JohnBrawley Posted September 19, 2016 Share #1 Posted September 19, 2016 (edited) Advertisement (gone after registration) Hi, I'd love to hear some thoughts from those with experice of the 35mm lenses. I have the M-E, the M8.2, an M7 and M3 body. I have the 50mm Summicron APO and the regular current 50mm Summicron (type V), along with a 75mm Summarit and the 28mm Summicron. I also have a 35mm Summicron, serial number #2741016 (which it think means it's a MK3 ?) Now I've loved every single one of my M lenses as I've taken them up, but I just can't come at this lens. Especially with the digital cameras it just doesn't look very nice at all the way my other lenses do. I shoot a lot of vintage optics in my other career as a DP so I feel like I know what I'm getting in for when I use older optics on newer cameras but the 35mm always feels a bit mushy and plasticy to me in the image. Normally I love the imperfections of older lenses. I can't work out what I'm not liking this one and I'm hoping some of you can give me some insights. Maybe I just prefer the more modern and sharper aspheric and newer lenses on the Leica ? Is the Type 4 that much different ? I'd love for any opinions about other 35mm lenses. I don't have to stck t the summicron either, I just rarely have the need for 1.4, but I do get a very different less "special" feel with this lens.... I wish I could explain it better than this ! Let me try in photos... I really love the 50mm APO, it has a stunning precision and subtlety. I find you really have to nail the focus or it just won't "work" but when you do it's very lovely. https://www.flickr.com/photos/johnbrawley/17840295460/ https://www.flickr.com/photos/johnbrawley/18024460162/ https://www.flickr.com/photos/johnbrawley/17407229883/ Even the 50mm type V is very good https://www.flickr.com/photos/johnbrawley/14903366460/ The 75mm Summarit sings and is super sharp... https://www.flickr.com/photos/johnbrawley/15220863362/ https://www.flickr.com/photos/johnbrawley/15190038400/ The 28mm has served me very well too https://www.flickr.com/photos/johnbrawley/11559039323/ https://www.flickr.com/photos/johnbrawley/12857052945/ https://www.flickr.com/photos/johnbrawley/15190137438/ And here are some of my 35mm. In the first shot I really don't love the kind of blooming happening with his hands and fingers in the foreground. His skin tone around his face kinds of smushes together... https://www.flickr.com/photos/johnbrawley/29709996986/ https://www.flickr.com/photos/johnbrawley/29663811271/ https://www.flickr.com/photos/johnbrawley/29710000266 Thanks for your time ! JB Edited September 19, 2016 by JohnBrawley 1 Quote Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Advertisement Posted September 19, 2016 Posted September 19, 2016 Hi JohnBrawley, Take a look here Not as happy with the 35mm as I thought I would be....Suggestions?. I'm sure you'll find what you were looking for!
NB23 Posted September 19, 2016 Share #2 Posted September 19, 2016 The 3 shots are in very difficult light. My first thought was that I found them very good, didn't see flaws. My second thought was: those said flaws could be converted to the magical Leica uniqueness. You only need to hang out more around here for the leica grandness to take effect. I'm not sure the V4 is better than what you're showing. The cron asph would be a good fit with you, I'm sure. Quote Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
michaelwj Posted September 19, 2016 Share #3 Posted September 19, 2016 My take is that its not the lens but the focal length. Your 35mm shots are too stand off-ish to be compelling for me. You get nice and close with the 28mm and those shots are good, and the longer focal lengths are working well too. It's almost like you are treating the 35 like a wid-ish 50mm, try treating like a tight 28mm and see how you go? Just my 2c. 1 Quote Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
luigi bertolotti Posted September 19, 2016 Share #4 Posted September 19, 2016 Nothing bad with the lens... picture 2 and 3 do demonstrate that it performs right like an old Summicron must do... . Anyway... I think you should appreciate a lot the Summicron 35 asph... personally, for me has been like this (and my Summicron 35 "unasph" was even older than yours... a "1st version - 8 elements"). Quote Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
LocalHero1953 Posted September 19, 2016 Share #5 Posted September 19, 2016 My take is that its not the lens but the focal length. Your 35mm shots are too stand off-ish to be compelling for me. You get nice and close with the 28mm and those shots are good, and the longer focal lengths are working well too. It's almost like you are treating the 35 like a wid-ish 50mm, try treating like a tight 28mm and see how you go? Just my 2c. +1 I don't see a problem with the lens, just how you use it. I think it's a matter of persistence until you find the right distance/context/ direction. I have had a similar problem with 50mm for years (decades) and it has only started to gel when I forced myself to go out with just the apo50 as one lens. Quote Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
lct Posted September 19, 2016 Share #6 Posted September 19, 2016 Seems like you're after a more modern IQ than that of your 35/2 v3. You won't see a significant difference with 35/2 v4 IMO so you should try a Summicron 35/2 asph as suggested previously, or the current Summilux 35/1.4 asph which is slightly sharper at f/2. Beware that both OoF renditions are more contrasty though, especially that of the Summilux around f/2.8. Quote Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
wattsy Posted September 19, 2016 Share #7 Posted September 19, 2016 (edited) Advertisement (gone after registration) I don't see anything especially egregious in the 35mm photographs you have posted though I possibly see where you are coming from in that those examples possibly lack some of the 'mojo' present in some of the others. Interesting to see how much flare there is in your third 50 APO photograph https://www.flickr.com/photos/johnbrawley/17407229883/ (albeit quite an attractive effect). If you are keen to pursue other 35mm options, you might want to consider either of the ASPH Summiluxes. Edited September 19, 2016 by wattsy Quote Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
