Why is the Leica 35 Summilux Double ASPHERICAL (AA) so special

[Erato]

Advertisement (gone after registration)

It could be hype when the street price of tier-2 products(35AA) surpass the tier-1 product(APO-35, 3 Aspherical elements).
It's rare, but it's gone too far. There're plenty of choices if you're looking for a lens that comes with cine/film rendition. 

BTW, both lenses(35AA/FLE) are unique, excellent, and the price is very different indeed.

Edited April 18, 2021 by Erato

[padam]

29 minutes ago, pedaes said:

To you maybe, but scientific analysis is never meaningless. Why do Leica issue MTF graphs for every lens they produce? Look, just go with your own judgement and be happy, but be aware there is quite a difference between a low res screen image and a A2 print.

They useful but looking at actual images when possible (which are in this case are full-res, so as good as it can be without a raw file) is actually much more useful to see how they behave on a digital sensor, which wasn't even a thing when the AA was released.
But some people are happier to be ignorant and base everything on theoretical analysis and that's wrong (imho of course).

[pedaes]

32 minutes ago, padam said:

But some people are happier to be ignorant and base everything on theoretical analysis and that's wrong (imho of course).

Are you referring to me as ignorant?  If not, what is the point of this sentence? Can you justify the price of this lens as a user lens if you don't like the alternative view?

Edited April 18, 2021 by pedaes

[padam]

6 minutes ago, pedaes said:

Are you referring to me?  If not, what is the point of this sentence? 

"be aware there is quite a difference between a low res screen image and a A2 print."

From this it seems quite clear that you didn't actually check the article, so it is safe to assume that you don't care too much about image examples compared to other resources.
Everybody is entitled to his/her opinion, I was only trying to provide useful information.

[pedaes]

2 minutes ago, padam said:

I was only trying to provide useful information.

So am I - of the objective type.

I will take it you were calling me ignorant and will proceed accordingly, and look forward to your apology.

[01af]

If you're willing to pay dearly then better go for the Apo-Summicron-M 35 mm Asph. It out-performs both the Summilux-M 35 mm Aspherical and the Summilux-M 35 mm Asph FLE, in terms of detail resolution, flare resistance, beauty of rendition, and bokeh. And it's rare and hard to come by, too. Who could ask for more?

[adan]

Advertisement (gone after registration)

7 minutes ago, 01af said:

....the Apo-Summicron-M 35 mm Asph. It out-performs both the Summilux-M 35 mm Aspherical and the Summilux-M 35 mm Asph FLE,.....

Except, of course, at f/1.4.

__________________

On the wider questions:

1) using an MTF chart limited to 40 lpmm to compare lenses is like comparing a Bugatti, a Lamborghini, and a Ferrari while limiting them to 80kph. Maybe some useful information, but not a serious measure of full performance.

Even a 24 megapixel sensor can make use of 80 lpmm, so I'd prefer to know the lens performance at that level.

2) There are actually three different 35mm f/1.4 aspherical lens designs. AA (1991), ASPH v.1(1994), ASPH v.2 FLE (2010).

If one cares, all produce slightly different MTF charts (and have slightly difference weights). Always remembering that Leica publishes theoretical MTF as graphed by its design computers, not as determined by real-world optical-bench measurements.

3) Someone asked if there would be a reliably-detectable difference if one were handed 100 pictures made equally with the AA and ASPH. In the other thread linked to on the first page, I quoted the late Erwin Puts as saying he would be hard-pressed to tell which was which in such a case. The differences are too minor.

4) The exorbitant price of the hand-ground, rare, double-aspheric "Aspherical" lens is virtually entirely due to its rarity.

On a personal level, I prefer the design choices made for the double aspherical, as Leica's engineers juggled aberrations in the computer (emphasis on center resolution at the expense of a little corner resolution). But I wouldn't pay more than $1000 extra for that difference, if I found an AA, an ASPH (1) and an ASPH (2/FLE) sitting on a dealer's shelf side by side by side.

