Is 35mm APO overkill with film?

[BjarniM]

Advertisement (gone after registration)

I have fallen in love with the APO-Summicron-M 35mm, very deeply 🙂

Is it overkill using the lens with film on my M6 and MP bodies?

Will I be able to see any difference in a Portra 160 image (scanned hi-res) in 60x90cm whether it’s taken with a 35mm Summicron vers. 4 or with the 35mm APO?

Thanks.

[250swb]

If it's the only lens you have use it, you don't need to buy another. That said you won't see any difference on film just as many people won't see any difference on digital with any other good 35mm lens.

Edited August 26, 2024 by 250swb

[hansvons]

25 minutes ago, BjarniM said:

Will I be able to see any difference in a Portra 160 image (scanned hi-res) in 60x90cm whether it’s taken with a 35mm Summicron vers. 4 or with the 35mm APO?

Yes. 

The slightly longer answer is that an image is the product of the film/sensor and the lens, with 1 being the theoretical optimum.

[lct]

21 minutes ago, Al Brown said:

"The difference in M lenses' optical properties is visible only to those who look with their heart."
                                                                                                                  -- Peter Mandler, cca. 1925

Wise for a 3yo baby  😄

 

[Smudgerer]

39 minutes ago, BjarniM said:

Is it overkill using the lens with film on my M6 and MP bodies?

Yes.........

[Smudgerer]

30 minutes ago, Al Brown said:

"The difference in M lenses' optical properties is visible only to those who look with their heart."
                                                                                                                  -- Peter Mandler, cca. 1925

or are constrained by their wallet..........

[BWColor]

Advertisement (gone after registration)

Based on the question, you seem to have both the lens and the cameras you are asking about.  If so, we should be asking you this question.  If you are thinking of buying because you fell in love remote from the lens, then it makes sense to be asking us.  I remember when I was asking about the Zeiss 35mm f/1.4 ZM lens, because I was considering buying one.  I’m thankful that prior to purchasing I looked in my safe to find out that I had purchased the lens years ago and forgot about it.

Edited August 26, 2024 by BWColor
punctuation

[BjarniM]

6 hours ago, BWColor said:

Based on the question, you seem to have both the lens and the cameras you are asking about. (…)

No, I don’t have the lens - yet.

I am saying I might want it, not that I have it. Those are two very different things.

This might seem ‘spoiled’ but I have the new 35mm Summilux and found out when I put the 35mm APO on my MP that it’s a smaller and intrudes less in the viewfinder.

Hence the question, if I gain anything image-wise with the APO, if it’s visible in 60x90cm prints or if it’s overkill, so to say.

Edited August 27, 2024 by BjarniM
misspelling

[Greenhilltony]

17 minutes ago, BjarniM said:

No, I don’t have the lens - yet.

I am saying I might want it, not that I have it. Those are two very different things.

This might seem ‘spoiled’ but I have the new 35mm Summilux and found out when I put the 35mm APO on my MP that it’s a smaller and intrudes less in the viewfinder.

Hence the question, if I gain anything image-wise with the APO, if it’s visible in 60x90cm prints or if it’s overkill, so to say.

How far away would you view the print? Sounds like it’s to be hung on the wall. You might or might notice the difference depending on whether you are standing at an audience position or stick your face upon it.

[BWColor]

Apologies… I misinterpreted your question.

I purchased the 35mm and 50mm APO Lanthar, which might be of some advantage wide open when shot on film, but I’ve only used the 50mm with Portra 160 and mainly use both on my M11M.   One advantage of the Leica APO is that it would future proof your purchase should you decide to use it on a high resolution sensor.  The Lanthar fairs better than you might think when reviews compare it to the Leica, so I suspect that for either of these APO lenses, the differences from f/2.8-f/16 would be minimal compared to the lens that you own.  The cost/benefit is probably pretty steep compared to just using the 35mm that you have.

Edited August 27, 2024 by BWColor
Modified

[kraxel69]

vor 27 Minuten schrieb BjarniM:

No, I don’t have the lens - yet.

I am saying I might want it, not that I have it. Those are two very different things.

This might seem ‘spoiled’ but I have the new 35mm Summilux and found out when I put the 35mm APO on my MP that it’s a smaller and intrudes less in the viewfinder.

Hence the question, if I gain anything image-wise with the APO, if it’s visible in 60x90cm prints or if it’s overkill, so to say.

From my experience with the APO 50 which I own, no. You gain from it being smaller and not sticking out as much 🙃.

Edited August 27, 2024 by kraxel69

[ph0toni]

@BjarniM When I was young, the benchmark was Kodachrome 25, then in the 90s it was Velvia 50.

With a slide you can make a direct comparison with a 20X loupe

The 160 ISO negative film has a more flaky grain and the quality is translated by a scanner (optical / drum?) which causes some of the sharpness to be lost that the soft then fixes with a contrast mask.

[costa43]

I wouldn’t buy it for film but if I had one for digital then I would use it on a film camera. When I’ve used my Voigtlander apo on film I can’t really see much of a difference if any from my vintage lenses at f2. 

