Jump to content

35mm Summicron v1 vs. 35mm Summilux Pre-Asph


cannonballjoe

Recommended Posts

Advertisement (gone after registration)

8 hours ago, Leon Berg said:

Thanks for your post.

I think of keeping both as an investment .. but on the long run, I want to sell one of them. Rule is to have one only. :) 

is the rendering similar? Everyone says the 8 elements is special for black and white. Is that correct?

Both work equally well for black and white I’d say…from f2.8 they look the same to be honest. 

The 8e glows at f2 and is fairly soft, the lux glows a LOT at f1.4 and is very soft. These soft / glowy rendering look amazing on black and white. From a bokeh perspective, both lenses have beautiful bokeh, but they are quite different from each other. The 1.4 is a bit dreamier here, but because the 8e can focus closer, that’s also an advantage. What I can say is that both lenses have much more  bokeh/subject separation than you’d think a 35mm lens could have. I’m very happy using both for portraits. 

By the way, the summaron mentioned above feels like a very different lens from these too. It is much sharper, even wide open, and it does not have a very unique signature compared with the other two. That’s the benefit of building a lens that is not stretched beyond f2.8. But if you want that unique rendering wide open, definitely go for the 8e or lux. 

Link to post
Share on other sites

vor 25 Minuten schrieb TomB_tx:

I have a Summicron 8-element M3 type with goggles, and a Summaron 2.8 M2 version (no goggles). I had the Summicron serviced by DAG to CLA and adjust the goggles, and it improved the viewfinder image, but still not as good as a version without goggles. I also prefer the rendering of the 2.8 Summaron, as it has higher contrast and just seems "snappier". I use both on film bodies, and prefer the 2.5 Summarit on digital.

Thank you Tom! 🤘🏽♥️

Link to post
Share on other sites

vor 1 Minute schrieb shirubadanieru:

Both work equally well for black and white I’d say…from f2.8 they look the same to be honest. 

The 8e glows at f2 and is fairly soft, the lux glows a LOT at f1.4 and is very soft. These soft / glowy rendering look amazing on black and white. From a bokeh perspective, both lenses have beautiful bokeh, but they are quite different from each other. The 1.4 is a bit dreamier here, but because the 8e can focus closer, that’s also an advantage. What I can say is that both lenses have much more  bokeh/subject separation than you’d think a 35mm lens could have. I’m very happy using both for portraits. 

By the way, the summaron mentioned above feels like a very different lens from these too. It is much sharper, even wide open, and it does not have a very unique signature compared with the other two. That’s the benefit of building a lens that is not stretched beyond f2.8. But if you want that unique rendering wide open, definitely go for the 8e or lux. 

Perfect, thank you a lot for your post. 

Link to post
Share on other sites

On 12/26/2021 at 7:42 AM, Leon Berg said:

Why? More details in the shadows, bit more contrast at around @f2.0-4.0

I own two 35mm Summilux v2 (Germany and Canada) and a 35mm Summicron 8E (Germany/No goggle,) and I shoot with them a lot. I found that, opposite to your statement, from F2, the Summilux is more contrasty--way more contrasty. That's why the 8E may be able to retain more details in the shadows, but the tradeoff is that the 8E glows at large apertures, and the contrast is pretty low.

I, too, have a soft spot for lovely vintage rendering, and both lenses have something to offer. For rendering alone, I would prefer the Summilux because it offers "unique" glow @f/1.4 and I found that it renders with the most accurate color compared to all other lenses I have, but for versatility, I would pick the 8E. (I use filters, and 0.7m close focus is better than 1m.) 

The below image is shot with 35mm Summicron 8E @f/2. If you look at the bulbs, you will see that the highlight seeps into the dark background. It looks pretty vintage, though.

Link to post
Share on other sites

I had both lenses for quite some time.

The pre-asph Lux was a Titanium one. It was very soft at 1.4 and glowed a lot, however at f2 it was very sharp, comparable to by FLE. From 2.8 onwards it had, however, a small focus-shift and at 2.8 and 4 it was slightly less sharp than at f2. My copy was perfectly calibrated. Contrast was much higher than the 8 elements, but colours were rendered very accurately.

