35 Lux ASPH pre-FLE hood question

[dkmoore]

Advertisement (gone after registration)

Always wanted to try out the pre-fle summilux so I bought one. I hate the hood but I don’t want to pay $1k+ for the 12466. 
 

I saw on a random website that the 28 Summicron screw on lens shade fits the 35 asph pre-fle but I’m not convinced. 
 

Can anyone corroborate this?

[Advertisement]

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

[dkmoore]

I suspect the poster meant the 28 Cron v1 hood but the pictures used are showing the metal screw on. So prob just BS / bad post. 

[FrozenInTime]

4 hours ago, dkmoore said:

Always wanted to try out the pre-fle summilux so I bought one. I hate the hood but I don’t want to pay $1k+ for the 12466. 
 

I saw on a random website that the 28 Summicron screw on lens shade fits the 35 asph pre-fle but I’m not convinced. 
 

Can anyone corroborate this?

The even bigger and nastier 12451 plastic square hood from the 28mm v1 is interchangeable with the 35 Summilux ASPH pre-FLE 12589 and 12466 hoods.

There is risk of the front lens group loosening on the 28/2 and 35/1.4 with the square hoods; this can happen for example when pushing the lens and body into a camera bag; the round 12466 reduces this; they were $400 new when I bought mine, but the never produced very many, 200 ?, hence the great price now - $1k would be considered a 'bargain'..

The 12028 hood from the new 11714 50mm Summilux is similar to the 12466, and even loosely fits the 35mm Summilux, but being Leica the internal rim sizes differ; the hood turns and rattles, so would likely fall off with a slight knock ( I did not check further for vignetting ).

[lct]

12466 is indeed a nice and expensive hood, but it sits close to the aperture ring and gets somewhat in the way when turning the later. 12589 is smaller, cheaper and easier to find out but its locking ring tends to get in the way as well. 12588 is my favorite but it is difficult to find out and tends to drop more easily. Here 12588 (left) and 12589 (center).

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!

[dkmoore]

4 hours ago, FrozenInTime said:

The even bigger and nastier 12451 plastic square hood from the 28mm v1 is interchangeable with the 35 Summilux ASPH pre-FLE 12589 and 12466 hoods.

There is risk of the front lens group loosening on the 28/2 and 35/1.4 with the square hoods; this can happen for example when pushing the lens and body into a camera bag; the round 12466 reduces this; they were $400 new when I bought mine, but the never produced very many, 200 ?, hence the great price now - $1k would be considered a 'bargain'..

The 12028 hood from the new 11714 50mm Summilux is similar to the 12466, and even loosely fits the 35mm Summilux, but being Leica the internal rim sizes differ; the hood turns and rattles, so would likely fall off with a slight knock ( I did not check further for vignetting ).

Interesting info about the 12028. 
 

i actually bought a 12466 from one of my go to dealers for like $300 5 years ago and for some dumb reason got rid of it. Actually, because I got rid of the v1 28mm. 
 

 

[dkmoore]

1 minute ago, lct said:

12466 is indeed a nice and expensive hood, but it sits close to the aperture ring and gets somewhat in the way when turning the later. 12589 is smaller, cheaper and easier to find out but its locking ring tends to get in the way as well. 12588 is my favorite but it is difficult to find out and tends to drop more easily. Here 12588 (left) and 12589 (center).

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!

The 89 def looks better to me. If I can’t find a reasonable 12466 I may give that a whirl. 
 

I should probably test out the pre fle first to make sure I’ll actually keep it before I spend $1k on a hood. 🤦‍♂️

[lct]

Advertisement (gone after registration)

Better check focus accuracy with this lens. Some late copies can be spot on whereas earlier ones can suffer from focus shift.

[dkmoore]

35 minutes ago, lct said:

Better check focus accuracy with this lens. Some late copies can be spot on whereas earlier ones can suffer from focus shift.

It’s a very late copy, arrives Monday. 
 

I never focus and change aperture. I set aperture then focus so shouldn’t be an issue. 
 

I will still check it out and make sure it’s focusing accurately. 

