Summilux 35 pre-asph vs Pre fle vs fle.

[oudjunk]

Advertisement (gone after registration)

I have owned the summilux 35 pre fle and i really like the rendering of it but i sold it for trying the other lenses in that time ( I always sell my lenses and camera for trying the others).

right now i own the summilux 35 classic pre-asph (Made in Germany) and i really like it as well because of its character (smooth bokeh and leica glow but still quite sharp for me) 

My point right now, as i told the first paragraph i always sell for trying the new one. what do you think about these 3 lenses, what lens that you like the most 

i want to know other opinion because i wanna try the fle but i miss pre fle version as well   still confuse. 

PS. I like to take portrait, candid, (some landscape).

[Advertisement]

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

[lct]

Never sell a Leica lens . I would keep the 35/1.4 pre-asph that you will miss anyway and get a modern 35/1.4 for when you need more sharpness below f/5.6. FLE or pre-FLE? Depends on the camera. On a rangefinder, the FLE has a negligible focus shift contrary to the pre-FLE so i got the FLE and kept my dear 35/1.4 v2. Now if i had to keep one 35/1.4 only it would be the FLE for its versatility but i would miss the glow and the small size of the pre-asph.

Edited July 19, 2019 by lct

[a.noctilux]

Hello,

my opinion is what you've done (always do ?), try one each time you have opportunity to know them.

Then judge by yourself if you keep it (them) after using for a while.

I sold the pre-asph Summilux-M 35mm after buying and using the asph. version, said to myself that I would not use the pre-asph. anymore.

But some years after, while looking at my ancient photos taken with the 35mm Lux pre-asph. , I regretted it so bought one and still use it.

This pre-asph. is not the "best" in term of optical formula, but when I use as intended, it's very pleasing for portrait or something less demanding

in optical perfection.

 

The 35mm Lux asph. is another step in lens quality for more "perfection" and now I use it less than the pre-asph. because it's "too much".

I've tried a short time the 35mm Lux FLE, never own one as the plain Lux asph. and pre-asph. give me satisfaction on film and sensor 😊.

[Ecar]

I have settled for the pre-ASPH v2 for its size and wide-open rendering, along with the pre-FLE ASPH (my copy doesn't exhibit focus shift - or I'm unable to see it - and I prefer its OOF rendering to that of the FLE, which I found somewhat harsher). 

[ChicagoMatthew]

If you can afford it, get a gently used FLE and start from there. It’s going to be punchy, sharp across the range and the bigger option. Everything is a step down from there, IMO.

Having said that, I traded my 35 summicron ASPH for the FLE and I kind of regret it. The rendering was less contrasts, but the ergonomics and size on the cron were much better than the lux. 

[tsleica]

I use my 35 pre way more than my 35 asph..

I use the pre as a mini noctilux..

And the asph for when I need more sharpness..

The pre has hardly any distortion..and looks just right..

After you take the time to figure out what it can do..it really works..

I hated it at 1st..but now one its of my faves..

No need to count pores..unless you want to..

Watch out for flare with the pre..get to know all the f stops and what they can do..

And you may be a happy camper..

This is the lens Leica should re-issue..

[a.noctilux]

Advertisement (gone after registration)

Summilux 35mm re-issue ?

This Lux is not as scarce as Thambar or Summaron 2.8cm 😉

I think there is no hope (or small chance maybe) of re-issue of this plenty available second hand more than 35,000 units produced most still in good shape now.

TOTAL

ASSIGNED

SERIAL NUMBERS

1967-1995

28,350 ( 35mm Summilux II from Wiki )

TOTAL

ASSIGNED

SERIAL NUMBERS

1960-1966

7,500 ( 35mm Summilux I from Wiki )

[jev]

I use pre on film and FLE on digital, completely different lenses, you should have both if you can

[ckuwajima]

I (try to) keep my lens repertoire as limited as possible.

I craved to get a good 35mm lens, but once I got my pre-asph, I simply use it, trying to take advantage of all its good and not so good characteristics.

 

[pico]

1 hour ago, jev said:

I use pre on film and FLE on digital, completely different lenses, you should have both if you can

There is a joke somewhere in there.

