about the Summilux 35 mm pre-asph.

[kengai]

Advertisement (gone after registration)

I can't find the Leica code for this lens. Can you help me?

I would also like to ask your opinion about this lens, especially when using it on the M10.
I've read about it very well, some even prefer it to the asph. 
What are its characteristics? How does it differ from the asph.?

[Advertisement]

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

[a5m]

11870-black

11860-titan

11871-M3 (w/ specs)

https://www.l-camera-forum.com/leica-wiki.en/index.php/35mm_f/1.4_Summilux_II

If you're referring to the 6-Bit Code it doesn't exist for this lens.

Main characteristic associated with this lens would be 'Leica Glow', especially wide open. Compared to the newer ASPH (Pre or FLE) I'd say the main difference is sharpness, again, especially wide open and also across the field.

[ocean2059]

You may find more information here: 

The Summilux 35/1.4 was produced from 1961-1995, shared very similar optical design of Summicron 35/2 pre-ASPH. I have not used this lens but have used a similar optical design version of the lens, a CV Nocton 35/1.2 V2 lens, and I am very happy with it. 

[adan]

As to the code number - it has a ton of them, depending on whether it came with goggles or not, or in silver, black, or titanium finish

11860, 11869, 11870, 11871, 11872,

Specific issues with digital Leicas (not just the M10) - not supported for 6-bit coded, and there is not even a code to add yourself. Can show slight blue vignetting in the corners without coding, or being ID'd in the lens menu.

May jam or be unmountable due to a protective baffle that surrounds the rear element and can hit the inside of the camera (the baffle can be removed by a repair person).

Biggest "defect" for me - cannot focus closer than 1 meter (except maybe the goggled versions for M3 use?). Other than that loose framing, I would use one happily.

Characteristics: at f/1.4 it is very soft and dream-like in rendering. Like a natural "negative clarity" setting. Boke is a bit "nervous" from overlapping rings or "eggs" at certain distances. See below.

By f/2 and below, it is on a par with the pre-asph 35 Summicron v.4 (and better then the v.2/3 Summicrons). The center is sharp, with increasing softness towards the picture edges, slowly improving between f/2 and f/8. The overall contrast remains lower than most ASPH lenses - a plus for me.

M9 picture at f/1.4 (and 1 meter)

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!

 

....and at f/5.6 or so (and 1 meter)

 

[pgk]

When it was designed, the 35mm Summilux (pre-asph) was state-the-art glass designed by Walter Mandler. In fact it was so good that a paper from a few years ago, by lens designers at Elcan, concluded that, given the glass constraints when the lens was designed, it could not have been bettered even using modern computer design. Quite an accolade. Its characteristics are that it is soft wide open but gets better as soon as it is stopped down. I have one and its a delightful little lens but it really isn't up to today's Summiluxes in terms of performance. Things have moved on. But I like it a lot and still use it on occasion.

[evikne]

I've had both the 35mm ASPH FLE, 35/2 pre-ASPH v.4 and now the 35/1.4 pre-ASPH v.2. Like the The Summicron, it's quite usable at f/2.0 and even more so at f/2.8. The extra f/1.4 stop is hardly usable to me, because it's usually too soft for my taste. And the 1m minimum focusing distance is quite limitating sometimes. 

At the moment I'm not quite sure if I'm going to keep it or going back to one of the other lenses. There are pros and cons with all of them, and that's very confusing. 🙄

[tommonego@gmail.com]

Advertisement (gone after registration)

I have one from 1969, works well on my M8, CL and of course M3. Made the mistake of doing an image of 3 lovely women near 70 at f1.4 all with white hair, wew did it glow, backlit. My wife made me promise never to show it, not a great picture so that is fine. But stopped down it is excellent, works for me as I am not an f1.4 person. I bought the lens because I could at the time been with me for 40+ years.

[OR120]

ME typ240 with 35 Summilux pre at f2.8 - this shot was posted earlier in forum:

 

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!