[Objektivjäger]

The focus shift occurs on all pre-FLE lenses. Despite what the Internet might say, there are no lenses where this issue was fixed altogether. Otherwise Leica would never have needed to create an FLE version to solve the problem. The difference is that earlier models were adjusted for accurate focus at f/1.4, whereas later serial numbers were adjusted for perfect focus at f/2.

The effect of this change was to make the focus shift issue less noticeable at f/2.8 and f/4. The best way to deal with it is to get to know your lens, and the way your specific sample focuses. With mine I have perfect focus at f/2, which is great because that’s where I normally shoot it. If I want to shoot at f/1.4 I know that I can simply move the focus the tiniest little bit and it will be sharp at f/1.4. If you’re shooting with a digital camera with live view it is very easy to do this test and understand exactly how your lens performs. Once you understand this, the changes can be made very easily without needing to refer to live view.

Despite the focus shift, I prefer the pre-FLE because I love the way that it renders the out of focus areas. 

[Objektivjäger]

On 5/18/2025 at 10:10 AM, dkmoore said:

It’s a very late copy, arrives Monday. 
 

I never focus and change aperture. I set aperture then focus so shouldn’t be an issue. 
 

I will still check it out and make sure it’s focusing accurately. 

Unless you are using live view or the Visoflex it will still be a problem, because changing the aperture before or after you focus has no effect on the rangefinder. See my previous post for the best way to deal with this and continue using this amazing lens.

[lct]

55 minutes ago, Objektivjäger said:

The focus shift occurs on all pre-FLE lenses. Despite what the Internet might say, there are no lenses where this issue was fixed altogether. Otherwise Leica would never have needed to create an FLE version to solve the problem. The difference is that earlier models were adjusted for accurate focus at f/1.4, whereas later serial numbers were adjusted for perfect focus at f/2 [...]

Interesting thank you. Would you have any link confirming those different adjustments? Just curious as later copies including titanium variants have been found with little to no significant focus shift.

[Rupert Greenwell]

I have a pre FLE that was six bit coded at manufacture that does not have focus shift as far as my eye can see .at either 1.4 or 2.0 . I don't pixel peep but cannot see anything out of focus in my prints or on my screen  that suggests that there is a problem with my lens.

 It took me some time to find a copy that did not have obvious focus shift, the person who repairs and services my equipment told me to look out for a factory coded example as these later lenses had been corrected. He found me two examples neither of which showed focus shift under normal viewing ( a print on the wall or in an album ). I bought one of them off him.

I have the lens on my M9 Monochrom at the moment and I have just tried it at F1'4 and F2 and there is no problem to my eyes. I don't often use the lens wide open . I do have the FLE Mk 1 which is a bit sharper wide open but the lens is plagued with a very loose aperture ring and I prefer using the pre FLE,

[dkmoore]

My late model version seems just fine. I’m extremely picky about focus. 
 

if I had to “know” a lens and back off or push forward focus, counter to the rangefinder patch, the lens would be dead to me. 

[Objektivjäger]

On 5/25/2025 at 10:11 PM, lct said:

Interesting thank you. Would you have any link confirming those different adjustments? Just curious as later copies including titanium variants have been found with little to no significant focus shift.

The change to the calibration of the lens where perfect focus was at f/2 eliminated any gross missfocus. By doing this, at f/1.4 and f/2.8 the lens is still okay, it’s just not as sharp as it could be if correctly focused. Previously at  f/2.8 the issue would be obvious. I would ask anybody who claims to have a copy of the lens with zero focus shift to do a simple test with a photograph of a ruler at minimum focus distance and watch how the sharpest focus point changes between f/1.4 and f/4 when viewed at 100%. I would be happy to eat my words if this was the case, but I believe the reason people do not see or notice the focus shift is because most people do not scrutinise their lenses to this degree.
 

Consider, if there was no focus shift there would be no reason to release an FLE version, particularly given the slight deterioration of the out of focus areas that this lens exhibits compared to the pre- FLE.

