35mm summicron v2/3 or ASPH?

[tomshelby]

Advertisement (gone after registration)

I am getting my first Leica lens (had Voitglander and Zeiss before). So I am targeting at either V2/V3 or the ASPH of 35cron. I know the former is a vintage while latter renders more modern images. But I want to ask how much of sharpness loss I am looking at large apertures like f/2? How about contrast and color?

From this article https://www.streetsilhouettes.com/home/2017/3/30/leica-35mm-lenses-5-summicron-versions, I can't really tell much of a difference (I can see some small differences after looking at them for longer time). Does that mean I can safely go with a v2/v3 to save a few bucks? And also, what is the difference in terms of rendering between V2 and V3, given their optics are pretty much identical? I shoot digital only. 

Thank you for any advices or ideas

[Advertisement]

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

[hansvons]

I have the V1 ASPH. And I have the Nokton 1.4. II SC (bought it a second time).

First the Nokton. Like the vintage Summicrons it's a Double Gauss design. It renders soft in the edges, sharpens up considerably with almost sharp corners at f 8.0, flares nicely and has that glow until f4. It's said to be quite similar to the Steel Rim Summicron, with even more vignetting (on digital). The first time I bought it, I found it too quirky for my SL2-S and sold it. F 1,4 is only somewhat usable at medium distances, e.g. 2-3 meters, making it effectively an f2 lens.

The ASPH is a very different beast. It's design is not based on the double Gauss scheme, it has a concave front and back lens. It's sharp from the very beginning in the centre but remains a tad soft in the edges between f2 and f4. At f5,6 it's perfectly sharp from edge to edge at infinity, making it a good choice for landscape photography. However, it does vignette at all apertures until f11. But it renders colour evenly at all stops without that cool tendency vintage glass often shows (so does the Nokton). 

BUT, like the 35mm Summicron R V2, the ASPH shows a distinct bent focal plane at f2 until f2,8 with high sharpness, which makes it a favourite among cinematographers seeking character.  Similar to it’s R sibling, the ASPH flares nicely, albeit keeping sharpness, which the Nokton cannot do to the same extent. It’s also important to note that the ASPH retains the relatively flat rendering of its siblings (and the Nokton) which is favourable for environmental portraits for medium close-ups in filmmaking because people’s faces render less egg-shaped. In my opinion, that's an often overlooked virtue in the race for corner sharpness and 3-pop.

Furthermore, neither the classic Summicrons nor the ASPH were designed with digital sensors in mind. On film, all their quirks are much less pronounced. That’s why I repurchased the Nokton. On film, it's a nice vintage-ish lens kind of a poor man’s Steel Rim Summicron with an extra emergency stop. The ASPH shows hardly any vignetting even at full aperture on film and renders beautiful, super-sharp B&W images. Especially on Delta 100, it's a revelation of sharpness and depth.

 

Edited July 10, 2023 by hansvons

[lct]

3 hours ago, tomshelby said:

I am targeting at either V2/V3 or the ASPH of 35cron. I know the former is a vintage while latter renders more modern images. But I want to ask how much of sharpness loss I am looking at large apertures like f/2? How about contrast and color?

Summicrons 35/2 v2 & v3 are significantly softer @ f/2,  especially at edges and corners, with less contrast and more veiling flare than Summicron 35/2 asph, at least v1 i have experience with. Also v2 and v3 cannot be 6-bit coded at Leica. Some asph copies suffer from focus shift though, i say some because my asph v1 is free from it. 

[a.noctilux]

12 hours ago, tomshelby said:

I shoot digital only

asph. lenses would be better choice then.

Later on you can discover the other older nice lenses.

[rtai]

I call defects “character” in Leica speak  It’s a beautiful lens on black and white film. If you shoot color then the Asph is the better choice.

[tomshelby]

12 hours ago, hansvons said:

I have the V1 ASPH. And I have the Nokton 1.4. II SC (bought it a second time).

