LocalHero1953 Posted January 2, 2022 Share #881 Posted January 2, 2022 Advertisement (gone after registration) Exploring the woods. M4, Summilux-M 35 v2, HP5+ 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! 5 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/288041-35mm-14-summilux-pre-asph/?do=findComment&comment=4343398'>More sharing options...
Advertisement Posted January 2, 2022 Posted January 2, 2022 Hi LocalHero1953, Take a look here 35mm 1.4 Summilux pre-asph. I'm sure you'll find what you were looking for!
Al Brown Posted January 2, 2022 Share #882 Posted January 2, 2022 I have noticed that the Canadian version II has two types of scale: One is with meters closer to the end part of the lens (where the hood comes) and feet closer to the body, second version has the meter/feet the other way around. Anyone have some more detailed info on this? Quote Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
adan Posted January 2, 2022 Share #883 Posted January 2, 2022 Ummm - Leica just followed Ralph Waldo Emerson's dictum that "a foolish consistency is the hobgoblin of little minds?" BTW - the ones with the feet in front clearly produce better pictures! ....................... More seriously, it might be related to the move of most of the rest of the M system manufacturing to Canada in 1977 or so. And a simultaneous "revision" of the M lens lineup around 1980 (although the 35 f/1.4 was not among the new/revised lenses that I know of). Might also be related to the prominence ($$$$) of the imperial-units market (UK/USA) at that time - even Canada was only just beginning to switch over. I do have a 90mm TE from 1977 - has m in front and feet behind. I have a 135mm TE (Wetzlar) from 1988 that is the same. OTOH all my other Leitz/Leica M lenses from 1983-today (21/28) have feet in front and m behind. Check the S/N on your 35s and date them, and see if that is a clue. 1 1 Quote Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
OSEGAL Posted January 2, 2022 Share #884 Posted January 2, 2022 summilux 35 v2 fuji xtra 400 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! 6 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/288041-35mm-14-summilux-pre-asph/?do=findComment&comment=4343734'>More sharing options...
Al Brown Posted January 2, 2022 Share #885 Posted January 2, 2022 1 hour ago, adan said: More seriously, it might be related to the move of most of the rest of the M system manufacturing to Canada in 1977 or so. And a simultaneous "revision" of the M lens lineup around 1980 (although the 35 f/1.4 was not among the new/revised lenses that I know of). The Summilux 35 is 1981 and has feet nearer to the body. 1 Quote Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
shirubadanieru Posted January 2, 2022 Share #886 Posted January 2, 2022 Does anyone own the Infinity lock version of the Summilux pre-asph? I’ve been trying to find one online to try it out but can’t seem to find it anywhere. If you have it could you post your thoughts / share some images? And if anyone has one that’s going unused let me know too on a message or something Thanks in advance! Quote Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Steven Posted January 2, 2022 Share #887 Posted January 2, 2022 Advertisement (gone after registration) 16 minutes ago, shirubadanieru said: Does anyone own the Infinity lock version of the Summilux pre-asph? I’ve been trying to find one online to try it out but can’t seem to find it anywhere. If you have it could you post your thoughts / share some images? And if anyone has one that’s going unused let me know too on a message or something Thanks in advance! I have all batches of these early V2 with infinity lock. Some of them are among my best pre asphs. there’s one for sale on eBay UK right now, but for a ridiculous price. i also know someone in Thailand selling one, but he repainted the body to cover signs of use. Pm if you want …. Quote Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
shirubadanieru Posted January 2, 2022 Share #888 Posted January 2, 2022 15 minutes ago, Steven said: I have all batches of these early V2 with infinity lock. Some of them are among my best pre asphs. there’s one for sale on eBay UK right now, but for a ridiculous price. i also know someone in Thailand selling one, but he repainted the body to cover signs of use. Pm if you want …. Wow that’s amazing, how did you even find those! Dropped you a PM. Share some results you took with them here if you have any readily available : ) Quote Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Steven Posted January 3, 2022 Share #889 Posted January 3, 2022 10 hours ago, shirubadanieru said: Dropped you a PM Didn't get it ! 1 Quote Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
