Review: The Leica Summilux-M 35 f/1.4 ASPH. by Jonathan Slack

[Herr Barnack]

Advertisement (gone after registration)

The bokeh is lovely - particularly in this image:   https://lightroom.adobe.com/shares/5f33000bf6ce4f5788ab21c6d192bd88/albums/ae8ffe279a842a19a48fa3e28afb3e3b/assets/1a16d6dabdb2eeb568056a4543f9600c

[Advertisement]

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

[graphlex]

Bokeh is the new Pictorialism.

[Jeff S]

It would be interesting to compare a pic using both lenses, under the same conditions that prompt the somewhat ‘nervous’ bokeh with the first FLE. And perhaps one exhibiting flaring differences given the different hood designs. I’m satisfied with my FLE, but just curious. I guess that would make this more of a review. 😉

Jeff

[jakontil]

Another advantage the FLE II has over its predecessor is that it comes with cheaper price

thanks jono, always love your writings

[roma]

Not sure why people think that “nervous bokeh” will go away. It became more apparent with the floating element and has nothing to do with aperture blades. The pre-FLE Summilux only has 9 aperture blades (just as FLE does) and people rave about its bokeh.

11 aperture blades will not fix this nervousness. It’s pure marketing.

[Huss]

Nice roverview!  So Jono, if the new film Leica does exist, and some claim it has been in the hands of field testers for months now, blink twice if you have one.

[Robert Blanko]

Advertisement (gone after registration)

Thank you, Jono, for the nice impressions from Crete with the new Summilux!
 

Regarding the close focus photos, I have the impression that there is hardly any area which I would consider sharp, even when viewing the version on your website on my iPad. Maybe it is an issue of downscaling? Does the sharpness come close to that of the Q2 when set to about 0,3m in macro mode? My Q2 seems to deliver much better results in said respect, at least when comparing to the photos in your review on my iPad.

[otto.f]

2 hours ago, Robert Blanko said:

close focus photos, I have the impression that there is hardly any area which I would consider sharp

Agree. I have the impression that the close focus of the APO35 is more convincing, as I’ve seen in Sean Reid’s review and also in Jono’s if I remember well. But if every close focus photo in the recent overview has been done handheld in the wind, then it’s quite understandable with 60Mp. 

Edited September 17, 2022 by otto.f

[geoffnik]

Hi Jono

Have you noticed any focus shift as some people have with the pervious FLE?

Cheers

[archive_all]

5 hours ago, roma said:

Not sure why people think that “nervous bokeh” will go away. It became more apparent with the floating element and has nothing to do with aperture blades. The pre-FLE Summilux only has 9 aperture blades (just as FLE does) and people rave about its bokeh.

11 aperture blades will not fix this nervousness. It’s pure marketing.

I agree and I'd love to see a side by side comparison between the two FLE lenses. It's something that can happen mainly in corners with a lot of background highlights, backlit foliage etc. so the review shots with a clean background or at close focus distances (not much of an issue that close) wouldn't really show that anyway. But who knows, maybe there's been some slight repositioning within the FLE part of the lens that does address it? The 9 vs 11 blades is much less of a big deal even at f2 or f2.8 to me, the bokeh on the FLE actually smoothes out in those 'busy' scenarios when going a stop or two down...9 was fine.

[roma]

18 hours ago, Artin said:

The 11 blades will not make a difference wide open , but it will make a difference when stoped down to 2. Or to 2.8. 

Maybe if you zoom-in to 300% it’s possible to see something in the highlights. I used pre-FLE for years and printed lots of 16x20in prints. Those 9 blades never interfered with bokeh areas no matter what aperture I used. However, things changed when I switched to FLE (also at all apertures).

[phototrope]

19 hours ago, Artin said:

The 11 blades will not make a difference wide open , but it will make a difference when stoped down to 2. Or to 2.8. 

It also makes "bokeh balls" perfectly round. This is another aspect of bokeh which some people look out for, apart from "nervousness", which by the way, can be avoided if you're carefyl about your backgrounds.

[jonoslack]

On 9/16/2022 at 6:41 PM, Herr Barnack said:

The bokeh is lovely - particularly in this image:   https://lightroom.adobe.com/shares/5f33000bf6ce4f5788ab21c6d192bd88/albums/ae8ffe279a842a19a48fa3e28afb3e3b/assets/1a16d6dabdb2eeb568056a4543f9600c

 

On 9/17/2022 at 7:41 AM, roma said:

Not sure why people think that “nervous bokeh” will go away. It became more apparent with the floating element and has nothing to do with aperture blades. The pre-FLE Summilux only has 9 aperture blades (just as FLE does) and people rave about its bokeh.

11 aperture blades will not fix this nervousness. It’s pure marketing.

This is an interesting subject - I always wonder about the reputation of different lenses and their bokeh . . . it seems to me that the general opinion has much more to do with phrases or words which become attached to them . . . for instance I've always found the 'Bokeh King' to have rather nervous bokeh, and I've never thought that the 75 APO was remotely 'sterile'. But these labels stick, and there is no way to change them!