First the Nokton. Like the vintage Summicrons it's a Double Gauss design. It renders soft in the edges, sharpens up considerably with almost sharp corners at f 8.0, flares nicely and has that glow until f4. It's said to be quite similar to the Steel Rim Summicron, with even more vignetting (on digital). The first time I bought it, I found it too quirky for my SL2-S and sold it. F 1,4 is only somewhat usable at medium distances, e.g. 2-3 meters, making it effectively an f2 lens.

The ASPH is a very different beast. It's design is not based on the double Gauss scheme, it has a concave front and back lens. It's sharp from the very beginning in the centre but remains a tad soft in the edges between f2 and f4. At f5,6 it's perfectly sharp from edge to edge at infinity, making it a good choice for landscape photography. However, it does vignette at all apertures until f11. But it renders colour evenly at all stops without that cool tendency vintage glass often shows (so does the Nokton). 

BUT, like the 35mm Summicron R V2, the ASPH shows a distinct bent focal plane at f2 until f2,8 with high sharpness, which makes it a favourite among cinematographers seeking character.  Similar to it’s R sibling, the ASPH flares nicely, albeit keeping sharpness, which the Nokton cannot do to the same extent. It’s also important to note that the ASPH retains the relatively flat rendering of its siblings (and the Nokton) which is favourable for environmental portraits for medium close-ups in filmmaking because people’s faces render less egg-shaped. In my opinion, that's an often overlooked virtue in the race for corner sharpness and 3-pop.

Furthermore, neither the classic Summicrons nor the ASPH were designed with digital sensors in mind. On film, all their quirks are much less pronounced. That’s why I repurchased the Nokton. On film, it's a nice vintage-ish lens kind of a poor man’s Steel Rim Summicron with an extra emergency stop. The ASPH shows hardly any vignetting even at full aperture on film and renders beautiful, super-sharp B&W images. Especially on Delta 100, it's a revelation of sharpness and depth.

 

 

11 hours ago, lct said:

Summicrons 35/2 v2 & v3 are significantly softer @ f/2,  especially at edges and corners, with less contrast and more veiling flare than Summicron 35/2 asph, at least v1 i have experience with. Also v2 and v3 cannot be 6-bit coded at Leica. Some asph copies suffer from focus shift though, i say some because my asph v1 is free from it. 

 

3 minutes ago, rtai said:

I call defects “character” in Leica speak  It’s a beautiful lens on black and white film. If you shoot color then the Asph is the better choice.

Thank you for the help! I still have no clue of how much of sharpness loss I am looking at.. perhaps the best way is to try them out. 

[darylgo]

Advertisement (gone after registration)

Sharpness?  If you compare mtf charts it will give you a measured idea.  Mtf also tells you about contrast, a significant part of perceived sharpness.  
 

To avoid critics of mtf charts, I’ll add that they are not comprehensive in all qualities of a lens.  I use them as a start. 

[Jeff S]

On 7/10/2023 at 5:04 PM, tomshelby said:

..perhaps the best way is to try them out. 

Always sound advice.

You’ve already noticed that online viewing is a great equalizer (pixel peeping aside). Even a camera phone can generally produce solid IQ. If you’re not making prints, buy the lens that best suits your budget and that meets your requirements for handling, controls and ergonomics, which can be as meaningful as rendering for many folks.  
 

Shooting preferences, workflows (from shooting to editing to display) and output goals vary greatly.  Only you can determine what suits your priorities and preferences.

Jeff
 

 

[tomshelby]

On 7/10/2023 at 5:28 PM, darylgo said:

Sharpness?  If you compare mtf charts it will give you a measured idea.  Mtf also tells you about contrast, a significant part of perceived sharpness.  
 

To avoid critics of mtf charts, I’ll add that they are not comprehensive in all qualities of a lens.  I use them as a start. 

For the v3 I couldn't find any MTFs. Even image comparisons are rare.. I guess I'll just order and see. I guess the advantage might be marginal, more of a psychological diff.

[tomshelby]

2 hours ago, Jeff S said:

Always sound advice.

You’ve already noticed that online viewing is a great equalizer (pixel peeping aside). Even a camera phone can generally produce solid IQ. If you’re not making prints, buy the lens that best suits your budget and that meets your requirements for handling, controls and ergonomics, which can be as meaningful as rendering for many folks.  
 

