc? I understand the shape/number of aperture blades is different? Are there any other differences? Quote Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Hayek Posted January 24, 2016 Share #51 Posted January 24, 2016 Several months back, there was a thread referring to a quote from Leica that they might reference older designs in new lenses. This may be one of those instances, preserving the characteristics, perhaps even the fundamental design of the known quantities but eliminating the issues that compromised performance on digital. Quote Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
michali Posted January 24, 2016 Share #52 Posted January 24, 2016 (edited) "New summicron asph 35mm. How and why did they improve the current one?" In my experience there's is plenty of room for improvement on the current lens. I went through 3 brand new versions of the 35mm Summicron. I returned each one of them for various reasons, ranging from back focusing, to poor construction- rattling and loose elements. FWIW also had similar construction issues with a brand new out the box 75mm Summicron a few years ago, and also recently sold my 35mm f1.4 Summilux ASPH (2010 vers.), the lens barrel at the aperture ring kept coming loose. I've never had any of these issues with any of my Zeiss lenses. Finally gave up on the 35mm Summicron and went back to my 35mm f2.5 Summarit. Edited January 24, 2016 by michali Quote Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
maralatho Posted January 24, 2016 Share #53 Posted January 24, 2016 Poor Zeiss. Relegated to making niche lenses. Nice straw man argument posed for no reason whatsoever. Quote Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Jeff S Posted January 25, 2016 Share #54 Posted January 25, 2016 Apparently Mr. Puts is not impressed with the recently announced M lenses (and many other things).... http://www.imx.nl/phot/files/c00b8df660bd93e87f4209-25.html Jeff 3 Quote Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Hayek Posted January 25, 2016 Share #55 Posted January 25, 2016 Thanks for that link, Jeff. All falls in line with the pattern set by the 28 Summilux; somewhat better on the SL than the M240 and so with these three marginally refreshed wides, they're easy fillers until the AF's are ready. Speculation, but the 35 will probably resolve the focus shift issue many report on digital M. Hard to see how the 28 Elmarit ASPH can be improved upon In the same blog entry, Puts addresses the high MP pressures on Leica. My reason for not jumping from a 12 to 36MP Nikon was that I don't care to shoot with tripods. Absent new pixel-shifting technology or IBIS, a 40 or 50 or 75MP 'M' doesn't make a whole lot of sense to me for the same reason. Might be meaningful for a studio-bound S or SL, though. The MM1 that I presently have punches well above its 18MP and sensor resolution is not one of the issues I have with it.. Quote Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
microview Posted January 25, 2016 Share #56 Posted January 25, 2016 Apparently Mr. Puts is not impressed with the recently announced M lenses (and many other things).... http://www.imx.nl/photo/blog/files/440d3fe8c00b8df660bd93e87f4209-25.html Jeff A well argued and interesting piece I thought Quote Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
jaapv Posted January 25, 2016 Share #57 Posted January 25, 2016 "New summicron asph 35mm. How and why did they improve the current one?" In my experience there's is plenty of room for improvement on the current lens. I went through 3 brand new versions of the 35mm Summicron. I returned each one of them for various reasons, ranging from back focusing, to poor construction- rattling and loose elements. FWIW also had similar construction issues with a brand new out the box 75mm Summicron a few years ago, and also recently sold my 35mm f1.4 Summilux ASPH (2010 vers.), the lens barrel at the aperture ring kept coming loose. I've never had any of these issues with any of my Zeiss lenses. Finally gave up on the 35mm Summicron and went back to my 35mm f2.5 Summarit. Well, my 21 mm ZM developed a loose lens element which was a pain, as the elements are screwed in and shimmed individually. Quote Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
michali Posted January 25, 2016 Share #58 Posted January 25, 2016 Jaap, Please, I think we're both a bit too long in the tooth to become involved in one of these: http://www.urbandictionary.com/define.php?term=pissing+contest The point I'm making and which you don't seem to get, is that given the high cost of Leica lenses, my own "painful" experience tells me that there's plenty of room for improvement in their quality control. There are no excuses. Best, 2 Quote Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
skinnfell Posted January 26, 2016 Share #59 Posted January 26, 2016 (edited) I have been a heavy user of this lens for the last year and a half (like 10K frames on my monochrom with it). Compared to the (Current) summicron 28 It has got slightly less microcontrast and slighly more flare, and a slight dip in sharpness in the extreme corners. On the other hand, it is very uniform in its character - no distortion and vignetting to speak of, and the sharpness is uniform across almost the entire frame. (All of which plagues the 28). And this, to me means more than the utmost extreme sharpness. Sharpness is good to have, but the whole matters more. All in all the 35/2 has a very pleasing, relaxed look. It is also in my opinion the best handling of all M lenses. Not too small, not too large, fast and precise focusing, etc. I can not say I will not upgrade, but the improvements better be significant. That said, the price hike is just a minor one so I suspect the improvements are minor as well, kind of like when they "improved" the summarit from f/2,5 to f/2.4. Edited January 26, 2016 by skinnfell 3 Quote Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
lincoln_m Posted January 27, 2016 Share #60 Posted January 27, 2016 If the "new data sheet" is accurate then I agree with Mr Putts that the optics are identical from the MTF graph. The plots are identical. But the lens housing has been changed and the number of aperture blades changed. I notice that the data sheet in UK/Europe is still the old 35F2ASPH judging by the date. The silver version is now much lighter because it's aluminium (instead of brass) but can hold the silver paint without flaking off. They used heavier brass for the chrome lenses before. The body has changed to allow the screw-in hood instead of the old clip on hood. The chrome 50 Nocti and 35 summilux are already sporting the lighter casings, I expect the new body on the 35 summicron will also follow this trend. New screw-in hood, new Lens body, extra aperture blades, same optics. It's possible they do have new optics but they don't have the MTF yet and they might slip it into the data sheet later. But they are still showing the 35F2.5 data sheet (in Europe) when it should be the F2.4 version. These inconsistencies in the data sheets posted make it difficult to speculate on what will actually be delivered in February. Regards, Lincoln 2 Quote Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Join the conversation
You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.
Note: Your post will require moderator approval before it will be visible.