35mm Summilux pre-ASPH, calibrate or not?

[luigi bertolotti]

Advertisement (gone after registration)

I'm not convinced. Sorry. I had my 35mm Lux FLE lens calibrated and its tack across all apertures...

... Well... this demonstrates only that Leica is still smart in designing lenses : the FLE has been, as expected, a step over about the matter of focus shift

[lct]

Cliff, we discussed about the Summilux 35/1.4 pre-asph i.e. the grandfather (or grandmother) of your lens

Edit: You beat me to it Luigi

Edited April 2, 2017 by lct

[Frase]

Hi Frase,

 

In my opinion, focus shift is easier to detect if one keeps the focus fixed when changing the aperture. Anyway, with the helps of Luigi and lct I have already established that my lens behaves normal, but is calibrated to f/2.8 instead of f/1.4 which I first expected it to be.

 

Case closed from my side :-)

Well if you are happy thats cool, as for the lens being calibrated at F2.8 I'm not sure of that, seems a shame to have a F1.4 lens which only focuses properly at F2.8.

Having a shimmed my own lens to be spot on at F1.4/2 I've no idea how you would calibrate the lens at F2.8 since the lens has no noticeable focus shift, unless someone has done something to the rangefinder cam.

[adli]

Are we talking about the same lens?

 

Well if you are happy thats cool, as for the lens being calibrated at F2.8 I'm not sure of that, seems a shame to have a F1.4 lens which only focuses properly at F2.8.

Having a shimmed my own lens to be spot on at F1.4/2 I've no idea how you would calibrate the lens at F2.8 since the lens has no noticeable focus shift, unless someone has done something to the rangefinder cam.

[Cliff S]

Irrespective of which iteration of 35 Lux, if it's calibrated at 1.4 there's a good chance it will be sharp across all apertures.

 

Why would you accept 2.8 as the smallest aperture? Just send it in. You may be very surprised. And happy.

[adli]

The question is not what to have as smallest aperture, smallest aperture will always be f/1.4. The question is at what aperture should the lens be calibrated to be resonably sharp at all apertures. My initial thought was f/1.4 but I dse teh point that f/2.8 gives more flexibility. Calibrated at f/1.4 the shift will be much more protrude at smaller apertures.

 

Irrespective of which iteration of 35 Lux, if it's calibrated at 1.4 there's a good chance it will be sharp across all apertures.

Why would you accept 2.8 as the smallest aperture? Just send it in. You may be very surprised. And happy.

[lct]

Advertisement (gone after registration)

adli, for a calibrated lens at f/1.4 you could try a CV 35/1.4 but its focus shift is even more pronounced than that of the Summilux pre-asph, at least it is the case for my copy. 

cliff, a Summilux 35/1.4 pre-asph can perfectly be calibrated at f/1.4 but focus shift will look like that of the CV more or less. F/2.8 has been chosen by Leica in purpose i guess. This way focus shift is only visible around f/4-f/5.6 where it tends to be compensated by DoF whereas f/1.4 and f/2 look just a bit softer. Same problem for some non Leica lenses like ZM 50/1.5 for instance. Some of them are calibrated at f/2.8 whereas others (like mine) are calibrated at f/1.5. But then focus shift is well visible around f/2.8. There is no free lunch or the cost of the lunch is that of an EVF.

Edited April 2, 2017 by lct

[Frase]

The pre asph summilux should have virtually no focus shift as already said if the lens is set up at F1.4 every other aperture should be fine unless there is a fault with the rangefinder cam.

 

The 35mm summilux is famous for two things no focus shift and 1.4 glow. My copy is a well used one that has had a hard life and has no focus shift.

The other 35mm summiluxs are different they do suffer from focus shift (except I believe the newest version).

[adli]

Hi Frase,

 

I asume what you mean is that focus shift is within your tolerance levels. If you look at my initial post it illustrates clearly how focus varies on different apertures.

Edited April 3, 2017 by adli

[UliWer]

Older lenses are often calbrated to a smaller opening than maximal aperture. It was assumed that people used them more often with a "normal" aperture than wide open.

 

So if the 35mm Summilux shows inherent focus shift (I do not know whether the 35 Summilux has it, but I would suspect it has), it is not unusual that it will be better at f2.8 or f4 than f1.4.

 

My screw mount Summarit or the pre-FLE 35mm Summilux asph from film times showed this quite clearly. Zeiss says so frankly about the 1.5/50mm Sonnar.

