Struggling with APO M 35mm f2

[jankap]

Advertisement (gone after registration)

Something in the adjustments is different.

 FastRawViewer:152

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!

FastRawViewer: 146

Edited December 13, 2023 by jankap

[skahde]

After many years of extensively checking my gear before putting it into everyday-use. I would recommend to test both lenses outside at infinity-targets or close to that on a considerably clear day at all relevant apertures. With 35mm you don't even need a tripod in bright daylight and it will tell you more about both lenses than you ever wanted to know. Close-up and indoors can be done later, if the lens in question passed the first test. 

[Advertisement]

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

[pgk]

9 hours ago, EGD said:

I have the M11 with the Summilux 35mm f1.4 and love it, however I kept looking at the Summicron APO 35mm m f2 .....

I took a bunch of photos with both lenses and I can't get the APO to be sharper than the Summilux, not even close.  I have all the reviews about how great the APO is .....

You are compring two extremely good lenses. To differentiate them you need to be extremely precise in taking images and take which will highlight any differences. But IMO any differences will be mere nuances. How do you dramatically improve upon the Summilux when it is an exceptionally good lens? The answer can only be; marginally. I would only expect to see differences occasionally and under specific conditions - in areas of fine detail under particular lighting conditions for example. In general photography either will deliver more than acceptable results.

FWIW it is possible to get great results out of surprisingly old lenses. Improvements have been made and the 35mm Summilux is an exceptional lens and the difference between it and older 35mm lenses is obvious. But improving exceptonal is difficult and merely nuanced in comparison with 50 year old equivalents. It has to be so. Expectation can be difficult to meet at such levels.

[250swb]

It's true a tripod would help, and don't use the rangefinder to focus, but if such rigorous testing is needed to see a tiny difference in sharpness are you going to see any practical difference in real life everyday photography? Perhaps you shouldn't be looking at sharpness at all and try to see if there are any other differences between the lenses in walking about daylight photography? My feeling is that any lens beyond a Summilux is a waste of time if you can't clearly point to some further improvement and other people see it as well.

[Smudgerer]

8 hours ago, EGD said:

Image 146 is with Summilux Leica M 35mm F1.4

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!

Image 152 is with Leica APO Summicron f2.0

If you zoom in on the clock, the clarity of the words and also edges of the wood show the biggest difference

Maybe a sample or two of  the available "black stuff" between lens changes might have had something to do with the perceived problem 'tween both lenses?

[muskyvibes]

Yea. Rangefinders aren’t perfect. That’s the whole thing. Which is why I tend to stay away from these ultra corrected lenses. A lot of the time things are slightly out of focus and shaky anyway. Most of my favorite photos of the 20th century taken with Leica M rangefinders have a lot of technical flaws. But the photos are perfect. It’s more about conveying a feeling than anything else. 

if you need this level of perfection then get an AF mirrorless camera that has a selection of very fast AF lenses and accurate PD AF. 

There’s nothing sadder than taking photos of brick walls with a Leica M. Literally of brick walls. 

Nothing wrong with making sure a lens is calibrated and all that though. If you suspect that’s an issue then maybe visit a local Leica store or something. Hard to believe a brand new APO and a new M11 have calibration issues. On my 2 year old M10R every lens I’ve bought has been perfectly calibrated. The last one I bought was the Nokton 35f1.4. Cost me a few hundred bucks. Perfectly calibrated. 

but to be honest I would never notice anything on your 35APO. I don’t think the differences in the photos are enough to be noticeable in every day real world use. I just think the APO is unnecessary or the Lux is unnecessary. One of them must go. 

Just get rid of the APO and move on with the Lux. You’ll get the same pictures. 

Edited December 13, 2023 by muskyvibes

[tsleica]

Advertisement (gone after registration)

Ahh...the lesson learned..

That these days...

With current lenses..

One lens..

Is pretty much..

Just like the next one...lol..

Edited December 13, 2023 by tsleica

[EGD]

Well I spoke to Leica this morning and they are going to take a look at the lens.  Will update this when I receive lens back.

[jaapv]

I would suggest that the secret lies in sending both lenses (and any other lenses)  plus the camera in for a complete calibration of the system.Don't send it to Leica - it will take months to return. Use one of the reputed independent technicians.