[P_Wijk]

I got both a PRE and a FLE, for me the PRE makes much more interesting rendering. 

I’ve got to know there is some small difference between pre Canada and pre Germany in term of lens-coating . What is your thoughts? 

 

Which is by picture quality the more preferred one?

I do not want to account the fact that the German version is less common therefore more valued.

 

cheers Per

[lct]

Welcome to the forum . According to my memories, there is some difference between v1 and v2, essentially less flare with v2, but last time i used a v1 was several years ago so i would not swear about that. Now what you call Canada and Germany are both v2 i guess. If so, there is no difference as far as coating and IQ are concerned as far as i know. German v2 user speaking.

[Ecar]

I've had 2 Canadian and 2 German v2s. Kept the German ones, but only because they are in better overall condition. Otherwise, no IQ difference that I could detect.

[P_Wijk]

Thanks @lct and @Ecar yes i was mentioning the difference between different make of version II. 

Good to know, than I will keep my Canadien version in a wait for the perfect opportunity to get a German one. 🔴

[UliWer]

The Canadian version (vers. II) has a broad rim around the rear lens which can hit the sides of the "lens mouth" of digital bodies (no problem with film bodies). The M10 which has a slightly elevated mount avoids  this problem - in most cases). I can use my Canadian Version on the M10, but not on the M9. The late German versions are said to cause no problems.      

[84bravo]

I had the pre-asph and didn't care for the glow and performance at f1.4. I now have the 35mm f1.4 asph (non-FLE) and love it. I have not seen any problems at all with focus shift, so maybe I got lucky with my sample.

[Stein K S]

Hi 84bravo

I have the non/pre-FLE and really like it as well. Definitely a keeper! However, I also have the 35 cron v4... which ¨complements¨ the Lux in a very nice way with its glow and more classical rendering 😉... And being a 35mm guy (i.e. willingness to invest in more 35´), I find myself getting increasingly curious about the Lux pre-asph.... offering possibly even more of the looks I like about the Cron v4.

Edited July 31, 2019 by Stein K S

[84bravo]

On 7/31/2019 at 12:36 PM, Stein K S said:

Hi 84bravo

I have the non/pre-FLE and really like it as well. Definitely a keeper! However, I also have the 35 cron v4... which ¨complements¨ the Lux in a very nice way with its glow and more classical rendering 😉... And being a 35mm guy (i.e. willingness to invest in more 35´), I find myself getting increasingly curious about the Lux pre-asph.... offering possibly even more of the looks I like about the Cron v4.

I have a 35 Summicron v4 as well and it's a beautiful performer, not at all like the 35 Summilux that I had. I found the performance of the pre-asph 35 Summilux to be unpredictable. Depending on the light it could appear to be not sharp wide open and very "glowy," and other times be pin point razer sharp at 1.4. The Summicron is sharp throughout as long as I do my part.

 

[Advertisement]

Hallo,

Look here: Leica M

[Stein K S]

13 hours ago, 84bravo said:

I have a 35 Summicron v4 as well and it's a beautiful performer, not at all like the 35 Summilux that I had. I found the performance of the pre-asph 35 Summilux to be unpredictable. Depending on the light it could appear to be not sharp wide open and very "glowy," and other times be pin point razer sharp at 1.4. The Summicron is sharp throughout as long as I do my part.

 

Interesting... but also strange. I always thought these two lenses were quite similar except for the Lux offering ¨more of it all¨ (glow, dof etc) when stopped down.

Any other comments/experiences with the Lux pre-asph anyone?

[lct]

 

3 hours ago, Stein K S said:

Interesting... but also strange. I always thought these two lenses were quite similar except for the Lux offering ¨more of it all¨ (glow, dof etc) when stopped down.

Any other comments/experiences with the Lux pre-asph anyone?

The 35/1.4 pre-asph can be compared to 35/2 lenses from the same period but the 35/2 v4 is a more modern lens from the eighties or end of seventies with more contrast, less flare and no glow (halos around highlights) at all. Focus shift is not the same on both lenses either. Appears at f/1.4 and f/2 on my 35/1.4 v2 and at around f/4 on my 35/2 v4.