Monochrom & Summilux steel rim?

[shirubadanieru]

Advertisement (gone after registration)

Hello I was wondering if anyone here has the Summilux 35 steel rim & shoots it with the Monochrom. If you do, could you share your impressions & some shots (especially wide open) thank you in advance!

[Advertisement]

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

[Ecar]

Here on the CCD M9M. No experience with the CMOS MM bodies.

Wide open, the 'native' contrast is on the low side, so you'll need some PP work to make your B&W pop if the scene light is dull. As with many low-contrast lenses, I find that it's often easier/quicker to get more bite by using the channel mixer and convert from colour - even if this sometimes means throwing the original scene's tonal relationships out of the window. Stop it down a bit, and it becomes much easier to tame. Quite frankly, the f/1.4 aperture was a bit of a stretch for such a lens when it was released (although I happen to like it's wide-open rendering). This applies to the v2 as well, albeit to a lesser degree.

Edited January 8, 2021 by Ecar

[shirubadanieru]

@Ecar thank you so much! I found one today and it goes so well with the Monochrom
Reached Leica Nirvana with this ahah here’s a shot of the set and two pics one wide open one stopped down. 

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!

[Ecar]

Good thing it came with the OLLUX 😉

[a.noctilux]

Nice !

Lovely glows as usual 😄.

10 to 8 has "nicely warm glow", but the famous logo is recognizable, "there".

 

Leica Nirvana ?

waiting for another Nirvana,

...another Nirvana,

and so on ...😉

[shirubadanieru]

14 minutes ago, a.noctilux said:

Nice !

Lovely glows as usual 😄.

10 to 8 has "nicely warm glow", but the famous logo is recognizable, "there".

 

Leica Nirvana ?

waiting for another Nirvana,

...another Nirvana,

and so on ...😉

Yes the glow is nice, sharp yet dreamy by f2 and especially f2.8 it behaves pretty much like a summicron v1 / summaron. 

ahah I know what you mean...I don’t wanna use nirvana lightly as I keep selling and buying but hopefully this time around this will serve me well for a lot of years. 

M3 & Rigid
MM & Steel rim
(& elmar 50mm f3.5 as backup)

Sold everything else

[shirubadanieru]

Advertisement (gone after registration)

17 minutes ago, Ecar said:

Good thing it came with the OLLUX 😉

Indeed this hood can cost as much as most lenses...ahah thanks again Ecar 

[Musotographer]

I have a 1992 v2 in titanium, which I love - but I knew nothing about the steel rim v1 (just shows that there's always something to learn in Leicaland). Do the two versions have similar optics and results? 

[a.noctilux]

I've seen that the coatings are different, but the optical cell stay the same over time and "versions".

I dont know for "steel rim", I have over long period different non-asph. Summilux 1.4/35, they give mostly same rendering.

Marco Cavina has a very nice article, here, long and very interesting read in Italian

 

 

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!

We have also here reference number for different lenses

11871, 11870, 11860 for pre-asph.

11873, 11874, 11663 for asph. models

[shirubadanieru]

Got to play around with this combo a bit more here are two shots both wide open, beautiful bokeh and while glowy it’s still sharp  

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!

[shirubadanieru]

Just sharing this review for whoever is interested, since there aren’t many online and from the date of the post it was just created last week https://tahusa.co/lens-review/leica-summilux-35mm-f1-4-pre-a-v1-steel-rim/ 

[Guest Nowhereman]

On 1/16/2021 at 7:33 AM, a.noctilux said:

...Marco Cavina has a very nice article, here, long and very interesting read in Italian...

Thanks. Very informative. I don't know Italian,  but there is an easy way to read this: you can download a free version of the DeepL translator, which is better than Google Translate for idiomatic translations, here. Then, you highlight a text section between the images and then hold down the Command key and click "c" twice and immediately get a very good translation on your screen.