It is always a good thing to do this if one runs into problems like this - you'll be surprised at the improvement.

[Al Brown]

10 hours ago, skahde said:

After many years of extensively checking my gear before putting it into everyday-use. I would recommend to test both lenses outside at infinity-targets or close to that on a considerably clear day at all relevant apertures.

There is absolutely no need to test at all apertures - infinity wide open will do, and maybe two stops down. The former will show you decentering, the latter lens' optimum performance.

[skahde]

vor 55 Minuten schrieb Al Brown:

There is absolutely no need to test at all apertures - infinity wide open will do, and maybe two stops down. The former will show you decentering, the latter lens' optimum performance.

That's why I said: All relevant apertures. It depends of the lens and its max aperture and if you want to see sunstars, bokeh and what not. Older lenses may not reach optimum corner-performance after stopping down more than just two stops, diffraction comes into play in the center and so on. It also depends on lens, preferred application, format and target-resolution. In this case two steps may do, in general not so much. 

Edited December 13, 2023 by skahde

[hansvons]

13 hours ago, EGD said:

Well I spoke to Leica this morning and they are going to take a look at the lens.  Will update this when I receive lens back.

Chances are high that this won't lead anywhere, and here is why:

Ms are all about the experience. Some see that in the design or the myth. Others understand the real-life experience of the viewfinder as pivotal to their shooting. Some collect them, others don't, and see them purely as photographic devices. Often, everything of the above is in the mix. But it's vital to understand that Ms cannot quickly shoot super-sharp, high-resolving images. The M11 60MP resolving power unveils all the system-inherent shortcomings in sharpness, especially if you pair it with a highly corrected lens: the unprecise range finder focusing and the missing IBIS.

This brings me to your issue. The 35mm APO is Leica's attempt to build the ultimate 35mm M-mount prime, which means, first of all, a considerable restriction in size. While it's an impressive lens, its counterpart in the SL line without the size restriction outperforms it by a mile. And it shows more interesting character traits, which makes it a class of its own.

Price aside, the contemporary Summilux is the more meaningful high-end lens because it's not built to deliver mind-blowing corner-to-corner sharpness but rather a decent overall performance with a f 1,4 as an extra bonus. It's much less demanding in focus and motion blur and thus fits the M system much better. 

If you want outstanding image quality in the Leica stable, that would be the SL2 and the APO SL primes. This system has all the bells and whistles to create effortlessly super-sharp images all day. 

Lastly, if you want to test-shoot a lens, do this:

• At infinity, shoot a far distant landscape at full aperture and stop it down until the lens reaches its pinnacle. With the APO, that should be f 2,8. And if that is not the case, then the whole APO exercise is somewhat moot. Look out for asymmetrical sharpness at the edges, vignetting, and smearing corners. Get the sun involved and check how you like the flares.
• Shoot a medium close-up portrait at full aperture in a back-lit environment with things in the picture that are in the same focus plane as your subject. Check how the edges perform. The APO shouldn't show a bent focal plane; the Summilux probably would. Then, check how the lenses render the faces. That can be quite different. Check how you like the bokeh balls of each lens. 
• Never shoot a brick wall; that only creates uncertainty (you must line up perfectly to learn anything) and wouldn't be the typical use case.

Now, you have a solid ground for an informed decision. 

 

 

Edited December 14, 2023 by hansvons

[Jon Warwick]

15 hours ago, hansvons said:

Chances are high that this won't lead anywhere, and here is why:

Ms are all about the experience. Some see that in the design or the myth. Others understand the real-life experience of the viewfinder as pivotal to their shooting. Some collect them, others don't, and see them purely as photographic devices. Often, everything of the above is in the mix. But it's vital to understand that Ms cannot quickly shoot super-sharp, high-resolving images. The M11 60MP resolving power unveils all the system-inherent shortcomings in sharpness, especially if you pair it with a highly corrected lens: the unprecise range finder focusing and the missing IBIS.

This brings me to your issue. The 35mm APO is Leica's attempt to build the ultimate 35mm M-mount prime, which means, first of all, a considerable restriction in size. While it's an impressive lens, its counterpart in the SL line without the size restriction outperforms it by a mile. And it shows more interesting character traits, which makes it a class of its own.

