28/2 + 50/1.4 versus 35/1.4

[sean_reid]

Advertisement (gone after registration)

Hank

 

I have both the Nokton and the 35 lux asph latest version. I bought the nokton hoping it would get the job done and I could use the cash from the sale of the lux asph to finance another Leica lens.

 

I shot several self-assignments with both and there is no way the nokton would be my fast 35 choice. It is way too soft compared to the lux asph. I find the focus shift of the lux to be very manageable although it takes some getting used to.

 

JMHO

 

Woody Spedden

 

Hi Woody,

 

That Nokton shouldn't be soft at all. Something is amiss.

 

Cheers,

 

Sean

[Advertisement]

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

[sparkie]

Hank, if you can afford it go for the 35/1.4 ASPH. Its the one lens I would pick if I could only have one lens. Its the best there is IMHO

[hankg]

Please excuse my lack of knowledge here , but I have a 35 Cron bought 1992 , would that be a version IV , that I keep hearing about.

 

Thanks

Yes it would be a IV made from 1979-1997

 

Thanks to all for the very helpful comments. The sale or trade of the 28/2 will get me a 35 Lux. If I find it to contrasty stopped down in full sun I might add a 35 Ultron or 35 Summicron IV for sunny days but I'm hoping the Summilux will be all I need.

 

I'm sure it's the 35 I need as when I've got the 28 on I feel I'm to close and with the 50 I'm not close enough. I pretty much see the world like a 50mm lens (on film). It's just a question of which one. My first thought when I got the M8 was to get a 35/2 IV but one can get so easily distracted with the wealth of choices for the M mount:)

[lars_bergquist]

Trying to find one , Canadian or German version

 

Guy, the v. IV as far as I know was made only in Canada. Otherwise it must be a II or III. A IV with 'Germany' engraving should be collectible.

 

The old man ... you know who

[j. borger]

Guy, the v. IV as far as I know was made only in Canada. Otherwise it must be a II or III. A IV with 'Germany' engraving should be collectible.

 

The old man ... you know who

 

Mine (a chrome version) was made in Germany ....

[carstenw]

Hank, there is a long thread with many rather technical samples comparing 35 Cron IV, 35 Cron Asph and 35 Lux Asph, and there are also shots from some other 35mm lenses there. I ended up preferring the look of the Lux, so I sold the Cron Asph and returned the 35 IV to Holger, from whom I had borrowed it for the testing. I also own the 28 Cron, so if there is a particular kind of shot you would like to see, I could try to make it with both so you can compare.

 

http://www.l-camera-forum.com/leica-forum/leica-m8-forum/29964-35-lux-asph-vs-35-cron.html

[Eoin]

Advertisement (gone after registration)

If I were to limit my self to one lens in the 24 to 50 range it would be the 35 Summilux Asph, a super lens with plenty of clarity, saturation and punch in colours no matter what aperture is used. My reason for parting with my chrome version was one of focal length, I found the 28 & 50 a better combination for my style. The 28 Summicron Asph has quickly become my favorite lens for general shooting with it's smoother tones and less Asph fingerprint. I really can't fault the 35 Summilux, superb in every respect, I just prefer the fov of the 28. I don't think I could bring my self to replace a 28 & 50 Asph with a 35, 2 excellent lenses into 1 excellent lens just won't go for me.

[jedi996sps]

Afraid i dont hav any dilema's (yet) over which lens to keep or sell as i am just starting off with my new M8. I do however hav a plan...and that is for 28mm cron, 50mm lux and a 75mm cron. I already hav the 50lux and hav tracked down the 28cron. I purposefully didn't look at the 35mm as with the M8 it equates to what is close to an equivalent 50mm ...which for me i never really got on with in a previous life with film cameras and also it would be (for me) to close to the 50mm.

 

Regards

[carstenw]

Ali, you may want to consider 28/35/75 instead. The perceptual difference between the 28 and 35 is great than between the 50 and 75, and the 50 on the M8 is a funny focal length anyway. You could also think about 24/35/75 if that extra bit of space helps you make the argument.

[jedi996sps]

Ali, you may want to consider 28/35/75 instead. The perceptual difference between the 28 and 35 is great than between the 50 and 75, and the 50 on the M8 is a funny focal length anyway. You could also think about 24/35/75 if that extra bit of space helps you make the argument.

