drfink@drfink.de Posted March 19, 2008 Share #1 Posted March 19, 2008 Advertisement (gone after registration) I own the M8 and would like to buy a fast 50 mm lens. I've been offered a pre-asph 1.4 50 mm lens for a very reasonble price. Is the modern asph lens, which would cost nearly twice as much worth the money ? Where are the differences ? Does anybody own both lenses for comparison. Thank you for your help. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Advertisement Posted March 19, 2008 Posted March 19, 2008 Hi drfink@drfink.de, Take a look here Summilux 50 1.4 asph or pre-asph ?. I'm sure you'll find what you were looking for!
lct Posted March 19, 2008 Share #2 Posted March 19, 2008 Recurrent topic here. See for instance: http://www.l-camera-forum.com/leica-forum/customer-forum/16684-50mm-cron-50mm-lux-pre-asph.html http://www.l-camera-forum.com/leica-forum/digital-forum/17505-50-1-4-asph-vs-pre.html ------- pdf brochures: http://tinyurl.com/rv7w/LeicaM_5014_11868.pdf http://tinyurl.com/rv7w/LeicaM_5014asph.pdf ------- Physical view: http://tinyurl.com/rv7w/DSC00622-afterweb.jpg ------- Summilux 50/1.4 pre-asph #11868 (last version with built-in hood) vs Summilux 50/1.4 asph (#11891). Epson R-D1, 200 iso, available light, tripod, Epson raw converter. (hope the links still work): Summilux 50/1.4 pre-asph & asph, f/1.4: http://tinyurl.com/rv7w/EPSN3058-afterweb.jpg http://tinyurl.com/rv7w/EPSN3060-afterweb.jpg Summilux 50/1.4 pre-asph & asph, f/1.4, crop 1: http://tinyurl.com/rv7w/EPSN3058-aftercropweb.jpg http://tinyurl.com/rv7w/EPSN3060-aftercropweb.jpg Summilux 50/1.4 pre-asph & asph, f/1.4, crop 2: http://tinyurl.com/rv7w/EPSN3058-aftercrop02web.jpg http://tinyurl.com/rv7w/EPSN3060-aftercrop02web.jpg ------- Summilux 50/1.4 pre-asph & asph, f/2.8: http://tinyurl.com/rv7w/EPSN3069-afterweb.jpg http://tinyurl.com/rv7w/EPSN3065-afterweb.jpg Summilux 50/1.4 pre-asph & asph, f/2.8, crop 1: http://tinyurl.com/rv7w/EPSN3069-aftercropweb.jpg http://tinyurl.com/rv7w/EPSN3065-aftercropweb.jpg Summilux 50/1.4 pre-asph & asph, f/2.8, crop 2: http://tinyurl.com/rv7w/EPSN3069-aftercrop02web.jpg http://tinyurl.com/rv7w/EPSN3065-aftercrop02web.jpg ------- Summilux 50/1.4 pre-asph & asph, f/2.8: http://tinyurl.com/rv7w/EPSN2714-afterweb.jpg http://tinyurl.com/rv7w/EPSN2718-afterweb.jpg Summilux 50/1.4 pre-asph & asph, f/2.8, crop 1: http://tinyurl.com/rv7w/EPSN2714-after_cropweb.jpg http://tinyurl.com/rv7w/EPSN2718-after_cropweb.jpg Summilux 50/1.4 pre-asph & asph, f/2.8, crop 2: http://tinyurl.com/rv7w/EPSN2714-after_cropweb02.jpg http://tinyurl.com/rv7w/EPSN2718-after_cropweb02.jpg ------- Summilux 50/1.4 pre-asph & asph, f/5.6: http://tinyurl.com/rv7w/EPSN2716-afterweb.jpg http://tinyurl.com/rv7w/EPSN2720-afterweb.jpg Summilux 50/1.4 pre-asph & asph, f/5.6, crop: http://tinyurl.com/rv7w/EPSN2716-after_cropweb02.jpg http://tinyurl.com/rv7w/EPSN2720-after_cropweb02.jpg Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Eoin Posted March 19, 2008 Share #3 Posted March 19, 2008 I had both together briefly and I think the answer to your question depends on a number of factors. The pre asph has less contrast (softer tones) wide open than the Asph and is not as sharp in detail as the Asph is. It catches up with the Asph by about f:/2.8 - f:/4 where there is little to choose between them IMO. In the Aperture range of f/2 - 2.8 I felt the bokeh from the pre asph was a little smoother and slightly more mellow in colour tones, again perhaps to do with the contrast. However that being said the Asph has a floating rear element which is supposed to improve lens performance irrespective of focusing distance and is supposed to be better at close distances. I did not notice focus shift tendency with either lens during my time with them. I guess the choice comes down to the look, old school Leica or the newer Asph full bodied contrast with bitingly sharp detail. As for your question on price, I really did not factor that in when making my decision, I wanted the better performance wide open in sharpness and contrast, I also tend shoot it at fairly close distances, so I chose the Asph. I have not been let down, it's truly a stunning lens. But if truth be told, I'd be happy with either if forced to live within budget constraints. Is it worth 2x an already expensive price?, as a serious amateur perhaps not, these minute differences are neither here not there in what makes a good image better, but rather a personal preference. Good luck with your decision. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
docolmo Posted March 19, 2008 Share #4 Posted March 19, 2008 I wonder where the Summicron fits in. Is it between the Summilux ASPH and pre-Asph? Or is it better than both? Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
