Mauribix Posted September 7, 2007 Share #1 Posted September 7, 2007 Advertisement (gone after registration) Hi guys... I'm so troubled now... yesterday I could make a couple of shots using a 35lux pre-asph (the latest pre-asph)...but i couldn't take a lot of time in doing what i wanted to do with it... I've searched many past thread in the forum looking for a comparison between ASPH and pre-ASPH... now it's up to you..What would you suggest and why? and most important: Have you got some portraits or street photo to show how them perform (especially open wide)? regards Maurizio Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Advertisement Posted September 7, 2007 Posted September 7, 2007 Hi Mauribix, Take a look here 35lux: to ASPH or not to ASPH?that is the question.... I'm sure you'll find what you were looking for!
brivadois Posted September 7, 2007 Share #2 Posted September 7, 2007 Everybody says the ASPH is sharper than the non Asph, and it is. It's difficult to see that on a screen. Here is a street photo with M8+ Cron35 ASPH. François 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! Link to post Share on other sites Simply register for free here – We are always happy to welcome new members! ' data-webShareUrl='https://www.l-camera-forum.com/topic/32847-35lux-to-asph-or-not-to-asphthat-is-the-question/?do=findComment&comment=347949'>More sharing options...
Mauribix Posted September 7, 2007 Author Share #3 Posted September 7, 2007 ...Here is a street photo with M8+ Cron35 ASPH... François Merci François... but is it a Summicorn? I was quite interested in the Sumiiluxes... especially at F1.4... do you know what aperture was your shot? thanks a lot. Regards Maurizio Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
ArtZ Posted September 7, 2007 Share #4 Posted September 7, 2007 Hi guys... I'm so troubled now... yesterday I could make a couple of shots using a 35lux pre-asph (the latest pre-asph)...but i couldn't take a lot of time in doing what i wanted to do with it...I've searched many past thread in the forum looking for a comparison between ASPH and pre-ASPH... now it's up to you..What would you suggest and why? and most important: Have you got some portraits or street photo to show how them perform (especially open wide)? regards Maurizio Maurizio, I had this dilema two weeks ago. I went for the Nokton 35/1.2. Build quality is exceptional and image quality is REALLY very (very) similar to the LUX 1.4 ASPH but it has a bit less of contrast and sharpness wide open. On the other hand, you have an extra half stop, Nokton bokeh is nicer and has less flare than the LUX ASPH and the price is ONLY 819 USD (600 €) at CameraQuest! You have a review here: Luminous landscape I asked by email Tom Abrahamsson's opinion about this lens. He replied: "Manuel, the 35f1.2 and the M8 is a match made in heaven. Put the M8 at 1250 iso and the lens at 1.2 and the only limitation is the fact that it is dark enough for you to have difficulties seeing what to focus on! The camera will pick it up easily. I did some low light stuff with the M8 and it is truly magical, particularly in the mono chrome mode! I find the 35f1.2 far more useful than the Noctilux, particularly with the M8 as the 35 becomes a 50 and the Nocti becomes a "long" lens with the problem of holding it steady in those type of situations. " This is my first (and sole) non-Leica lens. I have coded it with a sharpie (it took me a while because there's a screw in the code area). I've been taken some pictures with it and I'm everytime I get surprised. My copy has prefect focus. I though for 600 € it was worthy to try the Nokton. If I wasn't satisfied, I could always buy later the LUX ASPH... but this is not going to happen But if you really want a Leica lens and money is not something to consider, I will go for the LUX ASPH. Cheers! . Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
rosuna Posted September 7, 2007 Share #5 Posted September 7, 2007 Erwin Puts compared the two lenses: M8 part 5: Performance of Leica and Zeiss ZM lenses | Photography and image capture: the Leica technique and philosophy by Erwin Puts | Erwin Puts R. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
brivadois Posted September 7, 2007 Share #6 Posted September 7, 2007 Yes, it is the Summicron 35 f:2 ASPH and it was shot at f:2.8. Another one, at f:2, but post processed with PS CS3 for more blur. It's my only Leica Lens for the moment, and I just begin with a rangefinder. This lens is very sharp (sometimes too much) and I enjoy taking pictures with it. François 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! Link to post Share on other sites Simply register for free here – We are always happy to welcome new members! ' data-webShareUrl='https://www.l-camera-forum.com/topic/32847-35lux-to-asph-or-not-to-asphthat-is-the-question/?do=findComment&comment=348108'>More sharing options...