[Objektivjäger]

On 5/25/2025 at 10:11 PM, lct said:

Interesting thank you. Would you have any link confirming those different adjustments? Just curious as later copies including titanium variants have been found with little to no significant focus shift.

From Steve Huff:

“From what I understand, Leica sets them up at the factory these days optimized for F2, meaning at F1.4 you will have a TINY bit of front focus, but pretty much undetectable. At F2 you will be super sharp and by F4 the back-focus will be so small, it will not really affect the image. Basically, as good as it gets with this lens on an M8.”

https://www.stevehuffphoto.com/the-leica-35-summilux-1-4-asph-pre-fle-lens-review/?amp=1

[pgk]

On 5/25/2025 at 12:07 PM, Objektivjäger said:

The focus shift occurs on all pre-FLE lenses.

It doesn't. I've looked into this quite extensively as my pre-FLE exhibits very little if any focus shift and obviously some do not think that this should be the case. So far I am of the opinion that focus shift may potentially be due to variation in the aspheres. I have been informed that the precision of molded aspheres has improved significantly over the last few decades, but any variation in early (the pre-FLE dates from 1994 so is a 30+ year old design now) molded aspheres (marginal variations in the aspheric surfaces) might just lead to shift in the focus upon stopping down, in some lenses. The FLE versions are optically the same but with close range correction which shouldn't actually affect the focus variation upon stopping down, but higher precision and accuracy of the molded aspheres may well have minimised the problem. It is by far my most used Leica lens so I have a lot of images to examine for focus shift.

[wattsy]

Focus shift is a consequence of spherical aberration and is a characteristic of a particular lens design. That doesn't mean that there can't be minor variation in the severity of the shift (as Paul states, there can be variation in the quality of the moulded lens elements) but the idea that the "titanium" or silver chrome pre-FLE Summiluxes don't exhibit the phenomenon is just classic internet nonsense. I owned two of these lenses (a late 1990s example I bought off eBay) and a brand new (black and silver box) example in around 2007. The latter was indeed calibrated to be bang on at around F2 but still exhibited noticeable focus shift if you were using the lens at around F5.6. Being an inveterate upgrader in those days, I bought the FLE version in 2011 and never looked back. The FLE is a very fine lens but, now that I am only using M lenses on the SL system (where I always focus at the taking aperture) or with film M bodies, I rather wish I'd kept the pre-FLE version. It's a really nice lens with a less modern character than the more recent generation of M lenses.

[pgk]

On 5/26/2025 at 1:37 PM, Objektivjäger said:

Consider, if there was no focus shift there would be no reason to release an FLE version, particularly given the slight deterioration of the out of focus areas that this lens exhibits compared to the pre- FLE.

The advances in consistency and precision of molded aspheric lenses together with improved close focus performance would both have helped performace of the FLE. Its also quite possible that the additive effect of focus shift and marginally poorer close focus performance of the pre-FLE were both improved and these both led to improved overall performance and consistency of the FLE. That said, my pre-FLE is more than adequate for my photography though so I have no desire to 'upgrade' it.

[Advertisement]

Hallo,

Look here: Leica M

[lct]

9 hours ago, wattsy said:

Focus shift is a consequence of spherical aberration and is a characteristic of a particular lens design. That doesn't mean that there can't be minor variation in the severity of the shift (as Paul states, there can be variation in the quality of the moulded lens elements) but the idea that the "titanium" or silver chrome pre-FLE Summiluxes don't exhibit the phenomenon is just classic internet nonsense. [...]

• 1994 Summilux 35/1.4 asph (Black): Focus shift at f/4 & f/5.6.

• 1996 Summilux 35/1.4 asph (Titanium): No Focus shift.

Source: J.M. Sepulchre
 

[pgk]

1 minute ago, lct said:

• 1994 Summilux 35/1.4 asph (Black): Focus shift at f/4 & f/5.6.

• 1996 Summilux 35/1.4 asph (Titanium): No Focus shift.

Source: J.M. Sepulchre
 

Sample size? Low sample numbers may simply show results of aspheric lens variation and have nothing to do with material/finish used.