lct Posted March 19, 2008 Share #5 Posted March 19, 2008 I wonder where the Summicron fits in. Is it between the Summilux ASPH and pre-Asph? Or is it better than both? Depends on the vintage AFAIK. My own copy (# 11819 w focus tab) is close to the #11868 Summilux from f/2.8 to f/11. At f/2 the latter is a bit sharper though. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
drfink@drfink.de Posted March 19, 2008 Author Share #6 Posted March 19, 2008 Thank you for your help and your competent answers. Again I learned a lot. I'm glad such a forum exists where you can benefit from the vast experience of so many people dedicated to photography and the M system. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Shootist Posted March 19, 2008 Share #7 Posted March 19, 2008 Advertisement (gone after registration) I wonder where the Summicron fits in. Is it between the Summilux ASPH and pre-Asph? Or is it better than both? I have the newest version Summicron and a new, September 07, chrome Summilux ASPH and the Lux is shaper throughout the whole range of apertures. I still use the Cron but most of the time the Lux is glued to one of my M8's. The Cron give a different look then the Lux. It all depends on what you're looking for in the final print. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Mauribix Posted March 19, 2008 Share #8 Posted March 19, 2008 I had both together briefly and I think the answer to your question depends on a number of factors. The pre asph has less contrast (softer tones) wide open than the Asph and is not as sharp in detail as the Asph is. It catches up with the Asph by about f:/2.8 - f:/4 where there is little to choose between them IMO. In the Aperture range of f/2 - 2.8 I felt the bokeh from the pre asph was a little smoother and slightly more mellow in colour tones, again perhaps to do with the contrast. However that being said the Asph has a floating rear element which is supposed to improve lens performance irrespective of focusing distance and is supposed to be better at close distances. I did not notice focus shift tendency with either lens during my time with them. I guess the choice comes down to the look, old school Leica or the newer Asph full bodied contrast with bitingly sharp detail. As for your question on price, I really did not factor that in when making my decision, I wanted the better performance wide open in sharpness and contrast, I also tend shoot it at fairly close distances, so I chose the Asph. I have not been let down, it's truly a stunning lens. But if truth be told, I'd be happy with either if forced to live within budget constraints. Is it worth 2x an already expensive price?, as a serious amateur perhaps not, these minute differences are neither here not there in what makes a good image better, but rather a personal preference. Good luck with your decision. I second every single word, I have both, but since the ASPH arrived, I usually pick it up with me, especially because of its performances at F1.4, otherway for slower 50s I'd go for the 50elmar-m f2.8 (just discontinued): incredibly sharp, only 4elements, unexpensive, compact and light, absolutely a winner IMHO! Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
wparsonsgisnet Posted March 19, 2008 Share #9 Posted March 19, 2008 DR, I would live with either lens. I owned a pre-asph 50 'lus for about 6 years. I replaced it with the asph version because of the *enormous* differences that I was in the 35 'lux. With that lens, I got way too much flare when shooting stage performances. I don't notice much difference beteen my current 50 'lux-a and the previous non-asph version. There were some previous threads about flare in this lens. I didn't find it to be noticable -- when the non-asph 35 'lux had so much flare in the SAME situation as to be useless to me. If you're getting a good price, go for the non-asph. It's a terrific lens. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest rweisz Posted March 19, 2008 Share #10 Posted March 19, 2008 I own the M8 and would like to buy a fast 50 mm lens. I've been offered a pre-asph 1.4 50 mm lens for a very reasonble price. Is the modern asph lens, which would cost nearly twice as much worth the money ? Where are the differences ? Does anybody own both lenses for comparison. Thank you for your help. I owned both. My pre-ASPH was of the final style with the pullout hood. If you are going to shoot f/1.4-f/2 @ 160-320 on a tripod then go for the ASPH. Otherwise the digital noise of the M8 from 640 up, and especially if handholding @ slow speeds, will negate most or all of the difference. I offed my ASPH, it was just too much cash sunk into a lens that wasn't giving me my money's worth in the very situations I bought it for. Cheers, Ray Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Daniel Ortego Posted March 19, 2008 Share #11 Posted March 19, 2008 Thank you for your help and your competent answers. Again I learned a lot. I'm glad such a forum exists where you can benefit from the vast experience of so many people dedicated