18 hours ago, archive_all said:

I agree and I'd love to see a side by side comparison between the two FLE lenses. It's something that can happen mainly in corners with a lot of background highlights, backlit foliage etc. so the review shots with a clean background or at close focus distances (not much of an issue that close) wouldn't really show that anyway. But who knows, maybe there's been some slight repositioning within the FLE part of the lens that does address it? The 9 vs 11 blades is much less of a big deal even at f2 or f2.8 to me, the bokeh on the FLE actually smoothes out in those 'busy' scenarios when going a stop or two down...9 was fine.

I liked the bokeh in the flower picture as well, but I think that it was a good subject for nice bokeh. On the other hand I DID find the bokeh from my FLE to be nervous and I have not found this new one to be . . .  but I did not compare them side by side (really hard without proper terms of reference!) . . Is this difference because of sample variation? subject variation? my mood? there are so many variables which don't really relate to the optics of the lens!

all the best

Jono

 

[andy.we]

Here is an advice for everybody to make true Reviews - the Brick Wall Test 

Selecting the Proper Brick Wall for Photographic Tests

[Bikie John]

28 minutes ago, andy.we said:

Here is an advice for everybody to make true Reviews - the Brick Wall Test 

Selecting the Proper Brick Wall for Photographic Tests

Very informative and brightened up my morning Thanks

John

[andy.we]

The Brick Wall Test is or was a speciality of Dustin Abbott , guess he is not longer doing it. 🙂 

[pgk]

1 hour ago, andy.we said:

Here is an advice for everybody to make true Reviews - the Brick Wall Test 

Selecting the Proper Brick Wall for Photographic Tests

I'll never be any good at lens testing - clearly as a result of living in a property which as rendered brick walls - and consequently I cannot evaluate lenses properly and will simply have to hope that photographic content is good enough to usurp any failings in my lenses

[Jeff S]

6 hours ago, jonoslack said:

… for instance I've always found the 'Bokeh King' to have rather nervous bokeh, and I've never thought that the 75 APO was remotely 'sterile'. But these labels stick, and there is no way to change them!

 

Jono, the guy who created the ‘King of Bokeh’ term (Mike Johnston, now publisher of The Online Photographer…TOP) agrees with your assessment and has since written about his regret over the term. The term first appeared in a picture caption in the photo magazine he edited at the time.  But he hadn’t used the lens at wide aperture or close distance. BTW, he was also the first to spell out the term ‘bokeh’ to help readers with the pronunciation of the Japanese term ‘boke,’ from which it derived. He now dislikes that overused term, too, and prefers ‘out-of-focus-blur.’  You can read all the background in various articles he’s since written at TOP.  Despite his retraction and regret, the terms have indeed stuck.

Jeff

[Advertisement]

Hallo,

Look here: Leica M

[jonoslack]

1 hour ago, Jeff S said:

Jono, the guy who created the ‘King of Bokeh’ term (Mike Johnston, now publisher of The Online Photographer…TOP) agrees with your assessment and has since written about his regret over the term. The term first appeared in a picture caption in the photo magazine he edited at the time.  But he hadn’t used the lens at wide aperture or close distance. BTW, he was also the first to spell out the term ‘bokeh’ to help readers with the pronunciation of the Japanese term ‘boke,’ from which it derived. He now dislikes that overused term, too, and prefers ‘out-of-focus-blur.’  You can read all the background in various articles he’s since written at TOP.  Despite his retraction and regret, the terms have indeed stuck.

Jeff

Thank you Jeff - I didn't know that, and I'm glad . . . I wonder who first used the term 'sterile' with respect to the lovely gentle detail and bokeh of the 75 APO . . . and whether he regrets that!

But these things cannot be undone . . . I hope I haven't been guilty of any!

best

jono

[archive_all]

19 hours ago, jonoslack said:

 

This is an interesting subject - I always wonder about the reputation of different lenses and their bokeh . . . it seems to me that the general opinion has much more to do with phrases or words which become attached to them . . . for instance I've always found the 'Bokeh King' to have rather nervous bokeh, and I've never thought that the 75 APO was remotely 'sterile'. But these labels stick, and there is no way to change them!

I liked the bokeh in the flower picture as well, but I think that it was a good subject for nice bokeh. On the other hand I DID find the bokeh from my FLE to be nervous and I have not found this new one to be . . .  but I did not compare them side by side (really hard without proper terms of reference!) . . Is this difference because of sample variation? subject variation? my mood? there are so many variables which don't really relate to the optics of the lens!

all the best

Jono

 

Thanks much, Jono! Nice images by the way as I forgot to mention that, I always enjoy your reviews. I think you're right there are so many variables. I also have seen some 'nervous' bokeh from my FLE but mainly in extreme corners and with backlit foliage like just shooting in trees while hiking, and we have a lot of densely wooded areas here in the north eastern US. It's not particularly bothersome but I'm weighing options of course. I think maybe the biggest benefit for me would be the built-in hood since I often go without the hood on the FLE for a more compact size so that would be super convenient with this new version...trying to justify here.