5) In terms of what actually matters in photography (which pictures will end up in the permanent human archive of great images - i.e. galleries, museums, publications, collectors' walls - and not be forgotten within a few years) even MTF is not a reliable predictor. Nor will anyone remember, nor care, what lens was used. Nor the price paid for it.

[Arif]

I did not use the FLE but have used all the different 35 lux since the early 90's. For some reason (as can be verified by my worn out AA), I have preferred the AA and it has never given me any problems including flare or back focus or any reason to upgrade.  Along with the 50APO, it is my mostly used lens on the original monochrome and just does the job and creates an aesthetic I like.  Have sold all the others since and have not regretted at all.

[Knipsknecht]

vor 11 Minuten schrieb Steven:

[...] I've observed this phenomenon that every time a lens is expensive, people feel the need to attack it. But it's not the lens's fault. It's the dealers fault. Attack them, not the lens. 

Probably, it‘s a “Ying-Yang” game. If a lens is rare and expensive, those who own it tend to mystify it, others feel obliged to denounce it. One can see this kind of pattern not only with Leica Glas but with almost any special and expensive lenses.

With Leica, the additional problem is that some rare lenses have become collectors items and therefore are extremely expensive - even if their performance is by today’s standards debatable.

[pedaes]

46 minutes ago, Steven said:

the Pre FLE

Do you, personally, see a diference between pre-FLE and FLE? As you know, they are the same optically apart from the floating elements.

[M10Alpine]

2 hours ago, Steven said:

Personally, I have never been able to judge a lens from these kind of links, or even less from charts. Theres no point to me to compare two lenses on a brick wall, or on a tree with foliage bokeh. I prefer real life examples, and trying them when it's possible. Actually, I once compared the SL 35 APO against a sony 35mm 1.8 on a doll portrait in my house, using a 12MP sony against a 47MP Leica, and the two photos appeared to be identical. But I can guarantee you that I could never get the photos I get with the Leica combo with the sony one. 

It takes real life to judge a lens. It takes a multitude of situations, and different lights, to know if you like it or not. 

Someone earlier mentioned that most of would not tell the difference between lenses side by side. Myself, I am pretty good at blind test, as long as the lenses are compared wide open of course (at 5.6, they're all the same !) . I would not see the difference between the AA and the Pre FLE most of the time, because they are very similar. But I would see the difference between the AA and the FLE probably 75% of the time. The difference between the AA and the APO 95% of the time, and the difference between the AA and the Pre Apsh 100% of the time. The FLE is surely the best 35 Lux on paper, but when using it, I didn't love it. As is the case for many. The Pre FLE is excellent. The AA reminds me of the Pre FLE, without focus shift, and sharper in the center. The pre asph I lovely too. 

But trust me on one thing: I am not saying the AA is the best lens for everyone. But you need to try it to understand it. Not look at a side by side tree photo. Trust the testimonies. Everyone who tried it fell in love. Even those who paid cheap for it. It IS special. 

I've observed this phenomenon that every time a lens is expensive, people feel the need to attack it. But it's not the lens's fault. It's the dealers fault. Attack them, not the lens. 

I totally agree with you. Very well put, real life test, different situations etc. I also find comparing pictures difficult. I was interested in real life experience of the AA, the feel etc. I think you nailed it. Steve do you have it, if you don't mind me asking ?

[M10Alpine]

I have two pre FLE Summilux's and the FLE . The FLE is getting the least amount of use. I have a los Summcron 35mm Version III that I really like on both film and digital. 

I'm thinking about getting the AA but the price is a little out there @Steven will you keep your 35mm APO?

Even if the price is crazy I don't think its something I would lose money on trying out.

