ammitsboel Posted December 6, 2008 Share #21 Posted December 6, 2008 Advertisement (gone after registration) This lens has a lot of strange attributes but some users like the look. Here's my experience with it. M8 on the bar. What processing did you apply to this image, it looks like there's applied some smoothing? Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Advertisement Posted December 6, 2008 Posted December 6, 2008 Hi ammitsboel, Take a look here Help. M8 and 35 f/1.4 Summilux flare?. I'm sure you'll find what you were looking for!
tofsla Posted December 6, 2008 Author Share #22 Posted December 6, 2008 The 'lux ASPH too has some sensitivity to flare, but much much less than its predecessor, and also much less than the current 50mm Summicron which I will not touch with a nine foot pole because of its flareyness. The least flare-prone M lenses I have ever worked with are various modern 28mm lenses, including the Summicron, and also the 75mm Summarit. The old man from the Age B.C. (Before Coating) Thats good to know about 50mm Summicron! I was thinking its only me who see it as a flare central! My most flare-prone lens CV 28 f/3.5 - no flare even when I shot direct in the sun. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
sean_reid Posted December 6, 2008 Share #23 Posted December 6, 2008 Tofsla: Remember that with the M8, you are not using the outermost part of the lens' field of view. But that part of the image is still bouncing around in the lens and the camera body. --Peter That's a very good point to keep in mind and esp. relevant for a picture made in a car in daylight. Cheers, Sean Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
tofsla Posted December 6, 2008 Author Share #24 Posted December 6, 2008 That's a very good point to keep in mind and esp. relevant for a picture made in a car in daylight. Cheers, Sean I will keep it in mind. Cheers Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
offshore Posted December 6, 2008 Share #25 Posted December 6, 2008 What processing did you apply to this image, it looks like there's applied some smoothing? No smoothing. I convert from raw in PS3 using channels, curves and histogram. Except for those WYSIWYG. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
wlaidlaw Posted December 6, 2008 Share #26 Posted December 6, 2008 I have found that changing the hood on the 35 ASPH Summilux from the standard one, with its "self losing" lens cap to the hood from the 28 Summicron, provides better flare protection, better physical protection and the lens cap locks positively in place. Wilson Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
lars_bergquist Posted December 6, 2008 Share #27 Posted December 6, 2008 Advertisement (gone after registration) A screw-in hood intended for standard lenses can work very well on the 35 'lux. Mine is from B+W, and I found that the cap for the 75 and 90mm Summarit hoods fits it perfectly! The 28mm hood lets in even more potential stray light than the 35mm hood, because it is for a wider lens. The old man from the Age of the Bowler Hat Shade Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
lars_bergquist Posted December 6, 2008 Share #28 Posted December 6, 2008 Thats good to know about 50mm Summicron! I was thinking its only me who see it as a flare central! My most flare-prone lens CV 28 f/3.5 - no flare even when I shot direct in the sun. Flare is usually not apparent on a MTF test rig, so it is very often neglected. But it is very dangerous with a RF camera, because we do not see it in the finder. The Summicron is useless for a landscape with a lightly overcast sky, or a portrait near a widow, as it can create either overall flare, or a curious parallelepipedic patch of flare centrally. Strangely enough, even the old (1962--2004) Summilux was pretty immune. And my present 50mm lens is the Summilux ASPH, not because of the speed, but because it is extremely resistant to both flare and internal reflexes. The old man from the Age B.C. (Before Coating) Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
SJP Posted December 6, 2008 Share #29 Posted December 6, 2008 I seem to recall that the old Noctilux (50mm,f/1) was/is one of the most flare resistant lenses. Whether this is also true for the new noctilux (f/0.95) remains to be seen. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
ho_co Posted December 6, 2008 Share #30 Posted December 6, 2008 I think the same holds for the f/1.2. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
lars_bergquist Posted December 7, 2008 Share #31 Posted December 7, 2008 Correction: Widows are not generally known to induce flare. The old man from the Age of Typos (nowadays nobody seems to mind) Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