Shooting preferences, workflows (from shooting to editing to display) and output goals vary greatly.  Only you can determine what suits your priorities and preferences.

Jeff
 

 

yeah that's true. Especially during daytime the differences are not significant. ASPH is not beyond my budget, just I am kind of stuck with the vintage feel of old lenses but also want the sharpness (rock and hard place). Can't really afford 2 lenses together at this moment tho, and never owned more than 1 lenses (changing lens freaks me out a little). That's why I have had several point-and-shoots

Edited July 12, 2023 by tomshelby

[darylgo]

1 hour ago, tomshelby said:

For the v3 I couldn't find any MTFs. Even image comparisons are rare.. I guess I'll just order and see. I guess the advantage might be marginal, more of a psychological diff.

Sources I use are the Leica Pocket Guides or Erwin Puts Leica Compendium.   The pocket guides are condensed Compendiums, a new version was recently released but the older 8th editions perhaps can be found.  A summary of the curves:  V2, V3 and the asph are not that different in the center and the reason Street Silhouettes might indicate similarity.  The V2, 3 have a midfield dip in the mtf curves that are severe, this indicates to me that a brick wall will not photograph well but for real photography the plane of focus likely shifted either backwards or forwards.  The asph will photograph a brick wall better, but has more astigmatism. 

If I was looking, based on mtf curves I would buy V2/3, also see what others are saying about the lens subjectively, the Leica wiki, https://wiki.l-camera-forum.com/leica-wiki.en/index.php/35mm_f/2_Summicron_II , has a page that references each lens with forum discussions,  more importantly (to me) I would try to find a good copy optically, not necessarily the most beautiful physically as tempting as this is.  

 

  

[Guest]

1 hour ago, tomshelby said:

yeah that's true. Especially during daytime the differences are not significant. ASPH is not beyond my budget, just I am kind of stuck with the vintage feel of old lenses but also want the sharpness (rock and hard place). Can't really afford 2 lenses together at this moment tho, and never owned more than 1 lenses (changing lens freaks me out a little). That's why I have had several point-and-shoots

I had the ASPH. both v1 and v2 in the past. Both are sold today and replaced by the V3, which I vastly prefer for my photography (daily life of my family in reportage style). The rendering is more gentle and pleasing on digital (M10R BP and M10M) again for me.

But again it's all personal preference. 🙂

[35photo]

I had the VII in the past nice compact lens made some nice images with it ended up selling it because I had the ASPH, I've had the ASPH for 20+ years now its been my go to lens for all types of images.... Its never let me know always delivered excellent results at all apertures can't really fault it. I just added a 35mm 1.4 pre ASPH for something different looking forward to getting to know it.

[edstock]

I've used my 35 f2 asph since it was first introduced. The images are outstanding.

[shirubadanieru]

Leica summicron 35mm asph is too clinical / boring on digital sensor (my opinion), but it works well with color film. If you mainly shoot digital, and like a more analog / classic rendering, it’s best to go with non-asph lenses. Main difference you’ll notice is that the non-asph are very sharp in the center, including when shot wide open, whereas the ASPH lenses are sharp across the whole frame. If you plan on shooting mostly wide open for street / landscape, the ASPH would the best option, but if you shoot a mix of portraits wide open + shoot landscapes / do street photography at f4~f8, the non-asph is a more enjoyable lens to use. 

[Jean-Michel]

As the OP wrote in the opening of this thread, it can be difficult to discern much difference between all the versions. I used a goggled version one for some fifty years, then I let it go and purchased the aspherical one. Yes, there are sometimes very visible differences between the two lenses, especially wide open — the version one shows much glow and low contrast wide open and then the contrast jumps right up at even just f/2.8.  I do not have any real advice to offer other than : just get a lens, photograph, and print..If you do not print then simply use your iPhone or such, for digital viewing that is as good or superior to just about any camera/lens combination, and basically foolproof. 