[AndreasG]

This lens was designed in the film era for available light photography, it still performs very well under such conditions today with a digital M, see some recent examples here. Certainly, modern lens calculations are superior, but this old piece of glass and metal is still one of my favorites today.

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 March 30, 2020 by AndreasG

[a.noctilux]

When I bought the 35mm Summilux-M asph , I sold the pre-asph. which I used for decades.

Regretting it, I rebought one but this nice lens is seldom used for it has some "flaws" to be learned.

As said above, 1 meter  focus can be a pain.

No thread in front to screw-in filter, so for Monochrom's colored filter , I must use Series 7 (or E49 ! ) in the hood 12504.

A bit too much "glow" at f/1.4 with curvature of field untill f/8 for use as "focus-then-reframe" ( I had some bad surprises with this ) when I rely on my experiences of

flat-field-lenses ( = asph. modern lens).

[mdg1371]

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!

[mdg1371]

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!

[mbray]

I bought a 1968 version of this lens some years ago which worked well with my M8.2. It has two fungus spots between the two cemented elements but these tend to be invisible most of the time as is the dust in the lens. It is absolutley fine from f2.8 to f16 and I will only use f1.4 when I want the glow (not often). I have a third party copy of the hood and a Series 7 filter. I see little point in selling it really - on a sunny day as a travel lens with an M240 it's fine.

[Peter Zapp]

Today's sensors reveal it's faults at f1.4 better than HP5 or Tri-X. On the other hand, today's sensors need f1.4 less than HP5 or Tri-X, other than for the effect. It's still more compact than any current lens. I upgraded to the aspherical Summicron to preserve a collector's item rather than to improve technical image quality.

 

 

 

[pgk]

On 4/1/2020 at 12:44 PM, mbray said:

I bought a 1968 version of this lens some years ago ..... It has two fungus spots between the two cemented elements 

If the spots are in the cement I'd be very doubtful that its fungus. 

[mbray]

On 4/2/2020 at 3:00 PM, pgk said:

If the spots are in the cement I'd be very doubtful that its fungus. 

Breakdown in the cement perhaps? I will see if I can photograph it.

[mbray]

When I partly disassembled this lens (front group) the marks were definitely in/on the inner elements.  

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!

[AndreasG]

Looks for me like a partial delamination of two cemented lenses.

[Advertisement]

Hallo,

Look here: Leica M

[mbray]

1 minute ago, AndreasG said:

Looks for me like a partial delamination of two cemented lenses.

Sounds expensive if it affects performance. Trip to Solms, I would assume (if I wanted it fixed).

[pgk]

That doesn't look like fungus to me at all.

Its worth getting it looked at as it might just be marks on an accessible lens surface and if so may be cleanable.If you look at a diagram of the lens you will see that there are 5 glass to air surfaces (excluding the back glass to air surface which it obviously isn't on) and one glass to glass (glued) surface in the rear section of this lens, It could be on one of these glass to air surfaces which means that it would potentially be cleanable, so is worth getting checked.

However if it is between the two glued lens surfaces it is probably delamination and if so it looks as though this may be around foreign objects - a couple of dust particles maybe - if so it might well have been this way since manufacture. I had a v4 Summicron with substantial delimitation, almost certainly due to being dropped at some point. The cement had sheared completely  so the two elements had just separated (you could tell by the Newton's rings which showed up inside the lens due to the very small air gap) and I did have the optics repaired bas they could be regaled having come apart, only to discover that the mechanics (plastic section) was irreparably damaged too. Problem is that I'm not sure what adhesive they used to glue the elements together on this Summilux lens but I'm guessing it would have been a modern type. If so it will potentially be difficult to separate the elements, so a repair may not be possible. On the bright side I'm thinking that its unlikely to get worse and will only potentially increase flare under specific circumstances. So I'd live with it myself and not worry about it being a fungus which might spread!