35mm summicron APO M vs 35mm summilux FLE

[BrettW]

Advertisement (gone after registration)

38 minutes ago, Jeff S said:

Aperture/speed, not focal length.

Jeff

Hahaha....I can’t believe I didn’t catch that. That’s what I meant, thank you.

[sebben]

10 hours ago, lct said:

I must have posted this a couple years ago but i don't remember where.

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!

 

 

That is shocking. Was this at F2?

[Advertisement]

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

[jonoslack]

12 hours ago, jaeger said:

yep yep this is the one, post #35. 

 

8 hours ago, lct said:

All my apo lenses do the same more or less in case of overexposure. I did it on purpose there and can reproduce it at will. Don't ask me what kind of fringing it may be though. I would vote for LoCa given the purple and green fringes but i may be vastly wrong.

 

13 hours ago, evikne said:

Probably this post? A few posts later he revealed that the second picture was the APO:

 

Hi there

Okay, so I think the clue here is in LCT's post - Overexposure

Both these posts anyway relate to the 50 APO and not the 35 (which this thread is about)

I'd stated that I'd seen no CA in the 35 APO - I've gone back and checked and I haven't found any with the 50 APO-M either. There is a point here, which is that I don't overexpose.

Anyway - so I've gone back and read Sean Reid's reviews of both lenses, and he can find minimal to no CA, and says that's what you should expect from an APO lens. 

I'd agree that neither the 35 FLE or the 50 'Lux show much fringing (although the 50 'lux is probably APO anyway). It's the very fast lenses where it seems to be a problem.

So - it would appear that if you overexpose you can get CA with APO lenses - and blown highlights and other horrors, but I don't think lenses are designed to be overexposed!

All the best

[tom0511]

I once switched from a 50/1.4asph to 50 APO and never regretted.

The 35 FLE is my low light lens. Low light for me is usually indoors and there often 35 works better than 50.

So for the 35 it would be harder for me to give up 1.4 than it was for 50mm.

I think for 4-5k price it would be easier for me to replace my 35 Chron with 35 APO and keep FLE.

At the moment the price tag is too steep for my taste, even though I admit the images from Jono and the rendering is beautiful.

 

[otto.f]

13 hours ago, UliWer said:

One may have a look at Reid Reviews https://www.reidreviews.com

Sean Reid shows comparisons between the new Apo Summicon asph, the Summicron asph. and the Summilux FLE

Having the Summilux FLE I think I shall not go for the new Apo Summicron. Yes, I don‘t often use f/1.4, and yes, the new lens shows more resolution (if you put it on a tripod and eliminate all other individual faults when you take a photo). Yes, the new lens shows less chromatical aberrations - Sean Reid backs Jono’s experience that you wont be able to find any. Though I never happened to find any which bother me with the Summilux. I am sure the new Apo Summicron is the better lens - as I am sure a 1:2.8/35 Apo-Summaron asph. would be even better. 

The „old“ Summicron asph. or the Summilux FLE are the working horses for 35mm in the present Leica lens line; the new Apo-Summicron is the lens for Sundays. 
 

Caveat P.S: There is a general rule that Leica products - lenses as well as cameras - immediately get better when a new model is on the market. Who would say that his camera or lens was worse when he wants to sell it?
 

I follow the second rule: never sell a Leica lens. 

 

 

Thanks for the referral to Sean Reid’s review with the comparisons to the asph and the FLE. Although it’s a pity that he compares 30cm with the 70cm distance of the FLE, I can say that I find the bokeh of the APO very smooth and calm. The fact that I find some photo’s overly sharp might also be related to the used SL2 and M10R. Seeing the close-ups of the FLE by Reid here I’m feeling that love for my FLE’s OOF again, although it’s a bit busier. So I tend to share your view of sticking with the FLE. Thus far. 

[lct]

2 hours ago, jonoslack said:

So - it would appear that if you overexpose you can get CA with APO lenses - and blown highlights and other horrors, but I don't think lenses are designed to be overexposed!

Sure buy we may expose our pics correctly for a part of the frame and another part, typically branches into the light, are overexposed more or less severely. Letting believe that apo lenses correct for CA in all circumstances i something i would not do then but i'm no reviewer and i'm not saying that you or Sean are stating this way needless to say .

[UliWer]

Advertisement (gone after registration)

Just a few examples - all with M10 on tripod, approx. 200% crop in LR, correction for chromatical aberrations deactivated

Summilux FLE at f1.4 not overexposed 

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!