 

Now usage - or trends - have changed, and users want max. sharpness with their lenses wide open. So they have to be calibrated differently. Leica CC did so without further notice with my Summilux asph when it was coded after I got the M8.

 

But - nobody can calibrate a lense that it will not show any focus shift - if this a "feature" of the lens design. It's mere physical optics and does not at all depend on chrome or black surface or any calibration vodoo.

[lct]

The pre asph summilux should have virtually no focus shift as already said if the lens is set up at F1.4 every other aperture should be fine unless there is a fault with the rangefinder cam. [...]

 

Sorry but the Summilux 35/1.4 pre-asph exhibits focus shift the same way as other legacy lenses like Summicron 35/2 v4 for instance. It is a lens issue which has nothing to do with the rangefinder. 

[friedeye]

I agree with Luigi - there's no focus shift in the pre-asph 35.  Wide open, there's a glow or bloom. That's what you're seeing.

 

You're also seeing some haze - which is very common for a lens that age.  My lux went in for a broken focus ring, and Leica did a full CLA, getting rid of most of my haze. I think my lens haze was close to yours.  I actually liked the look better before the cleaning; the glow was incredible wide open and disappeared when stopped down. Now I have some bloom, but not quite as much as I'd like.

 

So... I believe a calibration won't solve what you're seeing.  A CLA might.  But your pre-asph lux will never be clean looking razor sharp at 1.4 - and you should count that as a blessing.

[tobey bilek]

Try doing a focus bracket at close to MFD if that is where you want it calibrated.   If it is not sharp anywhere in the bracket,  recalibration will not help.   If it does improve, not the offset and see what it does to other distances and stops.

 

Not the worlds best lens anyway.

[Frase]

Sorry but the Summilux 35/1.4 pre-asph exhibits focus shift the same way as other legacy lenses like Summicron 35/2 v4 for instance. It is a lens issue which has nothing to do with the rangefinder.

 

Well I must be very lucky as I have both a summicron v4 and a summilux pre asph and neither have focus shift. Back to the original post that not just a little bit of focus shift that's a fault now if the op is happy with the lens that's fine but I wouldn't be.

[pico]

The lack of focus in your lens at 1.4 is due to inherent low-contrast, flare, or as another said, blooming.  As I wrote, it is just fine. I suspect that correcting the focus to be better at 1.4 In will change focus elsewhere.

 

Feel free to experiment by placing a tape shim on the lens' focus surface. It operates by extending/retracting. It does not rotate. There are copper tapes, adhesive on one side,  of 3mm width, thickness of 0.06mm ± 0.005mm if you wish to experiment.

[adli]

Shoot a roll to test some real life use with the camera I intend to use it on. Love the way this lens renders!

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!

[michaelwj]

Shoot a roll to test some real life use with the camera I intend to use it on. Love the way this lens renders!

Good to hear you've moved outside. The pre-asph 35/1.4 is my favourite (and currently only lens) but it definitely should not be pointed at a test chart! It's true beauty comes out when you take photos with people.

[pico]

I think Leica should consider re-introducing the original 35mm Summilux. Sure, Karbe might object, but Leica's history to make a 35mm Summilux does not necessarily mean an interruption of their technical progress. Leica can continue new lenses, and simultaneously continue their recognition of their lineage, the lens, the Summilux 35mm which made great images with characteristics that should continue as an option,  not be left behind. The 35mm Summilux was effectively two lenses. Wide open it tended to what some call a 'glow', and stopped down to F/2 it was a Summicron. Does Leica or any other maker offer the same? No!

--

Pico

Edited April 11, 2017 by pico

[michaelwj]

I think Leica should consider re-introducing the original 35mm Summilux. Sure, Karbe might object, but Leica's history to make a 35mm Summilux does not necessarily mean an interruption of their technical progress. Leica can continue new lenses, and simultaneously continue their recognition of their lineage, the lens, the Summilux 35mm which made great images with characteristics that should continue as an option, not be left behind. The 35mm Summilux was effectively two lenses. Wide open it tended to what some call a 'glow', and stopped down to F/2 it was a Summicron. Does Leica or any other maker offer the same? No!

--

Pico

Agreed. I'll start saving now so I can pre-order one as soon as it's announced!

Same optics, new coatings, and most importantly - 0.7m close focus. Without 0.7m close focus it's a non starter IMHO.

mmmmmmmm (is there a drooling emoji?)

Edited April 12, 2017 by michaelwj

[Advertisement]

Hallo,

Look here: Leica M

[Richard G]

And so they did.