Price aside, the contemporary Summilux is the more meaningful high-end lens because it's not built to deliver mind-blowing corner-to-corner sharpness but rather a decent overall performance with a f 1,4 as an extra bonus. It's much less demanding in focus and motion blur and thus fits the M system much better. 

If you want outstanding image quality in the Leica stable, that would be the SL2 and the APO SL primes. This system has all the bells and whistles to create effortlessly super-sharp images all day. 

Lastly, if you want to test-shoot a lens, do this:

• At infinity, shoot a far distant landscape at full aperture and stop it down until the lens reaches its pinnacle. With the APO, that should be f 2,8. And if that is not the case, then the whole APO exercise is somewhat moot. Look out for asymmetrical sharpness at the edges, vignetting, and smearing corners. Get the sun involved and check how you like the flares.
• Shoot a medium close-up portrait at full aperture in a back-lit environment with things in the picture that are in the same focus plane as your subject. Check how the edges perform. The APO shouldn't show a bent focal plane; the Summilux probably would. Then, check how the lenses render the faces. That can be quite different. Check how you like the bokeh balls of each lens. 
• Never shoot a brick wall; that only creates uncertainty (you must line up perfectly to learn anything) and wouldn't be the typical use case.

Now, you have a solid ground for an informed decision. 

 

 

Thanks for your comments, which I found to be useful. I agreed with quite a bit of it, but certainly had a different view to the one about the output of an SL prime outperforming the M lens by a mile. Sure, at f2 at the very edges, as reflected by the MTFs, the SL primes are epic and possibly slightly beat the M APOs wide open. But stopping down even a little, and I’m really really hard pressed to see the benefit in terms of image quality of my weightier SL2 + SL 50 APO … vs my M11 + 50mm APO (in my case APO Lanthar) ….that I took of the same scene and resampled for prints to 50”. The scene was at infinity, on a flat field of view looking across a river to the river’s wall across the way, so making it easy to assess the file’s edges. Very little difference in image quality, to my eyes at least, between those SL and M systems when using the latest modern glass.

That aside, the thing I especially like about using an M camera is being able to use a plethora of native M mount lenses so seamlessly to achieve different renderings, ie, M APOs for edge to edge sharpness and no field curvature, or 50 v5 for a less saturated and gentler look, and/or use any of those lenses on an M film camera etc. The SL system is great, but it relatively felt more a one trick pony (of “it’s all about the sharpness”) to me.

 

Edited December 14, 2023 by Jon Warwick

[EGD]

18 hours ago, hansvons said:

Chances are high that this won't lead anywhere, and here is why:

Ms are all about the experience. Some see that in the design or the myth. Others understand the real-life experience of the viewfinder as pivotal to their shooting. Some collect them, others don't, and see them purely as photographic devices. Often, everything of the above is in the mix. But it's vital to understand that Ms cannot quickly shoot super-sharp, high-resolving images. The M11 60MP resolving power unveils all the system-inherent shortcomings in sharpness, especially if you pair it with a highly corrected lens: the unprecise range finder focusing and the missing IBIS.

This brings me to your issue. The 35mm APO is Leica's attempt to build the ultimate 35mm M-mount prime, which means, first of all, a considerable restriction in size. While it's an impressive lens, its counterpart in the SL line without the size restriction outperforms it by a mile. And it shows more interesting character traits, which makes it a class of its own.

Price aside, the contemporary Summilux is the more meaningful high-end lens because it's not built to deliver mind-blowing corner-to-corner sharpness but rather a decent overall performance with a f 1,4 as an extra bonus. It's much less demanding in focus and motion blur and thus fits the M system much better. 

If you want outstanding image quality in the Leica stable, that would be the SL2 and the APO SL primes. This system has all the bells and whistles to create effortlessly super-sharp images all day. 

