pico Posted November 6, 2018 Share #81 Posted November 6, 2018 Advertisement (gone after registration) 53 minutes ago, evikne said: Add a minimum focusing distance of 0.7 meters and I'll buy it! Crop a bit and be happy. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Advertisement Posted November 6, 2018 Posted November 6, 2018 Hi pico, Take a look here 35mm 1.4 Summilux pre-asph. I'm sure you'll find what you were looking for!
evikne Posted November 6, 2018 Share #82 Posted November 6, 2018 7 minutes ago, pico said: Crop a bit and be happy. Not if my subject is too close and I can't move further back. 2 Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
UliWer Posted November 7, 2018 Share #83 Posted November 7, 2018 The Wiki of this forum and some postings say that you cannot use a Leitz Canada 35mm Summilux on a digital M without modification by Leica. I think that some of the examples here were taken with Canada versions and I tried one on the M10 - without problems. So, do the Canadian Summiluxes all work instead of the statements, or only some, or do they all need the modification? Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
pico Posted November 7, 2018 Share #84 Posted November 7, 2018 (edited) My stock V2 Leitz Canada 35mm Summilux works just fine on M9 and M10. BTW, somewhere there are photos showing exactly what part of the shroud must be shaved ~1mm for non-compliant versions. For some of us it is a simple DIY project. Oh, my version did 'drag' a tiny bit upon focusing on the M9. User Washington suggested exercising it, and that worked. Edited November 7, 2018 by pico 1 Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
UliWer Posted November 9, 2018 Share #85 Posted November 9, 2018 Now I got an 3081xxx, which fits without any problems to the M10, but with the M9 you cannot go to infinity, as the lenses shroud touches something in the camera‘s throat. After all it was a wise decision by Leica to elevate the camera‘s bayonet ring for the M10. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
jdlaing Posted November 9, 2018 Share #86 Posted November 9, 2018 12 minutes ago, UliWer said: Now I got an 3081xxx, which fits without any problems to the M10, but with the M9 you cannot go to infinity, as the lenses shroud touches something in the camera‘s throat. After all it was a wise decision by Leica to elevate the camera‘s bayonet ring for the M10. I don’t think they raised the bayonet ring. I think they lowered the body. Flange to sensor distance should be the same but the throat is probably wider. 1 1 Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest JMF Posted November 9, 2018 Share #87 Posted November 9, 2018 Advertisement (gone after registration) 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! quai Rive droite by JM__, on Flickr dans Paris by JM__, on Flickr Rue du 4 Septembre by JM__, on Flickr 35 Summilux v2 1966 - Acros 100 - M2 Link to post Share on other sites Simply register for free here – We are always happy to welcome new members! quai Rive droite by JM__, on Flickr dans Paris by JM__, on Flickr Rue du 4 Septembre by JM__, on Flickr 35 Summilux v2 1966 - Acros 100 - M2 ' data-webShareUrl='https://www.l-camera-forum.com/topic/288041-35mm-14-summilux-pre-asph/?do=findComment&comment=3628438'>More sharing options...
pico Posted November 10, 2018 Share #88 Posted November 10, 2018 On 11/4/2018 at 3:28 PM, lct said: I like much my 35/1.4 v2 but i would not buy a new one with as much or more optical aberrations. Now a modern 35/1.4 the same size as the pre-asph would have my vote provided it has less coma, less flare and no infinity lock at all (sorry Pico). Oh no, you would take away the defects some of us cherish! Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
lct Posted November 11, 2018 Share #89 Posted November 11, 2018 2 hours ago, pico said: Oh no, you would take away the defects some of us cherish! I would eliminate of at least reduce the defects i dislike, namely coma and flare, but i would keep the rest including halos around highlights (aka glow) as far as possible. As for the annoying (to me) infinity lock, i wouldn't have to get rid of it since it has been abandoned on 35/1.4 v2 but i would keep the metal focus tab of v1 if i had the choice. YMMV. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
pico Posted November 11, 2018 Share #90 Posted November 11, 2018 14 minutes ago, lct said: [...] As for the annoying (to me) infinity lock, i wouldn't have to get rid of it since it has been abandoned on 35/1.4 v2 but i would keep the metal focus tab of v1 if i had the choice. YMMV. Thanks to Leitz/Leica Canada, a lot of V2 35mm Summilux have locking infinity tabs, but we digress. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest JMF Posted November 14, 2018 Share #91 Posted November 14, 2018 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! goose by JM__, on Flickr 35 Summilux pre asph v2 on M8 Link to post Share on other sites Simply register for free here – We are always happy to welcome new members! goose by JM__, on Flickr 35 Summilux pre asph v2 on M8 ' data-webShareUrl='https://www.l-camera-forum.com/topic/288041-35mm-14-summilux-pre-asph/?do=findComment&comment=3631347'>More sharing options...
Metin Colak Posted November 19, 2018 Share #92 Posted November 19, 2018 (edited) Finally I got mine, v2. It is an interesting lens, and difficult to manage at f1.4 though.. Very prone to contra light, it becomes very sharp after f2, as explained here in this topic. It's real character lays on between f1.4 - f2, and you should control and consider a lot of factors in the frame in order to achieve a good result since this is a 35mm focal length. Many thanks to the everyone here to help to the people before deciding their lens. Cheers.. M240+Summilux-M 35mm f1.4 Pr-Asph. @f1.4 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 November 19, 2018 by Metin Colak 2 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/288041-35mm-14-summilux-pre-asph/?do=findComment&comment=3633548'>More sharing options...
