differences between Summicron 35 "king of bokeh" and Summicron ASPH

[a911s]

Advertisement (gone after registration)

I've owned both and have compared them extensively. IMO, the aspheric Summicron has better booked, contrast and edge definition, especially at larger apertures. The Type IV has significantly better resolution in the center of the images at f8-16. It's also lighter but more fragile. I sold mine. 

[lct]

43 minutes ago, a911s said:

The Type IV has significantly better resolution in the center of the images at f8-16

Not my feeling i must say but i like both lenses as well.

[KFo]

On 12/3/2019 at 2:56 PM, a911s said:

I've owned both and have compared them extensively. IMO, the aspheric Summicron has better booked, contrast and edge definition, especially at larger apertures. The Type IV has significantly better resolution in the center of the images at f8-16. It's also lighter but more fragile. I sold mine. 

I’ve been considering the IV version for it’s compact size as a alternative to my ASPH FLE.  In what way is it more fragile? Interesting to me because I carry and use the camera all the time...fragile is not something I’m looking for.

[adan]

42 minutes ago, KFo said:

In what way is it more fragile?

Cue lct's "crumbling Summicron" picture.....

In the meantime:

The v.4 has a plastic part (locking ring) inside, connecting the front and back halves of the screw-together lens parts. (Plastic was specced in the original design, as part of Leitz-Canada's weight- and cost-saving program in the early 1980s.)

It can break. The usual cause of the breakage is ham-fisted photographers trying to use the lens hood as a "wrench" to twist the lens when mounting and unmounting. Silly boys!

The usual symptom of breakage is that the front half of the lens (everything from the focus ring forwards, glass and barrel together) unscrews from the back part at some point.

It can be screwed back into place very easily, but often there is then a slight left-right tilt to the front half (~2-5°), most noticeably with the rectangular plastic lens shade attached when viewed from the front (it is also tilted slightly, and the square edges of the hood don't square up with the camera windows). And the aperture index (and aperture engravings) are not quite centered with the focus index mark.

(Not to be confused with the intentional tilt of those markings in the v.2 35, (a factory mod) which has to do with preventing the semaphore tab for aperture adjustment interfering with the lens release button).

Personally, I used a v.4 with the broken connector inside for years (2001-2007) with no focus or IQ problems. The tilted hood was noticeable, but did not vignette the corners or cause other problems. If I felt it start to unscrew in use, I just twisted it back tight. I also learned to quit grabbing the lens hood to put the lens on and take it off, and use the lens mounting ring (base) as intended.

 

Edited December 9, 2019 by adan

[KFo]

44 minutes ago, adan said:

...It can break. The usual cause of the breakage is ham-fisted photographers trying to use the lens hood as a "wrench" to twist the lens when mounting and unmounting. Silly boys!  ...

 

 

Thanks for the rundown on this failure mode! I was not aware of this issue until I saw that post. 

A quick web search tells me that fixing is not a big deal.  

Back to obsessing over a lightweight f/1.4 Leica.

[KFo]

A crooked hood like this?

 

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!

[adan]

Advertisement (gone after registration)

Naw, more like this - screwed back on, the front part of the lens (on which the hood mounts into slots) sometimes overrotates a bit to be tight. Only visible because the hood has straight sides.

And note this is the v.4 f/2 Summicron, not an f/1.4.

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 December 9, 2019 by adan

[lct]

See:

 

[jaapv]

Just to debunk the whole "king of Bokeh nonsense: Read The Online Photographer, here is what Mike Johnston has to say:

Quote

And as for "the King of Bokeh," which is what I unfortunately dubbed the Leica Summicron 35mm ƒ/2 version "IV" in a caption in the original articles: well, it's not. It's just not. I had no idea that reputation could adhere so firmly and so persistently to that lens even now, more than 20 years later, due to such an offhand comment!  [...] I always stopped that lens down at least one stop and usually two or three—honestly, I don't think I ever shot with it wide open in all the years I owned it; and "focused on middle distances" is how I usually shoot. So I'm sorry; I shouldn't have generalized. Troublemaker, I am.

 

[a911s]

My Type IV I used in a professional sense for 20 years until it fell apart like folks have noted. I tried but couldn't completely fix it myself. So, I sent it to Leica for repair, then sold it. It's probably still working well, but it does have a weak spot.

[Sergius]

On 12/9/2019 at 4:34 AM, adan said:

The v.4 has a plastic part (locking ring) inside, connecting the front and back halves of the screw-together lens parts. (Plastic was specced in the original design, as part of Leitz-Canada's weight- and cost-saving program in the early 1980s.)

