Why the resurgence of Summilux 35mm ASPH (11873, pre FLE)?

[michaelwj]

Advertisement (gone after registration)

The resurgence of film is actually quite real.  Film sales have been growing steadily in every one of the last 3-4 years.  Kodak is bringing back films that were previously discontinued (eg. Ektachrome).  Ilford is now profitable as opposed to nearing bankrupt.  There are several specialty film labels that have sprung up.  And in big US cities labs are being started again (some with the help of Kodak).

 

Check the prices of used film gear and you will see a lot of items having doubled in price in the last two years, like my cherished little Contax T3.

 

The problem with film was never that there was no interest, but that the fear of being abandoned drove shooters away and the dumping of equipment on the used market.  Also, production of films used processes that were meant for tens of millions of rolls a year that was not economical when film became niche, but that is changing, too.  Film is now a viable business and I won't be surprised if manufacturers start making film equipment again in the next few years, albeit in niche rather than mass market quantities.

 

 

Sure, film is being used more than it was 5 years ago, so in that sense it is a resurgence.

But compared to the late 90's, it's not even a blip. Kodak probably gave away more samples at its peak than it sells now. They said they will bring back one film (but haven't yet) after discontinuing how many? Again, this is not releasing a new film. Ilfords profitability more likely from drastically cutting cost rather than drastically rising sales. A few specialty labs are popping up (at niche prices, not mass market prices), but again, we're so far away from 15 years ago it's not worth comparing.

 

There is still no interest in film gear apart from a very select few desirable cameras. Try and sell a mid range film SLR for anything more than a few dollars.

 

You even say it at the end of your post, film has gone from mass market to niche. The film "resurgence" is like me having $10 worth of stock, it crashes to 1c, and then "surges" back to 2c. It may have doubled in value, but it's worth 0.2% of what it once was.

 

But anyway, the 35mm Summilux ASPH is very cheap at the moment, I don't see and resurgence in its cost. Prices fell off a cliff when the FLE was announced, but as it becomes more collectable, it likely will regain some of that ground.

[Advertisement]

The Leica Q3 is available for pre-order at B&H Photo Video and Adorama

[happymac]

Mmm... maybe.

Yet, I have a copy of the pre-FLE with no focus shift that I can detect, even when checking through the EVF on the M240 or the M10 at x10 magnification. I'm sure there must be some, but I can't see how it would affect my pictures in real life.

I have owned the lens since 1996 and havn’t ever noticed focus shift in practice. May be it exists, but more in brain than on pictures taken beside testing conditions.

 

Tom

[steamboat]

This is my number one lens. The 35mm f1.4 Summilux asph is just a great lens. I like it so well I have both the black and chrome versions. If I had to pick one lens from my 21, 28, 35, 50 & 90 it would be this lens. I also have the classic 35mm f1.4 Summilux and the 35mm f3.5 Summaron.

[Paul J]

The signature and bokeh of the FLE is different.

 

I really like the ASPHERICAL but overall I prefer the FLE. One of Leica's best, IMO, incredible lens.

 

But there are certainly times I would use/favour the ASPHERICAL, for it's particular and unique rendering. Stupid price though.

Edited October 27, 2017 by Paul J

[NB23]

The signature and bokeh of the FLE is different.

 

I really like the ASPHERICAL but overall I prefer the FLE. One of Leica's best, IMO, incredible lens.

 

But there are certainly times I would use/favour the ASPHERICAL, for it's particular and unique rendering. Stupid price though.

... ok... but what about the Asph?

[Paul J]

... ok... but what about the Asph?

 

 

When I said the FLE is different I meant it is different to the ASPH.

 

I prefer it, some don't. "Better" rendering is down to the individuals taste. The FLE is much sharper at close range and it's colour and contrast is superior.

 

I also prefer the ASPHERICAL over the ASPH and sometimes over the FLE. Overall, if I had to choose one, I would take the FLE any day.

Edited October 27, 2017 by Paul J

[NB23]

Advertisement (gone after registration)

I prefer the Erical. It’s much more velouté on all fronts.

[Paul J]

The ASPHERICAL is undeniably awesome. It's very classical in its rendering though, fine if you want that look, I don't always.

[steamboat]

Just so we're all clear. The Aspherical and the Asph are NOT the same lens.

[NB23]

Just so we're all clear. The Aspherical and the Asph are NOT the same lens.

It was very clear.

[michaelwj]

Just so we're all clear. The Aspherical and the Asph are NOT the same lens.

Man, I was just about to buy an Asph, trade if for an Aspherical, then sell it and buy two FLEs.

 

[Kwesi]

Man, I was just about to buy an Asph, trade if for an Aspherical, then sell it and buy two FLEs.

Ah, but would the two FLEs be worthy of a single double Aspherical? Edited October 28, 2017 by Kwesi