The 8 elements is softer than the pre-asph Lux at f2, with some glow, but very usable wide-open. I feel that for portraits it gives them a nice vintage feeling, but significantly sharper than the pre-asph Lux wide open. From 2.8 onwards it is much sharper than the pre-asph Lux and shows absolutely no focus-shift. Colours have a lower saturation maybe due to the fact that contrast is quite low. The fact that this lens can show up shadow detail that others can't is very much true and is a consequence of the combination of high-resolution and low-contrast, a feature it shares with the Type 2 Rigid Summicron from the same era. I feel that these low-contrast/high-resolution lenses shine particularly on digital sensors and B&W film. For colour film, higher contrast lenses give nicer results. 

The fact that the Summicron could be focused at 70 cm and could use a screw-on filter (I use my lenses without a hood) sealed the deal for me.

Link to post
Share on other sites

Thank you all for contributing so wonderfully and helping me decide. I’m not rich, but crazy enough to have ordered the two lenses for a reasonable price and spoke to the dealers, and they’re ok if I return them. I shot a side-by-side With the so called king and the Lux . What should I say, the Lux (that I already had) I like more. It was on black-and-white film, though and I haven’t tried the summicron on color film yet. I am sure you can justify to own all of them, but since the lux can handle both color and black-and-white, and the eight element version is not only a great lens to own and shoot, but also to have as an investment, I think I am going for those two, provided that it gives me what I believe I want :) 

I could also just keep the one lens I own, that I learned here .. What is crazy, I shot a black and white roll a couple of days ago during Christmas of my family, apologies, but I don’t want to share those particular ones in the forum, and what should I say, I am blown away by the lens, that I already had :) 

Since these lenses are going up in value or will hold their value, I am not afraid to owning them all right now and then decide. 
Lux will stay. 

Link to post
Share on other sites

Advertisement (gone after registration)

I had owned and used most of the classic Leitz 35mm lenses and only kept the Summilux pre-FLE for general use and the pre-Asph for “magic time”. The pre-A has such a special look at 1.4 to 2.8 a modern lens can’t possibly replicate. Sounds like a cliche but if you like the clinical look I think most Leica lenses can be replaced by 3rd party lenses but some Leica glass are so unique if you want or need that look. The pre-A is notorious for flare wide open and some people say it’s crap when they shoot it in bright daylight. Under low light conditions the lens really sings. While the Summicron V1 is a good lens I don’t think it’s worth crazy money. I sold mine for a 21mm Summilux.

Link to post
Share on other sites

I wanted to share my experience with the 8 Elements. I have not yet developed a film, but the viewfinder google is ok for me.

Also the look on digital ist just WOW! Can’t wait to see the first roll of film with it! Highly motivated and in love. 

I bought it from Leica directly, it had CLA, it has some fine hair thick scratches but they’re not relevant (I hope) I think there is no perfect copy or would you send it back and try? The look is just insanely sixties and I love it. ☺️🤘🏽

Link to post
Share on other sites

On 12/27/2021 at 1:31 AM, Leon Berg said:

Thank you. 
yes, I will have to try and then decide.

Does the goggle make the viewfinder a bit foggy? I will buy one version from a dealer and try it out this week and then keep it or give it back.

are there significant differences in coating with different serial numbers? There is one starting with 17……. that had a CLA from Leica and one with 21…… that looks mint but wasn’t serviced. 
Same price.

also.. I have the summilux and bought a Made in Germany King of Bokeh to complement.. I just can’t justify keeping all three .. but could see myself having two :)

i habe the 50 rigid and V3. I think it’s the perfect combination for me for color and black and white.

I think Summilux plus „King“ would be a good combination.. but the 8 elements turns me on really bad 🤣

If you wanna get rid of our lux I can maybe help you : ) Feel free to drop me a message if so

Link to post
Share on other sites

Posted (edited)

Leon, you may be right for this king of nothing even if it's a very good lens on it's own.

You might try the "II/III" one day ? Well choosing "six element" !

They said to better the "I", when launched with 2 less elements.

