about the Summilux 35 mm pre-asph.

[tommonego@gmail.com]

Advertisement (gone after registration)

vor 16 Stunden schrieb UliWer:

The first version has the same optics as the later one. But there may be a technical difference. The Canadian version had some protruding parts at the rear side which may collide with the interior of most digital M bodies.  The M 10 has an elevated bayonet surface which leaves more room. My Canadian version works with the M10 but not with the M9. Though even with an M 10 it is better to test before one buys a copy. The latest version which were built in Wetzlar are said not to cause this problem. Leica Customer Care can change the parts which cause the problems as well. 

Have had no problem with the 35 Summilux Canada (1972) on my CL or M8, though I don't like it that well on the 2 cameras as it is around a 50mm, which I hardly ever use. 

[tommonego@gmail.com]

vor 14 Stunden schrieb lct:

Any i don't know but E49 Leica filters can be dropped upside down between the two halves of the 12504 hood.

I don't have any Leica 49mm but do have 49mm B+W filters which fit in the 12504 hood. I do have a problem with a 49mm no name IR R72 filter. I do have series 7 filters which is what the hood was designed for. 

[Ernstk]

It's a wonderful lens, almost 2 lenses in 1. At f1.4 it renders beautifully and when stopped down is as sharp as a Summicron (according to Erwin Puts).

Here is a shot on an M-P 240 at f1.4

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!

[a.noctilux]

On 1/11/2021 at 1:35 PM, shirubadanieru said:

Yeah it’s ok but it’s much better if we could use it without the hood and still use filters (like the v1 steel rim), especially given it’s such a small lens the hood makes it a bit more bulky. Again not a big deal, but if I had the choice I’d definitely choose being able to add a filter without the need to use the hood  

No need of hood possible, even if filter choices are small.

I discovered some years ago that I can use the Kodak adapters to A42 which use Serie VI filter.

like this one

Benefit is I can use on most of my A42 lenses ( S-A 4/21 with vignetting ? to TE 4/135).

Series filters are hard to find though.

[Pyrogallol]

There are plenty of series filters on the usual auction site https://www.ebay.co.uk/sch/i.html?_from=R40&_trksid=m570.l1313&_nkw=series+7+filter&_sacat=625&LH_TitleDesc=0

I picked up a nice set of three Leitz series 6 filters recently very cheap.

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!

[evikne]

Regarding the minimum focus distance: "Everybody" says it is 1 meter. But on my lens, the yellow scale goes to a little below 3 ft. And when I measured, I could focus down to about 85 cm, which is about 2.8 ft, so that seems to be true.

BTW, I don't know exactly where to start measuring. Is it from the sensor, from the focal point of the lens, or another place?

[pgk]

Advertisement (gone after registration)

15 minutes ago, evikne said:

BTW, I don't know exactly where to start measuring. Is it from the sensor, from the focal point of the lens, or another place?

From the sensor/film plane is the 'standard' because its a 'known point' and anything else would be more arbitrary and incomparable.

[lct]

15 minutes ago, evikne said:

Regarding the minimum focus distance: "Everybody" says it is 1 meter. But on my lens, the yellow scale goes to a little below 3 ft. And when I measured, I could focus down to about 85 cm, which is about 2.8 ft, so that seems to be true.

BTW, I don't know exactly where to start measuring. Is it from the sensor, from the focal point of the lens, or another place?

From the sensor. Would be surprising if you find significantly less than 1 metre then but i may be wrong.

[evikne]

I measured again, a little more precisely, and came to about 89 cm. It's at least somewhat better than 1 meter (but I may be wrong too).

[ckuwajima]

36 minutes ago, evikne said:

I measured again, a little more precisely, and came to about 89 cm. It's at least somewhat better than 1 meter (but I may be wrong too).

That is about right. The minimun distance in lens scale is really less than 1m and a bit less than the 3 ft mark.

[Frase]

MINE IS ABOUT 85CM.

SORRY ABOUT THE CAPS KEYBOARD GONE WEIRD!

Edited January 22, 2021 by Frase

[evikne]

15 minutes ago, Steven said:

Could you test your FLE to see if you get precisely 70 cm or less here too ? 

I measured the FLE to 69 or 70 cm. I took a picture here of both lenses, and you can see how the pre-ASPH goes to a bit less than 3 ft (and clearly below 1 m), while the FLE goes to 0.7 m or a tiny bit below.

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!

[evikne]

21 minutes ago, Frase said:

MINE IS ABOUT 85CM.

This is the pre-ASPH, I suppose (a question about the FLE came in between)?

[Frase]

YES

[rijve044]

My Summilux 1.4/ 35 mm Pre Asph (1973) has probably an extended helicoid (Schnecke)

The 1 meter mark in the closest distance corresponds with the f 16 mark on the right side of the depth of scale

and I measure 71-72 cm. 

[Freestyler977]

Dear guys,

I'm about to buy a Summilux 35mm pre-asph, I've found an aesthetically perfect example from a private seller but.. the aperture ring is very loose, it marks the aperture stops perfectly but it is loose. The seller says it is a typical feature of summilux 35 lenses, what is your experience as owners? Is the aperture ring usually loose in these lenses?

Thanks in advance for your answers.

[lct]

2 hours ago, Freestyler977 said:

Is the aperture ring usually loose in these lenses

Not in my v2 from 1989.

[darylgo]

The models I've had varied a bit but I don't remember them being overly loose.  Perhaps defining loose would be beneficial, my take is the ring turns easily and not that the ring is sloppy with forward (toward the front element) and back (toward the back element) movement.  If it's the first then I've seen this on my 50mm Apo, the ring barely engages the detents.  It can be an issue when shooting and a source of frustration when unintended changes occur.  

[rpsawin]

I have an original Steel Rim Leitz Canada Summilux 35/1.4. I've used it on my M2, M10-R and M10-M. While I have enjoyed all of the results I think I like it with the M10-M and an orange filter the most. This lens on my M10-R is wonderful but I rarely use it wide open. It's most often set at 2.0 or 2.8. In all cases, to my eyes, it has wonderful quality and it renders like no other lens I've used. It's been awhile since I used it on my M2 and I look forward to trying again with some B&W film.

I am not a very technical person when it comes to evaluating gear. I know what appeals to me and tat governs my selections.

[Advertisement]

Hallo,

Look here: Leica M