 

Carsten... hmm, yes, food for thought. As i already have the 50 and pick up my 28 hopefully this week, perhaps when i hav my three lens line up ie 28,50,75 i will look at the 35 and may chop the lux and go back to the nocti which foolishly i let go a while back . Interesting what u say about the perceptual difference between the 28/50 and the 50/75.

Going back to the original thread, if i really was only limited to a single lens, then i would definately want f1.4 and reasonably lightweight so perhaps the 35 would under those circumstances appeal....but it would be a close run with the 50lux

[carstenw]

You could also go 28/50/90. That could work. 50 and 75 are rather close together, however, and I find myself not switching lens if I have one of those on and the other would be better.

[Mauribix]

And what does it happen when you love that "soft" feeling?

75lux is my favourite lens (except done for its weight.... ),

I sold all "sharpest" lens kit as soon as i got it, and cosidering the same dilemma about 35/28 mm, i bought a fantastic 35lux pre-asph, i looked for one of the latest model (i.e. 1992) less subjected to coma and flares, a Titanium version (they say it's better built), and now i found a complete single-lens-set, perfect when stopped down from F2 to F8 (incredibly sharp and nothing to loose against 35luxASPH), almost no flare and coma from F1.8 to above.

I had the time to use a 35luxASPH wich is really the best 35 fast lens (incredible starting from F1.4 without the need to stop it down), but i found it quite "harsh" (as the 28cron) from f4/5.6 and above.

Obviously this is MY personal point of view.

Give it a try....

You'll probably able to find a Great pre-ASPH lux of the latest model for about 1400-1600€, and my only suggestion is try and try and try again the lens you're looking and the one you're looking not.

Each one of us could find it's feeling for an unexpected lens!

The problem is to find it!And no one could tell you

 

regards

 

Maurizio

[hankg]

I think for many the combo of 28-50 is ideal. It gives you a good range around 'normal'. I discovered for myself I don't want range I just want one lens that sees in the same perspective as I do and puts me at a working distance that I'm comfortable with. With a 50 (35 on the M8) I find my feet or leaning in or out gives me all the range I need.

 

Now paying work is different and I might want an exaggerated perspective for dramatic effect to make the client's big truck look bigger and more macho (only in the USA would a 1 ton dually truck be considered personal transport). So I'll pick up a 21 or 25 CV for that sort of work. But it's not the sort of thing I'm interested in for my personal stuff.

[hankg]

I had the time to use a 35luxASPH wich is really the best 35 fast lens (incredible starting from F1.4 without the need to stop it down), but i found it quite "harsh" (as the 28cron) from f4/5.6 and above.

 

It maybe that hyperfocal shooting out and about at f8-f16 and shooting for shallow DOF or low light f1.4-4 would be best done with a combo of ASPH and preASPH lenses. I could live with 2 35's especially if one was the size of the 35 IV, at least I'll always have the right focal length mounted:).

[Jack_Flesher]

FWIW:

 

1) I don't think you'll find the 35 Lux too contrasty stopped down --- it is one of the less contrasty Asph's made by Leica --- slightly softer contrast than the 28 Cron for example.

 

2) I think you'll find the 35 Lux from f1.4 thfrough 2 retains quite a bit of the traditional pre-asph look. Probably no need for it and a IV, though the IV has the look through about f4, getting pretty crisp even by asph standards at f4.5. But bokeh is pure cream on the IV...

 

3) Re focal difference --- FWIW I find a significant difference between 50 and 75 in use, and find 35 pretty different in use than either 28 or 50. In my case, the 35 is usually either a bit too short or a bit too long. (35 is what I started with because the math worked out better compared to my film M's. But for whatever reason I am happier with the 28/50 on the M8.) My point was that with the 28 and 50, I don't feel the need to carry the 35 very often.

 

My normal kit in the bag: 15/21/28/50/75. The 35 IV, 90AA, Noct and 73 Hektor are my "special teams" sitting on the sidelines ready to be called in when needed

 

Cheers,

[hankg]

FWIW:

 

1) I don't think you'll find the 35 Lux too contrasty stopped down --- it is one of the less contrasty Asph's made by Leica --- slightly softer contrast than the 28 Cron for example.

 

2) Re focal difference --- FWIW I find a significant difference between 50 and 75 in use, and find 35 pretty different in use than either 28 or 50. In my case, the 35 is usually either a bit too short or a bit too long. (35 is what I started with because the math worked out better compared to my film M's. But for whatever reason I am happier with the 28/50 on the M8.) My point was that with the 28 and 50, I don't feel the need to carry the 35 very often.