Summilux FLE at f 1.4 overexposed - no change of focus

 

Summicron Version1 from 1958 (neither apo nor asph) at f/2 - not overexposed:

Old Summicron at f/2 overexposed - no change of focus:

Conclusion: CA will be more prominent in the regions out of focus with a high resolution/ high contrast lens wide open and show even more when you overexpose. With a low resolution/ low  contrast lens CA will be lost in other deficiencies of the lens design.

 

Edited March 7, 2021 by UliWer

[Herr Barnack]

Quote

Conclusion: CA will be more prominent in the regions out of focus with a high resolution/ high contrast lens wide open and show even more when you overexpose. With a low resolution/ low  contrast lens CA will be lost in other deficiencies of the lens design.

So CA shows up in specific situations with specific subjects and is exacerbated by overexposure - correct? 

Is pronounced CA an issue in very low light environments when shooting at maximum aperture?

Edited March 7, 2021 by Herr Barnack

[Alberti]

On 3/7/2021 at 3:32 PM, UliWer said:

Just a few examples - all with M10 on tripod, approx. 200% crop in LR, correction for chromatical aberrations deactivated

Summilux FLE at f1.4 not overexposed 

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!

Summilux FLE at f 1.4 overexposed - no change of focus

 

Summicron Version1 from 1958 (neither apo nor asph) at f/2 - not overexposed:

Old Summicron at f/2 overexposed - no change of focus:

Conclusion: CA will be more prominent in the regions out of focus with a high resolution/ high contrast lens wide open and show even more when you overexpose. With a low resolution/ low  contrast lens CA will be lost in other deficiencies of the lens design.

 

Too bad your comparison is hidden for me - is it only visible for premium members??🤐

[andybarton]

No need for any conspiracy theories, please.
 

The thread is three years old. They have probably got lost in a database upgrade. 

[jaapv]

These were likely not uploaded images but image links. If the image gets moved on the hosting site the link is broken. . 

[patrickcolpron]

On 3/6/2021 at 7:39 AM, BrettW said:

Hi,

I’m a Leica newbie and I’m genuinely curious what the overall difference is between these two lenses, is there a noticeable difference? I understand they are two different focal lengths and the APO allows close focusing. Is the APO just better controlled and sharper than the Summilux? Or is it a completely different rendering?

 

 Thanks,

 Brett

 

Hi Brett,

I have both of those lenses, I've had a 35 Lux FLE the year it came out and regretted selling it a few years afterwards. Purchased another one about 6 years ago. I've had the APO 35 since about 6 months after it was announced. 

The APO 35 is my desert Island lens because it has no fringing and is stellar when used against the light. It has great color rendition and better contrast than the 35 FLE. 

In terms of rendering the APO 35 is very modern and so is the 35 FLE but the 35 FLE isn't anything special, the out of focus rendering of the APO 35 is more pleasing than the 35 FLE by a mile.

If I'd have to choose between both I'd go for the APO 35.

This said I did a few test shots wide open with a 35 V4 and the APO 35, my staff and my wife all preferred the rendering of the Summicron 35 V4. It is a lens which is not in your original question but one worthy of consideration.

The 35 FLE V1 that I have is great but doesn't hold up against the APO 35, and the 35 Cron V4 is the lens I had on one of my M10 today, while the APO 35 was on and still is on my MP loaded with TRI-X 

It doesn't come to nitpicking, the APO 35 is much better than the FLE, I could live without the FLE and the APO 35 could be my only lens. 

The close focusing is at best gimmicky but can come in handy in a pinch. 

[Alberti]

Thanks Patrick, I have the 35mm Cron v1 and v4. I see immediately what it means - often too preferring v4 - colour rendition, contrast and apparent sharpness. Still I had the v1 with me in some evenings to the Theatre Odeon. I never used it much in the evening at F2.0, now I did and the Christmas lights showed quite a lot of Coma - so much I thought I should look around.
The FLE 35mm II is very promissing but then even then the APO will outperform it. Looking at the MTF curves, I [out of ignorance] would select the APO. 

From the pictures I have seen, the APO ‘rendering’ resembles the v1 as long as that v1 is closed to < F4. But it is the wide-open I am in for, my reaaon to change.

  I have looked at the FLE vI a few weeks ago ath The Store but found it a bit large. Or at least the handling is quite different (even while the summicon I have has a tab too) from my current lenses.

So this is my current stage of thought. 

[andy/jaap - yes it is a pity such broken image links exist. ] Of course I was joking too a bit 🤭