35 Summilux Pre-ASPH vs 35 Summicron Pre-ASPH vs 35 Summicron ASPH (2016 edition)

[Ernstk]

Advertisement (gone after registration)

19 minutes ago, lct said:

I could not disagree more sorry. It is never because of it and always because of us. Lenses like the Summilux has been used by the best photographers. It deserves to be respected and used as such. There is a learning curve with lenses like this. If you find it too difficult to avoid flare you may wish to use an EVF... or try another lens .

I couldn't agree with you more. It's not the lens, it's the photographer. My feeling is that if you obsess over a lens, you're less likely to be focussed (no pun) on the resulting photo.  

Ernst

[Jul]

38 minutes ago, Steven said:

Yes, because of it. 

Tonight, for example, I wanted to take a photo of a bench next to a lamppost. I had to adjust my position and give up on what I though was the best composition in order to avoid flare. Unless I'm missing something, I missed a shot I wanted because of it. A shot I could have easily gotten with my Pre Fle, or even my Nokton. 

The lens gives, but not unconditionally. First impression of course. 

I see two possible scenarios:

- lamp was in the frame, flare depends on lens' susceptibility to it.

- lamp was just around the frame, you were using liveview, one hand not pressing the shutter, the lens is tiny enough to let you hold the body with just one hand and the bench was hardly a moving target. I guess with cautious movement from your second hand it could have been possible to shelter the front element from straylight, liveview helping you to check that the second hand does not appear in the frame.

Now, in retrospect, if you were in the second scenario, was it because of the lens? Of course, if you were in the first scenario, just ignore this post.

[DezFoto]

41 minutes ago, lct said:

I could not disagree more sorry. It is never because of it and always because of us. Lenses like the Summilux has been used by the best photographers. It deserves to be respected and used as such. There is a learning curve with lenses like this. If you find it too difficult to avoid flare you may wish to use an EVF... or try another lens .

I've never understood positions like this, no lens is perfect and just because a lens is expensive or has been used by a famous photographer, doesn't mean that it's beyond reproach or is ideal for us mere mortal photographers. I have several Leica lenses that have a hard time controlling flair, especially the older designs. Leica has never been able to match Zeiss when it comes to lens coatings and sometimes it's just not worth sacrificing your composition because of a lens that can't control flair effectively.

As a photographer, it's better to use equipment that allows you to work the way you want to, rather than having to conform your photography to the way the equipment requires you to work. Remember, it's you that's creating art, not the camera/lens. 

Edited February 3, 2021 by DezFoto

[lct]

14 minutes ago, DezFoto said:

I've never understood positions like this, no lens is perfect and just because a lens is expensive or has been used by a famous photographer, doesn't mean that it's beyond reproach or is ideal for us mere mortal photographers. I have several Leica lenses that have a hard time controlling flair, especially the older designs. Leica has never been able to match Zeiss when it comes to lens coatings and sometimes it's just not worth sacrificing your composition because of a lens that can't control flair effectively.

As a photographer, it's better to use equipment that allows you to work the way you want to, rather than having to conform your photography to the way the equipment requires you to work. Remember, it's you that's creating art, not the camera/lens. 

I did not say a single word about expensive lenses. I just said, or tried to say, that when a pic is not good the lens is never the culprit, it is always the photographer.

[Mr.Prime]

2 minutes ago, lct said:

I did not say a single word about expensive lenses. I just said, or tried to say, that when a pic is not good the lens is never the culprit, it is always the photographer.

you speak for yourself! 😀

[lct]

1 minute ago, Mr.Prime said:

you speak for yourself! 😀

I would if i were a photographer.

[Ernstk]

Advertisement (gone after registration)

21 minutes ago, Steven said:

Scenario 2, and I actually tried to block the light with my hand ! Didn't work...

With the Nokton, the flare would have been here, but in the form of a nice circular rainbow, that would have actually brought something nice to the photo. On the pre asph lux, it looked more like vaseline than rainbows. 

You obviously want to make this lens work for you, that's clear from what you have posted. I'm guessing that since it's a v1 steel rim, it wouldn't have been a cheap lens.

Why don't you send it to someone reputable who can clean it and service it? It may just be that you've got haze or fungus inside the lens and that is making the flare much worse?

I mentioned that to you in an earlier post but you didn't reply.

It's got to be worth doing?