KFo Posted January 4, 2022 Share #890 Posted January 4, 2022 Since we have access to the leading authority on the pre-ASPH lens here.... @Steven How do you feel about the hierarchy of glow that TASHUSA shows in the linked blog post? I've got a 254xxxx built in 1972 that I've been using exclusively for a while...month or more. I'm getting the feel for the lens and finding that I might prefer it at f/1.7 or f/2.0 a little more than f/1.4 generally. But there are occasions that want the f/1.4 blowout! Back to my question, TASHUSA indicates that my version is the most glowy. Can I think in terms of an equivalence between my version at some aperture and the titanium or infinity lock versions wide open? I'm asking because I'm thinking about picking one or the other. Thanks! Quote Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Steven Posted January 4, 2022 Share #891 Posted January 4, 2022 6 minutes ago, KFo said: Since we have access to the leading authority on the pre-ASPH lens here.... @Steven How do you feel about the hierarchy of glow that TASHUSA shows in the linked blog post? I've got a 254xxxx built in 1972 that I've been using exclusively for a while...month or more. I'm getting the feel for the lens and finding that I might prefer it at f/1.7 or f/2.0 a little more than f/1.4 generally. But there are occasions that want the f/1.4 blowout! Back to my question, TASHUSA indicates that my version is the most glowy. Can I think in terms of an equivalence between my version at some aperture and the titanium or infinity lock versions wide open? I'm asking because I'm thinking about picking one or the other. Thanks! His hierarchy sounds about right. (it might be by luck though, cause he is using a very particular version. On the one hand, it's a modified version of the lens, it's an M3 with the goggles removed, which is not the best, in my experience, but it's also a great batch, 206) But then there are subtleties within each of his categories. For example, a 173xxxx steel rim glows as much as a 254xxxx and is not recommended. Or to give you another example, a 216xxx infinity lock will be sharper than a 177xxxx Steel rim. There are two types of infinity locks, too: brass and aluminium. I generally prefer the earlier, brass infinity lock. But the alu are good too. 9 minutes ago, KFo said: I might prefer it at f/1.7 or f/2.0 a little more than f/1.4 generally. But there are occasions that want the f/1.4 blowout! FYI, this is how I feel about any batch of this lens too. While I embrace the 1.4 glow, in some scenarios, it's just too much, and I like to reduce it slightly by going to f1.7, or kill it totally at F2. This lens is very unpredictable, but when the planets are aligned.... 🤤 10 minutes ago, KFo said: the titanium or infinity lock versions wide open Either or will be an upgrade from your 254xxx. I prefer the infinity lock, in terms of ergonomics, or cosmetic look (the titanium has known a paint chipping issue around the filter thread area), and especially in terms of rendering (one of the best after the Steel Rim 206 and 216). But the infinity lock will cost you twice the price of the titanium, if/when you find one. 1 Quote Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
sinjun Posted January 4, 2022 Share #892 Posted January 4, 2022 I don't understand this glow hierarchy. Whilst it might seem desirable now (at least in certain circumstances) glow would have surely been treated as a lens aberration to be eliminated, or at least minimized, by designers. Why would glow have increased so much from the steel rim to the Canada pre-asph II? Unless there was some other compensating improvement in some other aspect of lens performance which came at the expense of increased spherical aberration? Quote Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
grahamc Posted January 4, 2022 Share #893 Posted January 4, 2022 On 1/2/2022 at 1:11 AM, pippy said: In my book being able to use colour filters when shooting in black and white is a fundamental skill which photographers should understand and be able to utilise in order for them to realise their vision as and when deemed appropriate. There is nothing whatsoever 'unpure' about this approach at all. Carry On the Good Work, Graham! Philip. Thanks Phillip. Agree, and thanks for the reminder of “when appropriate). I kept the yellow filter on kind of permanently for a while (being lazy really as changing filters of course requires splitting the hood). I think it will be better to pick and choose the correct application Although in saying that I ‘think’ the yellow filter gave more contrast for street photography also which gave pleasing results. That’s where my “purist” comment came from because if we are Changing the contrast of a lens at almost all times maybe that feels a bit wrong. Although no different to post producing to taste I guess. I changed developing lab around the same time so hard to know for sure, and I will have to keep experimenting once I get this nice lens back from snapped-focus-tab Repair all the best for 2022 ! 1 Quote Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