tobey bilek Posted September 19, 2016 Share #8 Posted September 19, 2016 (edited) Rent a 35 2.0 ASPH. or 1.4 FLE. Your pics are not terrible, but the age of the V3 does show. The overexposed backgrounds do not help matters. Edited September 19, 2016 by tobey bilek Quote Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
jaapv Posted September 19, 2016 Share #9 Posted September 19, 2016 It might be that you want more of a contrasty, sharp look.Give the Zeiss Biogon C 35 a try. 3 Quote Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Belle123 Posted September 19, 2016 Share #10 Posted September 19, 2016 All your 35mm shots were in poor light conditions whereas the others were much better due to the light. I would compare by taking same shots, same conditions, between lenses.... the same F stops and timing, etc. But there will be differences and you may just prefer the sharpness of the more modern lenses. Quote Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
JohnBrawley Posted September 19, 2016 Author Share #11 Posted September 19, 2016 (edited) Hi, Thanks for the feedback to all. Here's a couple more 35mm shots that are both "closer" and with less hot backgrounds. https://www.flickr.com/photos/johnbrawley/29120637023/in/album-72157674003770215/ This one especially is again, a problem in terms of the tonal range in her skin. https://www.flickr.com/photos/johnbrawley/29663827981/in/album-72157674003770215/ https://www.flickr.com/photos/johnbrawley/29633804862/in/album-72157674003770215/ I guess the other thing is that the light quality will always vary, the examples I selected were more to highlight the differences. The previous examples from other M lenses are on both good and difficult light (for me anyway) JB Edited September 19, 2016 by JohnBrawley Quote Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
spydrxx Posted September 19, 2016 Share #12 Posted September 19, 2016 35 has always been my favorite overall lens, but I think it requires some practice to feel comfortable using it especially in the type of shots you have illustrated. And honestly, if you aren't satisfied with what you are getting from the 35, maybe that FL isn't your cup of tea, and you can achieve more desirable results with the 28 with less angst, and get rid of the 35. Nothing says we need to be a master of all tools out there. Quote Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
lct Posted September 19, 2016 Share #13 Posted September 19, 2016 [...] This one especially is again, a problem in terms of the tonal range in her skin.[...] Just looks overexposed to me but a modern lens won't help you against that. Unless you shoot only jpegs i would keep my 35/2 v4 and play a bit with a good raw converter. Quote Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
jip Posted September 19, 2016 Share #14 Posted September 19, 2016 Hey there John, I just think that it's not up to par with your other lenses. It's an older lens and it shows. If you'd repace it with a Summicron ASPH. or one of the newer Summarit lenses it will really feel more in line with the look of your other lenses. Love your portrait shots though, amazing stuff. Quote Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
dpitt Posted September 19, 2016 Share #15 Posted September 19, 2016 (edited) Seems like you're after a more modern IQ than that of your 35/2 v3. You won't see a significant difference with 35/2 v4 IMO so you should try a Summicron 35/2 asph as suggested previously, or the current Summilux 35/1.4 asph which is slightly sharper at f/2. Beware that both OoF renditions are more contrasty though, especially that of the Summilux around f/2.8.+1 Your 35 summicron is from 1975, which is at least 20 years older than your 50 Summicron V and 35 years difference with your current lenses. That is a huge difference in lens design. In the older lenses design was optimised for sharpness, more than contrast, and they all need more aggressive application of contrast and clarity in Lightroom to approach the newer lenses. I can not tell from the results you get with your 35mm, but it is of an age that could benefit from a CLA, one maintenance service in 40 years is not too much... At that age it is even rare to see lenses that are completely up to specs. Edited September 19, 2016 by dpitt Quote Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
NB23 Posted September 19, 2016 Share #16 Posted September 19, 2016 In order to save the 35 cron V3 from too much criticism, and in an attempt to save Leica's face, I suggest that from now on we call it "The Gentle King". That would ensure a new cult following and keep up with the Leica bon ton. 2 Quote Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
JohnBrawley Posted September 19, 2016 Author Share #17 Posted September 19, 2016 Just looks overexposed to me but a modern lens won't help you against that. Unless you shoot only jpegs i would keep my 35/2 v4 and play a bit with a good raw converter. Hi. I was attributing that comment to the very first image I posted in that post. I use C1 and always shoot RAW. JB. 2 Quote Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
JohnBrawley Posted September 19, 2016 Author Share #18 Posted September 19, 2016 (edited) Thanks for the responses. I do think it maybe its just I prefer the more modern lenses, it's just that being Australian based its harder for me to try one out. I don't mind the current 35 on the film M's so it must just be my taste with the digital ones. JB. Edited September 19, 2016 by JohnBrawley Quote Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Mikeleica Posted September 20, 2016 Share #19 Posted September 20, 2016 (edited) Interesting I guess. Dunno what to say man, I really like my Leica 35's, both my 35mm 1.4 FLE and the V4 35 Summicron, both have great reasons to be on my camera. Hell, I guess I like em' all too come to think of it, 28, 35's and the fiddy. I'd post more but I am kinda respectful of my family and friend's privacy, don't dig the whole internet free-for-all show off stuff. But here's one from the 35mm F2 V4 from over the weekend wide open on the M240, guess my fiancé would not be too mad since she is wearing her new sunglasses, hehe. 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 September 20, 2016 by Mikeleica Quote 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/264693-not-as-happy-with-the-35mm-as-i-thought-i-would-besuggestions/?do=findComment&comment=3115540'>More sharing options...
NB23 Posted September 20, 2016 Share #20 Posted September 20, 2016 Mikeleica, that was way off topic. This is about the 35 Version 3. 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.