Metin Colak Posted November 19, 2018 Share #93 Posted November 19, 2018 One last note about this lens: It produces special glow between f1.4-2.2. Very special romantic environmental portraits can be taken with this lens. But I put a bit more speciality and importance on Summilux-M 75mm f1.4. The Lux75 produces more sophisticated glow at f1.4, even until 2.8. While the 75Lux produces this glow in a more 'latent' form (can be seen in the sharp edges especially), this 35Lux makes it very visible which is very difficult to make it a constituent part of the composition though.. 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! 4 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/288041-35mm-14-summilux-pre-asph/?do=findComment&comment=3633552'>More sharing options...
luigi bertolotti Posted November 19, 2018 Share #94 Posted November 19, 2018 (edited) On 11/7/2018 at 8:49 PM, UliWer said: The Wiki of this forum and some postings say that you cannot use a Leitz Canada 35mm Summilux on a digital M without modification by Leica. I think that some of the examples here were taken with Canada versions and I tried one on the M10 - without problems. So, do the Canadian Summiluxes all work instead of the statements, or only some, or do they all need the modification? I think there isn't a general rule… my two Canadians (1.765.850 - chrome and 2.290.126 - black) fit fine on M8 and M240, lacking the protruding back shroud which interferes with body : I think it was a manufacturing component which could or could not be inserted, depending on some final QC test… (Canadian factory introduced "new manufacturing methodologies…") ; probably Leica CS still performs the modification on demand… but it can be also a DIY filing job, provided one protects at best the back glass. Edited November 19, 2018 by luigi bertolotti Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Metin Colak Posted November 19, 2018 Share #95 Posted November 19, 2018 This lens could be really great if its minimum focus distance is 70cm! This is the major drawback of this lens for me.. Please see my other photographs on my 500px account: https://500px.com/metintext M240+Summilux-M 35mm f1.4 Pr-Asph. @f1.4 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! 9 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/288041-35mm-14-summilux-pre-asph/?do=findComment&comment=3633820'>More sharing options...
lct Posted November 19, 2018 Share #96 Posted November 19, 2018 I would welcome a 0.7m MFD as well but the lens would not be that small anymore i suspect. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
adan Posted November 20, 2018 Share #97 Posted November 20, 2018 Someone who's good at lens/macro maths should be able to calculate the extra extension needed to get a 35mm from 1m down to 0.7 meters. I'd guess about 0.55 mm. Most of the 35 Summicrons go to 0.7m, and some of those are as small as the Summilux Pre (including the 'cron v.4, which has the same 7 elements). Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
evikne Posted November 20, 2018 Share #98 Posted November 20, 2018 And near limit isn't only a question about a tighter cropping, as many seem to think. It is also about perspective. Sometimes I want the more dramatic perspective that I only achieve by going closer. 2 1 Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
lct Posted November 20, 2018 Share #99 Posted November 20, 2018 1 hour ago, adan said: Someone who's good at lens/macro maths should be able to calculate the extra extension needed to get a 35mm from 1m down to 0.7 meters. I'd guess about 0.55 mm. Most of the 35 Summicrons go to 0.7m, and some of those are as small as the Summilux Pre (including the 'cron v.4, which has the same 7 elements). Do you think acceptable results could be kept at 0.7m in such a small f/1.4 lens? Just curious. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
adan Posted November 20, 2018 Share #100 Posted November 20, 2018 10 hours ago, evikne said: And near limit isn't only a question about a tighter cropping, as many seem to think. It is also about perspective. Sometimes I want the more dramatic perspective that I only achieve by going closer. Exactly - attached is with a 35 Summicron v.4 at 0.7 meters. Would not be the same perspective ("point of view") and drama if shot from 1 meter and cropped. Or with a 50mm. (Demonstrators marking themselves with the phone number for legal aid, in case of arrest.) 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! 10 hours ago, lct said: Do you think acceptable results could be kept at 0.7m in such a small f/1.4 lens? Just curious. What does "acceptable" mean? For me it means "getting the d*mn picture that says what I want to say." And it is not just a question of 0.7m vs. 1m framing, but all the intervening distances that are lost with a 1m limit - 0.75m, 0.78m, 0.8m, 0.82m, 0.85m. I don't buy any lens shorter than 90mm that won't focus down to 0.7m - the limitation gets in my way. As Leica themselves realized, since they have progressively removed those 0.9-1.0m limitations in most of their 50s and 35s and 75s (and their cameras, post-M3) over the decades. 3 Link to post Share on other sites Simply register for free here – We are always happy to welcome new members! What does "acceptable" mean? For me it means "getting the d*mn picture that says what I want to say." And it is not just a question of 0.7m vs. 1m framing, but all the intervening distances that are lost with a 1m limit - 0.75m, 0.78m, 0.8m, 0.82m, 0.85m. I don't buy any lens shorter than 90mm that won't focus down to 0.7m - the limitation gets in my way. As Leica themselves realized, since they have progressively removed those 0.9-1.0m limitations in most of their 50s and 35s and 75s (and their cameras, post-M3) over the decades. ' data-webShareUrl='https://www.l-camera-forum.com/topic/288041-35mm-14-summilux-pre-asph/?do=findComment&comment=3634373'>More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Create an account or sign in to comment
You need to be a member in order to leave a comment
Create an account
Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!
Register a new accountSign in
Already have an account? Sign in here.
Sign In Now