to photography and the M system. Yep, I agree 100-percent. This forum together with RF & DPI is just as much about the Leica as photography itself. In fact, I doubt that I would really enjoy my M8 without this venue of knowledge and comradely. BTW: I just received my new silver 50-lux and it’s already seeing more time on target than my lovely 28-cron. These two lenses are as predictable on the M8 as the little red logo. Regards, Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Eoin Posted March 19, 2008 Share #12 Posted March 19, 2008 I just received my new silver 50-lux and it’s already seeing more time on target than my lovely 28-cron. These two lenses are as predictable on the M8 as the little red logo itself.Regards, Daniel, LOL, the saying "great minds think alike and fools seldom differ" comes to mind when I read your post. We have exactly the same lenses, chrome 50 as well, LOL. It is a sweet combination and the two I carry the most. Impossible to find a fault with these. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
russell Posted March 19, 2008 Share #13 Posted March 19, 2008 The pre-asph 50mm Lux is one of the biggest reasons I'm still holding on to the M platform. This lens is a sweetheart. It's the right contrast, speed, rendidtion, good focusing, no flare, etc... If they ever get full frame it will get most of the use out of all of my lenses. For now it's mostly a 28mm Ultron and the 35mm pre-asph Lux getting used. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
woodyspedden Posted March 20, 2008 Share #14 Posted March 20, 2008 The 50 Lux pre is one of those "pry it from my cold dead hands" lenses. It has what used to be called the Leica "magic" and is just a wonderful overall tool. However wide open it is not as sharp as the new asph model so the end choice is really dictated by your particular needs and desires. Woody Spedden Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
tom0511 Posted March 20, 2008 Share #15 Posted March 20, 2008 difficult question. I only know the 50 pre asph from film and now own the 50/1.4asph. I sold my 50 Cron because I prefered the bokeh of the 50asph being more smooth. I also have the Zeiss Sonnar which is a little slightly softer overall (vs the 50asph) but also here I prefer the bokeh of the 50asph. What I try to say is that while the 50asph is very sharp it is still not harsh, very smooth bokeh, and it does show character iMO. I like it a lot-however I would be interested to compare it directly to a 50 pre asph lux. Here are 2 shots with the 50asph. The great thing is that it creates definition and contrast in scenes where I would get only a mushy grey-brown soup with other lenses. I feel this lens sucks the light. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest Lotw Posted March 20, 2008 Share #16 Posted March 20, 2008 I own the M8 and would like to buy a fast 50 mm lens. I've been offered a pre-asph 1.4 50 mm lens for a very reasonble price. Is the modern asph lens, which would cost nearly twice as much worth the money ? Where are the differences ? Does anybody own both lenses for comparison. Thank you for your help. I would never do that pre-asph. do not underestimate the S'cron 50, even the 3rd generation is excellent and sometimes even better than the last generation. Save your money for the asph if you really want that undepth of field. the pre-asph is at least half the price of the asph, go to the casino with that money and double it. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest Lotw Posted March 20, 2008 Share #17 Posted March 20, 2008 I don't notice much difference beteen my current 50 'lux-a and the previous non-asph version. . You must be kidding, on film and sensor this is definitely not the case. I'm sorry but this really is non-sense. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
lars_bergquist Posted March 21, 2008 Share #18 Posted March 21, 2008 I wonder where the Summicron fits in. Is it between the Summilux ASPH and pre-Asph? Or is it better than both? The Summicron is inferior to both. It is inferior in its over-sensitivity to flare, which has ruined many pictures for me. The old Summilux handles flare and and internal reflexes very well, and the ASPH is amazingly good in that respect. It is truly a super lens. I sold both the old Summilux and the Summicron and replaced them with the Summilux ASPH. That said, the old warhorse (vintage 1962!) can give you very pleasant pictures and continues to improve on stopping down all the way to f:8. The ASPH on the other hand reaches its very high maximum definition around f:4 and starts to show slight diffraction at about f:8. And if you think it is too sharp, heck, put a light soft filter on it and eat the cake and have it! The old man from the Age of the Collapsible Summicron Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Archived
This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.