 

Edited April 19, 2021 by M10Alpine

[ELAN]

Through the years 35mm became my favorite focal length.  Until two years ago the 35 FLE was my only 35 lens, and like some here, I've had a love-hate relationship with it.  I searched for another 35, tried a few, and finally decided on the 35 AA, which lived on my M almost exclusively for over a year.  But there was still that talked-about King of Bokeh I hadn't tried... so since 3 months ago a silver 35 v4 has been mounted on my M10.

No question that the 35 AA is my favorite.  Wide open to f/2.4 it renders beautifully.  Softer than the FLE and the bokeh is nicer and less busy.

The 35 v4 KoB is not nearly as nice as the AA at f/2, but it's small and sharp and fun to use when I'm in the mood for bokeh-less f/8 compositions, which I have been in lately.

The 35 FLE lives in a dry cabinet.  I mount it once in a while (love its ergonomics) but not often. Still, I can't seem to part with it.

I've waited a long time for the 35 APO and now that it's finally here for some reason I'm not yet tempted by it.  My 35 fix is satisfied, for now.

[farnz]

50 minutes ago, ELAN said:

... My 35 fix is satisfied, for now.

It seems that it's time for you to try the 8-element 35/2 Summicron v1, ELAN. 😈 

Pete.

[ELAN]

58 minutes ago, farnz said:

It seems that it's time for you to try the 8-element 35/2 Summicron v1, ELAN. 😈 

I tried it at the meet in Porto (I think you were there too?). The Leica Store loaned it to me. Didn’t buy it, I was more into wide open back then.  The 35/2.8 is tempting but I don’t want too many 35 choices. Then I’ll have Steven’s problems  :)

[M10Alpine]

3 hours ago, Steven said:

@M10Alpine

I do have the AA. I got an opportunity to get my hands on a copy for 17K, that looked like the copies that are selling for 25K. This means brand new. Absolutely perfect condition. I got it thinking that if I didn't like it or thought it was not worth it, I could sell it back the day after with a profit. But for now, I think it is worth it to me. I have wasted much money trying different 35 lenses, going back and forth between all of them, that at the end of the day, it might just save me money to own the AA. I think it's the best compromise between everything I look for in a lens, and I absolutely love how it renders, although it has not made me completely forget my Pre FLE yet. But it is a beautiful lens, smaller than the pre fle by a little bit, no focus shift, and sharper, magical rendering, without being emotionless like the FLE. I also believe that it will continue to gain value, and that soon, it will cost 30+ to get yourself a copy. So I preferred to go for it now. On of the forum member got four 35AA when they were around 12K, and everybody told him he was crazy. Not so much anymore. Turns out that this forum member' second favorite lens is also the pre fle. If you like the pre fle, you will love the AA. And you will never need anything else. 

As for the APO, I returned it. I loved it, it is a marvel, but some reasons why I did not keep it were, in no particular order: 

- it was the time when I was looking to buy the 35AA, so it helped to finance it

- it is MUCH bigger than I am ok with for an F2 lens (almost the size of the 35AA)

- the MFD, while a nice bonus to have, was not as convenient to use as I expected, especially on an M body, where I found it awkward

- I am sucker for F1.4, not because of DOF, but because I think F1.4 shots have more mood. I much prefer my pre fle at 1.4 than my APO at 2. As I said, charts and tech perfection never mattered to me. The only thing I look for in a lens is the way it paints. The APO has a look, similar to the Q2, that I like, but it's not the most flattering for portrait. 

- I have too many 35s, and I get frustrated choosing, so I am on the search of the holy grail kit, which will start by being as minimalist as possible. 

- The most important reason: because the APO was more enjoyable to use on the SL2S than the M to me, it became a threat to my favourite SL2S lens, the 28 Lux. I love this lens so much, but I could see myself leaving it more on the shelf due to size difference with the 35 APO, and I didn't not want that to happen. So I sacrifice the APO35 to protect the 28 Lux. Leica problems 🙈

I am getting near that kit right now. I have four 35s left: 

1. The 35AA, for the modern look and the most versatile option. It can do everything I throw at it. 

2. The Pre FLE, as a back up to my 35AA. I usually take it out when I know I'm going to beat the camera a little more, when it's raining, or when I walk around sketchy neighbourhoods. 