Edited August 27, 2024 by costa43

[otto.f]

In use the APO on film with the same pleasure as on digital and on both media the images are more defined than they are with my Summicron 35 iv. For instance on these two images, the details in the sand, also at the edges. I printed these two together on ~24x30cm and it shows.

 

Edited August 27, 2024 by otto.f

[hansvons]

2 hours ago, BjarniM said:

Hence the question, if I gain anything image-wise with the APO, if it’s visible in 60x90cm prints or if it’s overkill, so to say.

I shoot all of my printed stuff on 35mm film with M cameras and 35mm M lenses. I also print relatively large (60x80cm) and do that in my atelier with my own printer. I shoot mainly landscapes and similar subjects that require sharp corners and would suffer visibly from CA.

The advantage of the APO-specified lenses over non-APO Leica lenses ist their relative high performance at full aperture. However, in many comparisons, including modern Summiluxes, this advantage fades when stopping down. Today’s Summilux (not the Steel Rim reissue), Summicrons and Summarits render as sharp corners at f/4 as the APO. The Summarit is particularly good in not showing CA on film and is amazingly flare resistant. The case can be made that the Summarit is as good as the APO for landscape photography shot at f/4 and above.

When shooting portraits the game changes a lot. The SL35mm APO is so intriguingly perfect that environmental portraits shot a f/2 show a character that is singular in many respects and can help tremendously specific stories. However that lens is digital-only. I haven’t tried the APO M yet but learned from knowledgeable source that it’s not a match  at all.

Prints: at 90x60cm prints out-resolve 35mm by far at 300 PPI. That includes Portra 160.  However, at a regular viewing distance this “issue” turns into a non-issue, but smeary corners remain smeary. So, a sharp lens makes a difference also on film-based prints.

I find perfect scanning essential to the printed results, as perceived sharpness depends very much on the texture/grain of the scan. Also, colour separation is vital. A good lens supports that with clarity, contrast and great colour rendering. However, the regular Summicon and Summilux are no slouches in that regard.

Bottom line: I have no use for the APO and my wallet prefers other investments like a proper 44” printer. YMMV, of course.

 

Edited August 27, 2024 by hansvons

[ph0toni]

sometimes we forget what APO and Chromatic Aberration means.
This is my excellent Nikkor PC-E 85mm @f2.8 (with reverse tilt for maximum blur)
Very correct at F:16 but lacking at full aperture.
This does not happen with the new Z 105 macro @2.8 (also because it has a less wide coverage range)

.

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!

[Smudgerer]

3 hours ago, BjarniM said:

No, I don’t have the lens - yet.

I am saying I might want it, not that I have it. Those are two very different things.

This might seem ‘spoiled’ but I have the new 35mm Summilux and found out when I put the 35mm APO on my MP that it’s a smaller and intrudes less in the viewfinder.

Hence the question, if I gain anything image-wise with the APO, if it’s visible in 60x90cm prints or if it’s overkill, so to say.

For what it is worth last week I made a 60cmx90cm B&W print from a cropped negative shot on a M6 with the VM Color Skopar 35mm VII..........Also with that lens there's close to zero intrusion in the viewfinder with it's hood mounted.

[250swb]

3 hours ago, BjarniM said:

 

Hence the question, if I gain anything image-wise with the APO, if it’s visible in 60x90cm prints or if it’s overkill, so to say.

It depends how far you want to go in 'technique'. Are you going to use ultra fine grain film, are you going to use a tripod, or be constrained by only using the optimum aperture? Then you will probably see a significant improvement in image quality with any lens but only little more improvement beyond that with the APO. Then there is the question of output, wet printed or scanned? Or to put it another way, everything being equal and the best technique is used not many people will be able to tell the difference in a print between the APO and any other good 35mm lens. If however you are going to be hand holding the camera and using 400 ISO film no difference will be noticeable using an APO.

[hansvons]

4 hours ago, 250swb said:

in a print between the APO and any other good 35mm lens. If however you are going to be hand holding the camera and using 400 ISO film no difference will be noticeable using an APO.

I would challenge that wide open, beyond 1/125, and at infinity, but in general you are right, of course, especially if there is no side-by-side comparison (and when do we have that in an exhibition?).

[Advertisement]

Hallo,

Look here: Leica M

[hansvons]

17 hours ago, BjarniM said:

I have fallen in love with the APO-Summicron-M 35mm, very deeply 🙂

 

There’s another point of view on this, beyond technique, specs etc. Some of the critical answers here are written by people who expose film for a living, work for clients and/or sell their prints. That perspective is always connected with the idea of a return of investment. Imagine a cap driver discussing the next ride.

Many see that quite differently and understand the whole affair as a never-ending journey of entertainment, curiosity, and self-expression.  Collecting gear, having FOMO, fighting with creative  slumps, getting inspired, making family and friends happy, entering new realms of photography etc. is an essential part of that trip. From that perspective, the APO makes tons of sense.