[nitroplait]

On 7/10/2023 at 7:44 AM, tomshelby said:

From this article https://www.streetsilhouettes.com/home/2017/3/30/leica-35mm-lenses-5-summicron-versions, I can't really tell much of a difference (I can see some small differences after looking at them for longer time). Does that mean I can safely go with a v2/v3 to save a few bucks? And also, what is the difference in terms of rendering between V2 and V3, given their optics are pretty much identical? I shoot digital only. 

Thank you for any advices or ideas

The linked article combines v2 and v3. That is wrong. V3 has a larger front lens diameter thus is not the same optical design as V2. I have not tried V2 so I can't tell you how big the difference is.

Geek fact: Leica CEO Dr. Andreas Kaufmann's favourite 35mm is the V3 which he shoots on a M11:

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!

Source: tokyocamerastyle (Oct. 23, 2022)

[Ouroboros]

2 hours ago, Unknown said:

I wouldn’t care about sharpness, something that nobody really will notice if care about, and go for size. 

especially if you have a 24MP Leica. The sharpness differences will be so minor honestly who cares!

Once you get the 40+ MP you’ll see the differences more. Even then I’ll go for size and the beauty and character of the image rather than sharpness. I don’t need sharpness. All those lenses are more than sharp enough.   

My favorite 35 is the v4 or KOB (King of Bokeh). Tiny and awesome. If you can’t make beautiful photos with that you can’t make it with any lens. 

That’s the little KOB on the left and the asphericalized bigger fatter cousins on the right of it. No thanks! 

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!

I would go for size above sharpness at certain apertures seen at 800%. 

It’s also a Mandler lens and very desirable. I would put my hard earned cash on that. Because Mandler lenses are amazing and no chart can tell you how awesome they are. 

here is an article with samples comparing all of them 

https://www.streetsilhouettes.com/home/2017/3/30/leica-35mm-lenses-5-summicron-versions

I’ve had ASPH super sharp and super corrected lenses. I sold the APO-Lanthar to have the 50 Summicron v5 Mandler lens. Non ASPH Mandler design from 1979. Like the KOB. 

The super sharp super corrected asphericalized APO chromatic lens was boring to be honest. I got sick of it. 

The non ASPH 1979 design has a personality. It’s glowy sometimes. Wide open and at f2.8 Not super sharp but sharp at the same time if that makes sense. It’s like having a couple of lenses in one. 

Go for the classics.  

plus you gotta admit. That’s a sexy looking lens… v4 KOB FTW!

Can you post some images to illustrate what you're saying?

[Advertisement]

Hallo,

Look here: Leica M

[hansvons]

4 hours ago, Unknown said:

I’ve had ASPH super sharp and super corrected lenses.

The 35mm Summciron ASPH differs from its older siblings because its design is quite different (not double Gauss anymore, concave front back lenses, ASPH correction group).

However, at least in my book, it's not a super-corrected lens. While the corners are pretty sharp at f 4.0 and become at f 8.0 and infinity as sharp as one can wish for (which I find essential for landscape photography and which the older Summcirons never achieve to that extent), its focal plane is pretty bent at f 2.0 until f 2,8+ which is a feature it shares with its older siblings and which creates that unique look in medium and near distances. Plus, and that's crucial for me, it renders faces relatively flat compared to modern 35mm lenses and thus stays in line with the classic Summicrons. But it vignettes less on digital sensors and hardly at all on film. And it doesn't glow at full aperture.

I find the ASPH is not clinical at all. It does have plenty of character and soul. 

Below is an image that shows the bent focal plane at f 2.0 on the SL2-S sensor. That effect is less pronounced on film, and so is the vignetting.

Click to enlarge.

 

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!

 

 

Edited July 24, 2023 by hansvons

[hansvons]

And these two images show how the 35mm Summicron ASPh lens renders on digital at f 2.0 and f 8.0 at infinity. Only levels and WB in C1 were adjusted. Much of the blurry edges at f 2.0 come from the bent focal plane. The vignetting is much less pronounced on film and completely gone at f 5.6. The ASPH is a pre-digital M design. 

 

Click to enlarge.

 

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!

Edited July 24, 2023 by hansvons