3. The Summilux 35 Pre Asph Steel Rim, for the vintage look, and when I need something really compact to walk around 

4. The Nokton Classic, as a back up to my Steel Rim, for the same reasons listed in point 2. 

In my head, I only have two 35s, so I exactly know when is which needed, and I never regret the one I didn't bring with me anymore. 

 

Funny I'm on that exact same path: "

- I have too many 35s, and I get frustrated choosing, so I am on the search of the holy grail kit, which will start by being as minimalist as possible. "

We should get together in Paris and shoot. I was in the Leica store getting a filter yesterday. 

Thanks for the exhaustive explanation. 

 

[farnz]

1 hour ago, ELAN said:

I tried it at the meet in Porto (I think you were there too?).

Yes I was - I took a picture of you in your wonderful hat in near silhouette on top of the Sandeman's Port building where we all had dinner.  A great Leica Meet and Jose-Antonio Salcedo and Fatima were excellent hosts.

Pete.

[farnz]

1 hour ago, Steven said:

Every time you post, in any thread, your profile picture fits perfectly with your post 😇

Thank you, Steven.  It's a picture taken by forum member jcraf that I feel sums me up rather aptly - I rarely take very much seriously (life's too short), least of all myself. 

Pete.

[ELAN]

3 minutes ago, farnz said:

Yes I was - I took a picture of you in your wonderful hat in near silhouette on top of the Sandeman's Port building where we all had dinner.  A great Leica Meet and Jose-Antonio Salcedo and Fatima were excellent hosts.

That's right.  That photo you took was with your Noctilux f/1.  I remember being at awe how you can nail focus wide open in dim light.  A couple of years of practice later I can almost do the same.  Lovely lens.   

[Advertisement]

Hallo,

Look here: Leica M

[insideline]

1 hour ago, Steven said:

I noticed something, while pixel peeping. I was not actually pixel peeping (I never do), just photoshopping little detail.

The AA seems to have a little bit of (vintage) glow in the highlights. Not like on the pre asph of course, it's much more subtle. Something my pre fle does not have. 

I define my 35 pre asph Lux as dreamy, and my pre fle as 3D pop. 

I guess the AA is a 3D pop lens, with a gentle touch of dreaminess... Maybe this is the beginning of an explanation to that thing we cannot pinpoint. 

I would post an example, but when I compress the image for the forum requirement, the highlight are pixelated and you cannot zoom in anymore.... 

I have waited to chime in here on the AA as I have enjoyed the different posts from old and new users of the AA. I purchased my Double Aspherical new in 1991 after receiving a call from my long time Leica dealer informing me that this was a special lens and he felt I would like it. I distinctly remember well when I viewed the first roll of developed film and was astonished how much superior this lens was over my old F2 Summicron. Over the years I shot many many rolls of film with it then with the M9, the M9 Monochrom which I felt was a special match, M240 and now M10 Monochrom which I enjoy the most of all. I did not purchase the Pre FLE as I did not feel there was a reason to, but I did buy the FLE twice, first soon after its launch and again this past year but I just never did bond with it as its out of focus seemed just unpleasant for a lack of a better explanation. The AA is a very sharp lens and offers a level of acuity combined with a lovely character that the FLE simply cannot match. Is it worth $20,000 in the market no, but neither is my (Dad's) original 1968 1.2 Noctilux worth what they are selling for, but both render with a character often lacking in the new APO lenses, and subjectively I enjoy more the feeling of character in my photographs. I do own the 50 APO and it is an amazing lens for the purity it renders but the AA possesses an overall sense of character the APO simply does not. Possibly this is what Steven has discovered during his new journey with these Leica 35mm lenses, and like Steven I will keep my amazing 28 Lux and not purchase the new 35 APO.