 

My normal kit in the bag: 15/21/28/50/75. The 35 IV, 90AA, Noct and 73 Hektor are my "special teams" sitting on the sidelines ready to be called in when needed

 

Cheers,

 

 

Yes I'm finding going by the crop factor numbers with focal lengths doesn't really work for the M8. You have to actually use the focal lengths to see how they work for you and it seems the 35 would work for me for precisely the same reasons it doesn't work for you.

 

Thanks for the comment on the Lux. I'm going to start with that lens and see. I may never feel the need to add another 35. If it has slightly less contrast then the 28 it will be fine.

[kidigital]

Hi Hank, I'd also recommend the 35lux asph. If I'm only bringing one lens, this is the lens I bring. So, by default, it's my go-to lens. I tend to like more of the intimacy I get with the 35mm length on the M8. For others, the 28 works better ... horses for courses.

 

With my chrome version, I haven't run into any focus shift issues. But, that's probably because I tend to shoot as close to wide open as often as I can. As Jack, mentions, I agree that between f1.4 and f2.8, the 35lux retains some of that old-time Leica mojo. For me, the lens offers a great combination of sharp edges, soft out-of-focus and intangibles that make it an excellent all-arounder.

 

Here's a picture with the 35lux asph at 1.4.

 

Kurt

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!

[Mauribix]

...As Jack, mentions, I agree that between f1.4 and f2.8, the 35lux retains some of that old-time Leica mojo... ...Kurt...

 

Hi Kurt and Jack... but I really have to disagree with this...

We can say that at full aperture the Lux ASPH has great contrast and sharpness, but to intend the difference i have to show a f1.4 shot made with the latest pre-ASPH summilux... which i consider the old-time Leica mojo reference for what that concern 35mm lenses.

I see a lot of difference.

The coma, sharpening and micro-contrast differences are very remarkable between these LUX's. Don't you think so?

Some "old-time difects" of pre-ASPH lux are its signature(coma and flares), as well as the more "clinical" touch of the ASPH is.

No need to find a "better" lens. They are really, significantly different (especially at full aperture).

 

Cheers

 

Maurizio

 

MAURIZIO BEUCCI.com - Official web site

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!

[Advertisement]

Hallo,

Look here: Leica M

[hankg]

We can say that at full aperture the Lux ASPH has great contrast and sharpness, but to intend the difference i have to show a f1.4 shot made with the latest pre-ASPH summilux... which i consider the old-time Leica mojo reference for what that concern 35mm lenses.

I see a lot of difference.

The coma, sharpening and micro-contrast differences are very remarkable between these LUX's. Don't you think so?

Some "old-time difects" of pre-ASPH lux are its signature(coma and flares), as well as the more "clinical" touch of the ASPH is.

No need to find a "better" lens. They are really, significantly different (especially at full aperture).

 

There are different qualities of the older lenses one can value. The 'Leica glow' well illustrated by your image and exhibited by some older lenses wide open is not one of the qualities I'm looking for. Although like the Cooke Portrait PS945 Lens the glow can make for some dreamy effects and beautiful pictures it's not for me.

 

I really like the wide open performance of the ASPH lenses (with all the glow corrected out) providing it's balanced with moderate contrast, a smooth tonality and soft OOF areas. The extremes of swirly bokeh, soft glowing highlights of some 'old school' lenses or the other extreme of extremely contrasty brittle sharpness, an active, frenetic bokeh and harsh transitions of some of the ASPH lenses I can do without. I want the lens to be transparent and balanced not calling attention to itself with a splashy visual performance.

[Jack_Flesher]

Maurizo:

 

Neither Kurt or I are saying the 35 Lux Asph has the same look as the 35 Pre-asph Lux. What we're saying is that the 35 Lux Asph has a traditional Leica look at the wider apertures. To clarify, I would say that the 35 Lux Asph at f1.4 is very similar in rendering to my 35 IV at f2. At f2, the Lux-Asph is about like my 35 IV at f3.5. Both of these lenses have more contrast than your 35 pre-lux until about f5.6 where they all look pretty similar. At the wider apertures, the bokeh characteristics and micro-contrast are also slightly different, and compared to your pre-lux, they are even more so.

 

So each lens is unique, especially wide open --- even adding the 35 Asph Cron in the mix, all 4 lenses are fairly distinct when compared wide open. I'll further add that all have their strengths and weaknesses too, and it is really a personal choice as to which lens' personality you prefer --- but again, once you're at f5.6, they all look pretty darn similar.

 

Cheers,