Ernst

[Mr.Prime]

3 hours ago, Steven said:

Isn't that the same for all lenses ? I can never see the patch in portrait orientation ! I focus in landscape, then rotate my camera. 

 

Not sure if the Lux pre asph will help in that regard, especially not an infinity lock one. 

 

Interesting, which one are you thinking about then ? I can think of two that ive tried that answer to that description. 

The viewfinder thing is independent of lens, it’s something related to where you position your eye.

Anyhow, not yet thinking about a particular alternative but I am finding out what are my ‘must have’, ‘must not have’ and desirables.

[Aryel]

Hi @Steven

Why not posting the samples that you think were great and the ones you feel were missed because of the lens? This way, anyone who has the same lens can tell you if this is normal behaviour. I don't have one so can't really help.

My naive 2 cents: if you have great shots and some that are wasted, it looks to me that you need to learn the lens. I have a 35pre-asph v2 since December, still trying to learn to anticipate what I will get when shot wide open (i am slow ☺️). Got great shots and bad ones (100% my responsibility).

Hope this helps a bit.

[Ecar]

Quick question: are you using it with the OLLUX hood attached? It helps quite a bit in my experience.

[Ecar]

15 minutes ago, Steven said:

Sometimes. 

I’ve been told that you own a very similar copy of my lens, maybe sold to you by a similar previous owner.... 

Maybe 😉. I had one many years ago, then sold it, missed it, and looked for another copy again a couple of years ago.

Seriously, it shouldn't flare THAT badly. TBH, I find the v2 more flare prone than the v1, which in turn has lower contrast. The hood helps, with both flare and contrast.

Also, I had mine CLA'd right after purchasing it (as I often do with vintage lenses): the glass may look clean but it can be a bit hazy and it's hard to see, the elements may have become ever so slightly misaligned over time, etc. It's worth a try if you want to make a definitive assessment.

[Ecar]

37 minutes ago, Steven said:

Just checked your portfolio. Excellent galleries 😍

Thanks - much appreciated.

Actually, I haven't updated it in a long time. Note to self: do something about it.

Edited February 4, 2021 by Ecar

[pedaes]

56 minutes ago, Steven said:

Leaving on a three weeks trip to Colombia, will do it for sure upon my return.

In the middle of a Pandemic!  Spread a little happiness!

[shirubadanieru]

5 hours ago, Steven said:

I’ve posted a few examples of the bad flare i am getting at night earlier in the thread. Ive had the lens for less than a week, this conversation is still just theoretical to me. I haven’t missed the shot of the year with it yet. I am just expressing that I am worried I could. 

 

Exactly my point. I usually expect from a great lens to work without compromise. I am not saying that I don’t want or shouldn’t learn the lens. Of course, the more you use a tool, the better you use it. That’s true for every tool and for every lens. I have some lenses that everyday i use better than the day before, but it doesn’t mean i have to adapt myself and sacrifice for the lens. 

My bench and lamppost example was futile. This morning, i found myself in a more tricky situation. I arrived in a train station in paris in the early hours of the morning. The hall was empty, and perfect for an architectural shot. I could not framed the shot like i wanted because of the position of the lights flaring too much into the lens. Yes, i could have moved, as other who say “you have to know your lens” said, but the point is that I DID NOT WANT TO MOVE. I wanted that precise composition. Anything else was not as good to me. But i had to sacrifice my shot, and adapt to the tool. 

I think it should be different. Look, I am not saying I don’t like the lens. I do. It renders beautifully when the planet align. But a lens to me should be a transparent tool. It shouldn’t be in the way of the photo and me. It shouldn’t have a word to say in my photo. And the pre Asph lux has so much character, as some say, that it speaks a little too much in my opinion. It’s getting involved in my composition process, when i would expect it to remain silent. 

I really hope i wont receive more comments saying it’s not the lens ‘ fault but mine. Because you would be missing the point. I will learn how to use it, and i will excel in using if needed. Nothing is my fault. I am not a bad photographer. It just sucks that i have to make sacrifices. 

I understand that argument in some situation, but not the one i am describing. I am not the kind to say “I missed this shot because of the lens, because it’s an F2 and i needed F1.4 for that shot”, or “this shot is ruined because the bokeh is too soft and i needed it to be harsher”, but when a lens can not technically follow with me, or with the shot i want to do, that’s a pity... and its the lens fault. Not mine. 