 

Have a look at this NB23's thread for "II"

 

Edited by a.noctilux
Link to post
Share on other sites

Am 2.1.2022 um 18:38 schrieb a.noctilux:

Leon, you may be right for this king of nothing even if it's a very good lens on it's own.

You might try the "II/III" one day ? Well choosing "six element" !

They said to better the "I", when launched with 2 less elements.

 

Have a look at this NB23's thread for "II"

 

Thank you.

yes, the Cron II seems to be the least popular and not hyped yet; I’ve actually seen some for around 1200,- from private sellers (approaching 2k nowadays from dealers) and the V1 is around 3k from dealers, and sometimes 500-1000 cheaper from private sellers. That’s for the goggle version. 
I have used mine now for a couple of days and I am impressed by the build quality. 
it’s probably hype and the V2 doesn’t have certain problems with fog and certain used glues and separation. But the character of the images is amazing. And it’s a great investment, too. 
 

Link to post
Share on other sites

  • 2 weeks later...
  • 1 month later...
Posted (edited)
Am 14.5.2017 um 19:30 schrieb Stealth3kpl:

I felt my 35 Summilux was a good copy but my 35 Summicron type IV was sharper at f2. I sold the Summilux. 

Pete

They are same sharp

1st ist Cron V4, 2nd is Summilux , Both f2 1m on Monohcrome no adjustments

 

 

Edited by shinobi2012
Link to post
Share on other sites

  • 3 months later...
8 minutes ago, egrossman said:

Can an 8-element with goggles be converted to be used without the goggles by someone like DAG and focus correctly?

Thanks

Erik

From what I've read ("It's on the internet therefore it must be correct") the answer is No.

AFAIK the focussing helicoids (and cam profiles?) of the two lenses (goggled/non-goggled) are completely different which is why goggled versions are always SO much cheaper.

Philip.

Link to post
Share on other sites

Posted (edited)

Hello Everybody,

Philip is correct about the cams. At the time that the goggled 35mm lenses appeared the M3 was the camera that they were designed to be used on. Altho they are equally usable on any "M" camera that they can be mounted on. The angle of view thru an M3 range/viewfinder window covers the angle of capture of a 50mm lens & a little more. And an M3 rangefinder focuses to approximately 1 meter/3 feet.

When a person focuses a 35mm lens w/ goggles from Infinity to its closest setting, approximately 65 - 70 cm/26 -28 inches, the rangefinder cam on the lens is moving the ROLLER of the camera rangefinder from Infinity to approximately 1 meter/3 feet. The Wizards of Wetzlar devised the goggle equipped lenses to not only cover the expanded angle of a 35mm lens, approximately 64 degrees expanded from approximately 45 degrees. But to also DIFFERENTIALLY move the lens from Infinity to 65 - 70 cm/26 - 28 inches, while the rangefinder ROLLER is moving from Infinity to 1 meter/3 feet. Focusing from Infinity to 65 - 70 cm/26 - 28 inches is what the rangefinder patches in the range/viewfinder window show. And what the engravings on the lens indicate.

If a person removes the Wetzlar Wizard's Goggles from the lens, the ROLLER will still be measuring Infinity to 1 meter/3 feet, which is what will be indicated in the range/viewfinder window. While the lens, itself, is being extended to be in focus from Infinity to 65 - 70 cm/1 meter 3 feet.

Which means that EXCEPT WHEN THE LENS IS SET AT INFINITY there will be NO correlation between what distance the lens is extended to, as indicated on the lens barrel. And where the rangefinder PATCHES in the range/viewfinder window INDICATE the lens is focused to.

Best Regards,

Michael

 

Edited by Michael Geschlecht
Link to post
Share on other sites

Sorry, one more question: given these are vintage lenses, how soft are the lens coatings on later-model 35mm Summilux v2 coatings? I have one its way to me from 1991.

Thanks again,

Erik

Link to post
Share on other sites

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.

Guest
Reply to this topic...

×   Pasted as rich text.   Paste as plain text instead

  Only 75 emoji are allowed.

×   Your link has been automatically embedded.   Display as a link instead

×   Your previous content has been restored.   Clear editor

×   You cannot paste images directly. Upload or insert images from URL.

Loading...
×
×
  • Create New...