carstenw Posted September 7, 2007 Share #7 Posted September 7, 2007 Advertisement (gone after registration) The 35 Summilux Asph is much sharper off-centre than the previous version, and has higher contrast and is generally just a much more modern lens. However, Puts' review is not so nice to the pre-Asph which has its own group of fans, who love the look, glow, bokeh and even the vignetting. The old Lux is still a very nice lens, just very different than the new one. I have the new one, and love the look and bokeh, and I think that those who criticise this lens for having bad bokeh are way off. Even the old lens looks weird sometimes, and the new lens is a real classic, a great lens. I would say that it really comes down to personal preference. The new lens is much sharper, which some like, but as a result it is also more clinical, which some don't like. The difference between Asph and pre-Asph is much greater with the 35 Luxes than with the 35 Crons. If you wait long enough, Jack might pop by and post some images taken with the old Lux. Here is a thread with some images of both, as well as some Crons, and even some older lenses: http://www.l-camera-forum.com/leica-forum/leica-m8-forum/29964-35-lux-asph-vs-35-cron.html Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
gravastar Posted September 7, 2007 Share #8 Posted September 7, 2007 I've posted this link before but it is an excellent example of how the 35 pre ASPH Summilux performs at full aperture. My Buddy Nina (not for corporate web surfers): Leica Talk Forum: Digital Photography Review In particular notice the soft glow around the girls hands and the overall somewhat dreamy effect. None of that's present with the ASPH version. At or near full aperture the two lenses draw very differently so you have to be sure that's what you want. There's also the not inconsiderable diffference in size - the pre ASPH lens is much less conspicuous and intimidating than the ASPH - even less than the 40/1.4 Nokton which due to it's silver front bayonet is more noticeable. Just a word of warning - if you intend to use the pre ASPH Summilux on the M8 try before you buy and check that the lens will focus to infinity without binding/obstruction. There are several versions around and with a few the rear lens shield is long enough to hit the front of the inside of the M8 and prevent infinity focus. Bob. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
wparsonsgisnet Posted September 7, 2007 Share #9 Posted September 7, 2007 I have owned and used both the 35 'lux non-A and the 35 'lux-A for several years. I now own only the A. This is because of the flare-prone nature of the non-A lens. I shoot a lot of stage performance and the flare in the non-A makes the pictures unsuitable. They are flat, unsaturated, and not true color. If you plan to shoot without oncoming light and like the softer signature of the non-A, as well as the lower price, go for it. My calculation about Leica lenses is that over the 30-year period I will own and use them, the price doesn't count. there are other non-A lenses in the Leica line that you can use for a soft picture without subjecting yourself to the flare-induced problems that are most noticable with the 35 lenses. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
xrogers Posted September 7, 2007 Share #10 Posted September 7, 2007 For a softer look wide open, use the pre-asph. For compactness, pre-asph. For glow/flare, pre-asph. A great lens for people, experiments and (both good and bad) surprises. For more defined edges wide open, use the asph. For corner-to-corner sharpness and contrast at all apertures, asph. For flare resistance, asph. A great lens for people and landscape with fewer surprises. The summicron asph may be clinical (and is an incredible landscape lens), but I don't think the lux asph is clinical. It is one of the gentler asph lenses, in my opinion. I think most people would prefer the lux asph. But those who strongly prefer the pre-asph find the asph almost offensive. And visa-versa. Pick one, try it for a while, see what it does to your shooting. If you can't decide, just get the used preasph---it must be significantly cheaper, is a classic, and is a great street/protrait lens. If you don't like it, sell it for no loss and get an asph. Good luck! --clyde Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
AGeoJO Posted September 7, 2007 Share #11 Posted September 7, 2007 I never used the pre-ASPH but indeed the flare resistant of the ASPH version is pretty good as shown on the attached image. I am not sure about the aperture though, I think it was f/2.8 but for sure not wide open. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
luigi bertolotti Posted September 7, 2007 Share #12 Posted September 7, 2007 Maurizio, I have never tried the ASPH, but my Summilux non asph, that is VERY old (1960, first batch, chrome) is : 1) A delicious tiny lens 2) Focuses well on M8 3) Surprisingly sharp (I think mine is something special... very first...) 3) No vignetting when wide open (on M8, a little on film) 4) Better to use in normal / correct light conditions; flares when light in front. Surely the asph is better, but I think you can find a non asph under 1000 Euros (in Milano, 3 or 4 at the moment) no much more than the Nokton 1,2 that, is a lot heavier and bigger: old non asph is a superdiscrete lens. Little girl shot at f 1,4 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! little cat at f 2 Link to post Share on other sites Simply register for free here – We are always happy to welcome new members! little cat at f 2 ' data-webShareUrl='https://www.l-camera-forum.com/topic/32847-35lux-to-asph-or-not-to-asphthat-is-the-question/?do=findComment&comment=348222'>More sharing options...