Lastly, if you want to test-shoot a lens, do this:

• At infinity, shoot a far distant landscape at full aperture and stop it down until the lens reaches its pinnacle. With the APO, that should be f 2,8. And if that is not the case, then the whole APO exercise is somewhat moot. Look out for asymmetrical sharpness at the edges, vignetting, and smearing corners. Get the sun involved and check how you like the flares.
• Shoot a medium close-up portrait at full aperture in a back-lit environment with things in the picture that are in the same focus plane as your subject. Check how the edges perform. The APO shouldn't show a bent focal plane; the Summilux probably would. Then, check how the lenses render the faces. That can be quite different. Check how you like the bokeh balls of each lens. 
• Never shoot a brick wall; that only creates uncertainty (you must line up perfectly to learn anything) and wouldn't be the typical use case.

Now, you have a solid ground for an informed decision. 

 

 

Much appreciate all of this knowledge.  I am pretty sure already I am staying with the Lux, for me it is just a pleasure to use.  I just got enticed by the new girl in the short skirt.

[newtoleica]

I sold my 50 summilux v1 for the 50 APO as I prefer the rendering of the APO at 2.8 (the hexagonal bokeh balls on the lux…) 

First time round the buyer got back to me a week later to return the lens as he said it was ‘somehow damaged’. He had been shooting test landscapes and was bothered by the field curvature wide open in the corners, thinking ‘for that money a Leica lens should be perfect’…. I re-sold it to a street photographer who appreciated the lens for what it does……

[overexposed]

2 hours ago, newtoleica said:

I sold my 50 summilux v1 for the 50 APO as I prefer the rendering of the APO at 2.8 (the hexagonal bokeh balls on the lux…) 

First time round the buyer got back to me a week later to return the lens as he said it was ‘somehow damaged’. He had been shooting test landscapes and was bothered by the field curvature wide open in the corners, thinking ‘for that money a Leica lens should be perfect’…. I re-sold it to a street photographer who appreciated the lens for what it does……

shooting landscapes wide open.........uh huh...

[Cronilux]

Your examples are clearly not in focus. The Apo shot has a front focus. I think the issue is behind the camera here to be honest.

[hansvons]

11 hours ago, Jon Warwick said:

I agreed with quite a bit of it, but certainly had a different view to the one about the output of an SL prime outperforming the M lens by a mile. Sure, at f2 at the very edges, as reflected by the MTFs, the SL primes are epic and possibly slightly beat the M APOs wide open. But stopping down even a little, and I’m really really hard pressed to see the benefit in terms of image quality of my weightier SL2 + SL 50 APO … vs my M11 + 50mm APO (in my case APO Lanthar) ….

Agreed.

Lens character is all about shooting wide open or slightly stopped down. At f4 or even f8, every reasonably good lens should be sharp from corner to corner and look quite similar to the competition, as the character is substantially subdued at high apertures. I didn't clarify enough: APO is all about phenomenal performance at full aperture. If you don't need that, a lens with the ASPH badge in the Leica nomenclature will be a less expensive bet. 

We had that APO experience in Cinema Land when the Zeiss Master Primes were released. They were T 1,3 primes with an unbelievable sharpness right from the beginning. An absolute game-changer. It opened up new possibilities, e.g., creating tack-sharp, non-vignetting wide-angle medium-long shots with an almost surreal blurry background. How much we loved that! But it was all about shooting at full aperture. The magic was gone when you stopped them down, as they became very good regular primes (the incredible sharpens remained, however).

And, of course, I wanted to avoid pitching the M vs the SL system. That would be a moot exercise.

[Rick in CO]

If you want to evaluate resolution, what you focus on, and all other objects being evaluated, have to be in the same plane of focus.

Use a tripod with cable release, be situated at the appropriate height for the focus point in the middle of your test subject, leveled horizontally and vertically.

Fill the frame with the subject, classical testing specified 20-30X the focal length, but I prefer a larger field, mine is ~ 5x8 feet in size.

While you are at it, test all apertures - you are not wasting film and you might as well get the maximum info from your efforts.

You will also need sufficient illumination as you progress to slower apertures to avoid camera shutter shake, although with the Leica M I find this to be minimal.

Brick walls are un-necessary, that is a test for curvature/distortion.

Again, this is only a test for the resolving power of a lens.

Good Luck!

 

[Advertisement]

Hallo,

Look here: Leica M

[Kiwimac]

Did you have the testing done?