KFo Posted January 4, 2022 Share #894 Posted January 4, 2022 4 hours ago, Steven said: His hierarchy sounds ... Thank you for your well considered reply. I'm now curious, have you seen counterfeit pre-ASPH on the market? I'm asking because I see a brass infinity lock version with a higher serial number than my lens. Did the infinity lock come and go, or is something strange going on ? I guess I've been assuming that infinity lock versions came earlier and got phased out over time. Quote Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Steven Posted January 4, 2022 Share #895 Posted January 4, 2022 1 minute ago, KFo said: Thank you for your well considered reply. I'm now curious, have you seen counterfeit pre-ASPH on the market? I'm asking because I see a brass infinity lock version with a higher serial number than my lens. Did the infinity lock come and go, or is something strange going on ? I guess I've been assuming that infinity lock versions came earlier and got phased out over time. I’ve seen many counterfeits. 1 Quote Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
pippy Posted January 4, 2022 Share #896 Posted January 4, 2022 (edited) 3 hours ago, grahamc said: ...I ‘think’ the yellow filter gave more contrast for street photography also which gave pleasing results. That’s where my “purist” comment came from because if we are Changing the contrast of a lens at almost all times maybe that feels a bit wrong. Although no different to post producing to taste I guess... Thanks for the good wishes, Graham, and the same back to you and yours! In terms of 'changing the contrast...at almost all times' is concerned - when discussing B'N'W snapping - there is not much difference in 'purist' terms from sticking with a yellow filter than (for instance), when shooting film, deciding on which film emulsion to use; which film developer to use; which dilution of chosen developer to use; what processing time to use; what dev. temperature to use; what agitation method to use; what type of enlarger to use; which printing paper to use; what contrast of paper to use; which paper developer to use...and on...and on...and on... I don't believe there is such a thing as a 'Purist' approach to photography (and would argue as much quite happily). All photography relies upon the photographer making decisions and every decision he or she makes will affect the look of the end result and the End Result is all that matters. Philip. Edited January 4, 2022 by pippy 1 Quote Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
KFo Posted January 4, 2022 Share #897 Posted January 4, 2022 I'm seeing that the Ti finish version is pretty available. Doing some research, I see two batches. One in 1992 and one in 1990. s/n 3599720 to 3602719 35mm f/1.4 Summilux-M (ELW.black+titanium) 1992 qty 3000 s/n 3519796 to 3520295 35mm f/1.4 Summilux-M (ELW.black+titan) 1990 qty 500 Would you steer one way or another for a Ti version? Or am I looking at lens to lens variability as being more significant than the actual batches? Quote Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
pippy Posted January 4, 2022 Share #898 Posted January 4, 2022 On 1/2/2022 at 9:46 AM, LocalHero1953 said: Wells Cathedral... 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! Frederick H. Evans would be proud!... Philip. 1 1 Quote Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
LocalHero1953 Posted January 4, 2022 Share #899 Posted January 4, 2022 (edited) 8 minutes ago, pippy said: Frederick H. Evans would be proud!... Philip. I have to admit I had never heard of him or that image till looking it up just now🙄. He got a better angle on it with his large format camera, probably with front rise. I see he took nine years to take the definitive photo. It's a very photogenic spot and a good reminder for the photographer not to take more credit for an image than the subject matter! Edited January 4, 2022 by LocalHero1953 2 Quote Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Al Brown Posted January 4, 2022 Share #900 Posted January 4, 2022 (edited) I have just recently acquired a decent copy of the Canada II 35 pre-asph lux from the early 80's (3140xxx). I was ready and prepared for a maelstrom of all its proverbial flaws but boy was I pleasantly surprised when I received it. - It focuses flawllessly to infinity on all my digital M bodies (from M8 to M10-R) without any modification. - It is decently sharp wide open at infinity on M10-R's sensor and very sharp wide open at MFD (no super vaseline bloom or softness like many reported with their copies, just some slight glow... mind you I am a "Zeiss Otus level" pixel peeper which is level 10/10) - The hood that came with it (12504) can take slim 49mm filters (turned around with thread facing forward) in place of the VII series filters AND it also permits the use of any ol' 58mm lens cap on its top. All in all a very pleasant little thingy which MUST get its modern iteration soon. Edited January 4, 2022 by Al Brown 1 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.