Mauribix Posted September 7, 2007 Author Share #13 Posted September 7, 2007 Thanks a lot guys! I have read all your comments, and they're really useful to me. I like the compactness of both 35cron asph, and 35lux preasph... i don't like so much those heavy-weight lenses (i own a 75lux and it's just enough to carry) so that's why i don't want a 35 nokton (even if i like its quality soooo... much), and that's why i would prefer both cron and pre-asph to the new asph. How do you feel with it? I'm completing my new lens set to carry with me, i.e 15cv + 21elmarit (or 25zeiss) + 35 (lux or cron asph or pre-asph) + 75 lux. I already have a 15cv a 28cron a 28elmarit ASPH, a 50 elmarit and a 75 lux... I had a 35cron ASPH in the past (my first lens).. i'm so confused and troubled now. Maybe i will follow clyde's suggestion... a used pre-asph lux?... mmm... what you think about? How would you complete my set?Consider the fact that i'm not going to take my 28's. I can't find the mood with that focal lenght... so far... thanks for all your precious comments... and still, every shots to see are welcome.. regards Maurizio Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Mauribix Posted September 7, 2007 Author Share #14 Posted September 7, 2007 ...but I think you can find a non asph under 1000 Euros (in Milano, 3 or 4 at the moment) no much more than the Nokton 1,2 that, is a lot heavier and bigger: old non asph is a superdiscrete lens. Little girl shot at f 1,4 [ATTACH]52734[/ATTACH] little cat at f 2 [ATTACH]52735[/ATTACH] Thanks Luigi... Where do I get those lenses in Milan? And where was your lens built?is it Canadian or German?Do you know the year too? it would be preciuos... regards Maurizio Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
sean_reid Posted September 7, 2007 Share #15 Posted September 7, 2007 Maurizio, I had this dilema two weeks ago. I went for the Nokton 35/1.2. Build quality is exceptional and image quality is REALLY very (very) similar to the LUX 1.4 ASPH but it has a bit less of contrast and sharpness wide open. On the other hand, you have an extra half stop, Nokton bokeh is nicer and has less flare than the LUX ASPH and the price is ONLY 819 USD (600 €) at CameraQuest! You have a review here: Luminous landscape . For that review, I tested the lenses on an R-D1. There are more extensive tests, on the M8, in my last review of 35 mm lenses. Cheers, Sean Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
sean_reid Posted September 7, 2007 Share #16 Posted September 7, 2007 In particular notice the soft glow around the girls hands and the overall somewhat dreamy effect. None of that's present with the ASPH version. At or near full aperture the two lenses draw very differently so you have to be sure that's what you want. Bob. Right. Wide open, the ASPH is a true modern Leica lens - very high res and not unlike the 50/1.4 ASPH. The older versions I've tested have all been much softer wide open, for better or worse. I personally prefer the ASPH. Cheers, Sean Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
stunsworth Posted September 7, 2007 Share #17 Posted September 7, 2007 Bear in mind that some (all?) pre-ASPH Summiluxes will not focus to infinity on an M8. Does anyone know if Leica can correct this? I had a pre-ASPH 35mm Summilux and sold it. Wish I hadn't. Used wide open it has a similar look to the Nocti/75mm Summilux. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
sean_reid Posted September 7, 2007 Share #18 Posted September 7, 2007 On the other hand, you have an extra half stop, Nokton bokeh is nicer and has less flare than the LUX ASPH and the price is ONLY 819 USD (600 €) at CameraQuest! "Bokeh" is a matter of taste, though, I love the way the 35/1.4 ASPH renders OOF areas. CA at wide apertures is much lower with the Leica than with the Nokton. But...the Nokton is an exceptional lens at any price. I prefer the smaller size of the 35/1.4 Asph, though, and it is one of my favorite Leica lenses. Cheers, Sean Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
wparsonsgisnet Posted September 7, 2007 Share #19 Posted September 7, 2007 Maurizio, you have not mentioned if you are using these lenses on an M8 but I will make the comment anyway. If you are not planning to carry your 28 with you, you might consider the 24mm f2.8-A lens. I bought one of these used for $1,500 and it is a magical lens. On the M8, of course, it is a 32mm equivalent. I, too, use the 75 'lux, and my favorite combo is the 24 and the 75. With the M8, the 24 is my most used lens. The images are the best I have seen from any Leica glass. Remarkable. Good luck with your decision. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
gravastar Posted September 7, 2007 Share #20 Posted September 7, 2007 Bear in mind that some (all?) pre-ASPH Summiluxes will not focus to infinity on an M8. Does anyone know if Leica can correct this? I had a pre-ASPH 35mm Summilux and sold it. Wish I hadn't. Used wide open it has a similar look to the Nocti/75mm Summilux. Not all have this problem. Mine does, yet three (I think) my dealer had focused to infinity OK. When we compared the lenses it was clear that the shroud on mine protruded a few mm further into the camera body. I thought I could fix the problem and still have protection for the rear element by machining off a small amount of material from the back of the shroud. No such luck - I found that the amount of material which had to be removed left the rear element unprotected from being placed on a flat surface. It's not simply the length of the shroud, there must be other mechanical/optical differences in the lens construction. I did tell Leica in the UK about the problem but they said it was unknown to them. There have been several other reports on the net since so mine isn't unique. In hindsight I should have checked how far the rear lens cell, which the shroud attaches to, protruded into the camera body. Bob. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Archived
This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.