The article has a detailed comparison between the goggled, "M3 version" of the Summilux 35 (11871) and the FLE (11663) — with comparative pictures of the same subject at at a range of distances and a range of apertures. What strikes one immediate is how different the color rendition of the two lenses is: makes me think that the 11871 would be better for B&W than color, that it's lower contrast could be interesting for the M10, and that the bokeh for non-architectural subjects could be interesting. I wonder what @Steven, whose color sense I like, thinks about this?

Below is the DeepL translation of Marco Cavina's conclusion on the 1m distance shots as well the general conclusions: 

Quote

 

Moving to a distance of one meter, the different optical scheme, the flotation of the more modern version and the different course of the spherical aberration curve allow the older model to guarantee a slightly better legibility of the out-of-focus at f/1.4 and f/2 apertures, This advantage vanished at the following apertures due to the superior analytical power of the aspherical model, which is also reflected in the out-of-focus areas and, perhaps, also due to the location of the astigmatic planes that changes position on the focal plane when closing the diaphragm, as often happens with older bright lenses; even in this operating condition the modern version confirms itself exceptionally constant at the various diaphragms taken into consideration, showing a visible but not marked superiority at f/5.6 - 8 and much more evident at the larger apertures, producing however images characterised by a very strong contrast that, if perfect in black and white in ambient light with certain subjects, in the case of this banal "souvenir photo" it results a bit penalizing because it tends to plug the shadows and to accentuate the "clipping" of the high lights, while the 60's model allows a greater compensation, even if at the expense of the image brightness and with that yellowish cast that cries out for revenge or, at least, a CC20B filter. ..

So these are two lenses with a very different performance: the old version, at maximum apertures, switches to blur in a more gradual way and, while resolving the necessary details with sufficient precision, returns a soft image with compensated contrasts; vice versa, the modern and ardent Asph. floating is colder, gives an almost brutal plastic detachment with a more indistinct blur and guarantees a very high contrast even at full aperture, a certainly exceptional feature that can be a boon or a bane, depending on the conditions and the subject; certainly the current Summilux, from a purely technical point of view, does not present the side of criticism: the colours are correct, the vignetting is acceptable, the distortion is well controlled, the rendering is uniform in the field, the resolution and contrast are constant right from the maximum aperture and at the various shooting distances: it is an instrument that does not set any limits a priori; where, instead, it could ignite discussions is in the "artistic rendering" of certain images, based on the poetry of words that do not cross the optical perfection but lucky overlaps and coexistence of aberrations fortuitously (or deliberately? ) present in the lens.

As already said, Mandler's original Summilux is certainly not the right lens to shoot buildings or two-dimensional elements with minute details up to the edges to be reproduced sharply, however its smooth rendering, gradual bo-keh and contrast compensation make it a well-cut tool for environmental reportage in raw and contrasty light conditions; It must also be said that the later and modern versions produced towards the end of its long career present a less warm chromatic blend and - one would say - also a tweak to the spherical aberration that slightly modifies its behaviour, without however changing the personality of the lens.

To summarize a brief personal opinion, I would say that the trajectory of the Summilux-M 35mm f/1.4 in half a century of life coincides with that of other Leitz lenses, evolved over time and transformed from instruments for poets to instruments for technicians: the principle of the manufacturer does not make a wrinkle: it is right and legitimate that, over the years, aberrations are resolved to the maximum degree, increasing resolution and contrast at all apertures, especially the larger ones, and in this field Leica has carried out a radical revision of undoubted effectiveness, also with an eye to the telecentric projection, since all models currently in production excel under this point of view; However, there remains the voice of those who use Leica and some of its lenses, among which the Mandler Summilux 35mm, to obtain effects linked also to the performance "flaws" so pitilessly detected and corrected by the Manufacturer; to these users I suggest to carefully try on the field the various lenses, choosing with the heart those that best suit their feeling, without looking too much at their age!

 

________________________
Frog Leaping photobook