From number series 340xxxx or 341xxxx the plastic ring has been changed with a metal ring. More durable. In fact I have a 341xxx Canada with metal ring. 

[Sergius]

It’s easy recognize if there’s a metal ring or plastic ring from a frontal picture of the lens. Matte finish for plastic ring. Slightly shine for metal ring. 
 

Edited December 21, 2019 by Sergius

[ChicagoMatthew]

On 12/8/2019 at 9:05 PM, KFo said:

I’ve been considering the IV version for it’s compact size as a alternative to my ASPH FLE.  In what way is it more fragile? Interesting to me because I carry and use the camera all the time...fragile is not something I’m looking for.

I agree the FLE is a beast to carry, and this little cron would be nicer in that regard, but the rendering between the two is quite different. 

[lct]

On 12/9/2019 at 4:34 AM, adan said:

The v.4 has a plastic part (locking ring) inside, connecting the front and back halves of the screw-together lens parts. (Plastic was specced in the original design, as part of Leitz-Canada's weight- and cost-saving program in the early 1980s.)

Interesting to read what Marco Cavina wrote about this (free translation):

« (...) an attempt was made to balance the additional costs of the optical unit by inserting synthetic elements into the mechanical frame, using new resins which, on paper, had to provide adequate guarantees regarding dimensional / thermal stability and reliability over time. 
« (...) during the course of the decades, it presented unforeseen problems of "aging" at the time when its use was decided and which decreed a structural fragility that exposed it to breakage.
« As soon as the manufacturer took note of this evolution of the materials, he reacted promptly, we must acknowledge it, eliminating the synthetic components from the barrel and taking this oportunity to recalculate the optical scheme (...), improving the correction of spherical aberration and elevating the overall performance of the "King of Bokeh", whose Germany specimens of the latest series are in fact excellent lenses that combine excellent sharpness and contrast with three-dimensional rendering and the typical out of focus for which the model is famous ».

Marco Cavina

[Stein K S]

On 12/21/2019 at 9:25 PM, Sergius said:

From number series 340xxxx or 341xxxx the plastic ring has been changed with a metal ring. More durable. In fact I have a 341xxx Canada with metal ring. 

Hi

So my Cron v4 with serial # 371... should be with no metal parts? Not that it really matters; my very first Leica lens ever bought late nineties still works just brilliantly. But it seems strange that this issue is kept almost a secret by Leica?!

 

[lct]

 

4 hours ago, Stein K S said:

But it seems strange that this issue is kept almost a secret by Leica?!

30 years time bar? Just curious.

[Sergius]

4 hours ago, Stein K S said:

Hi

So my Cron v4 with serial # 371... should be with no metal parts? Not that it really matters; my very first Leica lens ever bought late nineties still works just brilliantly. But it seems strange that this issue is kept almost a secret by Leica?!

 

Your Cron 371xxx has the frontal ring in metal. So no plastic part. It’s ok. 

[Sergius]

At end:

1) From 340xxx or 341xxx (it’s uncertain) leica changed optical design of lens (slightly better of first IV model)

2) From 340xxx or 341xxx (it’s uncertain) leica changed plastic parts with metal part

3) the last production of lens in Canada ( from  340xxx or 341xxx) has these modifications. They are very few. 
 

4) All Germany copies (because they start from  340xxx or 341xxx) have these modifications. 
 

 

 

Edited December 23, 2019 by Sergius

[lct]

14 minutes ago, Sergius said:

1) From 340xxx or 341xxx (it’s uncertain) leica changed optical design of lens (slightly better of first IV model)
2) From 340xxx or 341xxx (it’s uncertain) leica changed plastic parts with metal part
3) the last production of lens in Canada ( from  340xxx or 341xxx) has these modifications. They are very few. 
4) All Germany copies (because they start from  340xxx or 341xxx) have these modifications.

Where did you find those "340xxx or 341xxx" figures if i may ask?
According to LeicaWiki the first German-made copies were launched in 1987 (3453071 to 3454070) IINW and more than 26,000 copies have been made since then.

[Advertisement]

Hallo,

Look here: Leica M

[Sergius]

7 minutes ago, lct said:

Where did you find those "340xxx or 341xxx" figures if i may ask?
According to LeicaWiki the first German-made copies were launched in 1987 (3453071 to 3454070) IINW and more than 26,000 copies have been made since then.

I’m very sorry. You’re right. From German copies  3.390.000 start modifications.