Thank you

Reading this I really feel you should not invest in vintage glass to be honest lol if you want a transparent rendering, just go with the ASPH cron, or Zeiss 35mm f2.8; it will give you the most sharp, contrasty and transparent look you can wish for. That being said, even modern lenses don’t give ‘transparent looks’ wide open so regardless of the lens you should close down if that’s what you’re looking for. 

My point being, the reason to buy a vintage (Leica or any other brand) lens is that you don’t want a transparent rendering, but you enjoy the uniqueness (ie imperfections) that those old lenses bring. Reading your text I really think you should focus on ASPH lenses and that’s it. 

35/50mm Summilux pre-asph, 35/50mm summicron v1, Summarit f1.5, Noctilux f1.2 / f1, Summilux 75mm, Sonnar f1.5, etc...all these lenses are famous and have their fans (and haters) because they are NOT transparent, and offer a unique rendering you can’t get with any other lens...so the reason you’re complaining about is the exact reason why people love the lens...therefore, again, just go with ASPH and the lens will do well whatever you want it to do, regardless of the light and aperture. 

[a.noctilux]

Like two people,

you are learning to know each other 😇.

The marriage can be or not, future will tell...

 

Nothing new really !

Perfection is boring.

This experience may be repeated infinitely.

For me maybe hundred (or thousands) times 🙃

Edited February 4, 2021 by a.noctilux

[shirubadanieru]

10 minutes ago, Steven said:

I’d rather not take photos than use the Cron ASPH.

Ahahah I do not like this lens at all either, but I’d probably still use it if someone gave it to me ahah but yes, I’m with you it’s probably my least favorite Leica lens of all time. That and the Summarits f2.5 / f2.4 which actually have great rendering which is much better than the Cron ASPH, but I just can’t deal with the super short focus throw. 

My bad then, I thought when you were saying transparent that you were referring to the lens rendering, that’s why I said you should use ASPH lenses, otherwise you’ll never be satisfied. I get what you mean now, but yeah in the end, and of course I wasn’t there with you to understand what you mean, but I’d never use a vintage lens (especially not the lux pre-asph) wide open to do an architecture shot unless I was specifically looking for a glowy building and to have flare in my image. I’d just stop it down to f4~f8 and be done with it. 
 

5 minutes ago, Steven said:

It’s so unpredictable that I’ll always need to check the back of the screen. With the Nokton, on the other hand, i trust the result. If there’s a flare, I’ll embrace it, because its flare is predictable. It’s always the same. 

You just need to use it more? It seems you’ve only had it for a couple of days and it’s one of the hardest lenses to master wide open...so either use wide open only in very limited situations and stick to f2 ~ f8 for the most part, or go completely the opposite way and shoot all sort of scenarios / lighting wide open for a couple of days, go home, and try to understand how the lens behaves in certain circumstances; this will hopefully help you trust and understand the lens. In the end, if it’s too glowy or still too unreliable for you, then I do think the V4 summicron would be a better choice. 

Edited February 4, 2021 by shirubadanieru

[a.noctilux]

Steven, you are taking it right,

with SL2S VF you can see the "flaws" in real time.

Avoiding or including must be easier than M10's OVF.

[a.noctilux]

As I wrote so often, there is no "better choice" (for what comparing to ?).

Steven, space for your good looking 35 IV can be anywhere in your house or your bag when you go out ...

 

Side note (for myself !),

I must count my 35mm lenses, I don't even know how many I have now.

Those numbers changed often ...

Edited February 4, 2021 by a.noctilux

[otto.f]

On 1/27/2016 at 7:55 PM, jmui852 said:

, I feel like the 3 Pre-ASPH lens may be a better compliment as it is softer / has more of a leica glow (since my 50mm APO and the 28mm Elmarit are both bitingly sharp)?

You’re right, go for it. I wouldn’t call it soft, just natural sharpness, as a opposed to modern lenses in digital cameras which show sharper images than you’ll ever see with your on eyes in reality. If you want to use the lens for film, it’s a different thing. 

[Advertisement]

Hallo,

Look here: Leica M

[evikne]

7 minutes ago, Steven said:

- The Steel Rim when i need a compact lens and it’s day time

- The Nokton when i need a compact less and it’s night time

- The pre fle when size is not an issue and I need a reliable, full of precision and character, Swiss army lens, regardless of wether its day time or night time. 

Sounds reasonable. I thought to suggest something like this.