wlaidlaw Posted December 7, 2008 Share #32 Posted December 7, 2008 The 28mm hood lets in even more potential stray light than the 35mm hood, because it is for a wider lens. The old man from the Age of the Bowler Hat Shade Lars, Normally you would be right but the tiny little flimsy hood that comes as standard with the 35 Lux is surprisingly wide angle (using the word flared would lead to confusion). The 28 Cron hood looks to my eye to be a slightly narrower angle than the standard 35 Lux hood and is considerably longer. I have definitely had less filter reflection artifacts, such as pink circles in the sky, since changing to this hood. I have also not lost any lens caps, which is an additional bonus. The first standard 35 lens cap I had was so loose, that if you turned the M8 upside down and gave it a tiny shake, the cap would fall off and inevitably did, when I was not looking = lost. Wilson Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
grduprey Posted December 8, 2008 Share #33 Posted December 8, 2008 The reason I got rid of this lens is that it's the most flare-prone Leica glass I've ever used. Actually, the early 35, collapsing, Elmar was just flare-y to me. I tried and abandoned that lens, but the 35 'lux-non-a is a modern lens. After I swapped the lenses, my wife asked to see some older pix from a dance show that I photograph each year. She looked at the ones that came from the earlier 35 and immediately asked what was wrong with those photos. When there is flare, the images lose definition, color saturation, and seem uninteresting [sorry if that's a classic definition of flare.... ]. I also bot the asph version of the 50 'lux as soon as it was announced (well, I had to wait for what seemed like an eternity to get the *&^%$#@! lens!). I did this just because of the transformation in image quality from the 35 switch. I never had noticeable flare from the 50 'lux-non-a, but I made the change anyway. Also, I figured I was home free because I retained my 50 'cron DR. Little did I know that it wouldn't fit the M8. Damn. 'Course, my #1 son is very pleased with this outcome. He's caretaking my M6, the DR, and a 90 'cron (Canada) with great joy. He's also getting my darkroom equipment in a series of shipments. Do you know how cheap Leica glass is compared to shipping a bunch of heavy boxes to the Left Coast?!!!! I'm not sure what you mean by modern, this lens was designed in the 1960's, not what I would call a modern lens by Leica standards, or anyone elses either. It was th first 35 1.4 lens design to make it to the market and by the then standards it was the best available at the time. This design was the Leica 35 1.4 lens until the asph came out. By the way mine seems to perform far better on the M8 than on my M6TTL. Go Figure... Gene Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
grduprey Posted December 8, 2008 Share #34 Posted December 8, 2008 A screw-in hood intended for standard lenses can work very well on the 35 'lux. Mine is from B+W, and I found that the cap for the 75 and 90mm Summarit hoods fits it perfectly! The 28mm hood lets in even more potential stray light than the 35mm hood, because it is for a wider lens. The old man from the Age of the Bowler Hat Shade Are you talking about the 35 'Lux or the 35 'Lux asph? The 'Lux has no filter threads, and requires the 12505 hood to use Series 7 filters. Gene Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
wparsonsgisnet Posted December 8, 2008 Share #35 Posted December 8, 2008 Bill, I had the same experience with the old Summilux. Sometimes I was hard put to find anything sharp at all in the pictures (that was with my old M4-P). So I dumped it and got myself a Summilux ASPH, and I am happily using that lens now with my M8, in spite of the past flap about focus shift. The 'lux ASPH too has some sensitivity to flare, but much much less than its predecessor, and also much less than the current 50mm Summicron which I will not touch with a nine foot pole because of its flareyness. The least flare-prone M lenses I have ever worked with are various modern 28mm lenses, including the Summicron, and also the 75mm Summarit.... Lars, I use the 24 and the 35 'lux-a most frequently on my M8. The 35 doesn't exhibit any particular focus shift that I notice. In fact, I use it an enormous amount in my dance performance work, usually setting the focus about 1/3 of the way into the stage area and just snapping away. I didn't have complaints about the flare with my ealier 50, but made the switch based on the magical result with the 35 'lux-a. Gene -- by modern, I meant since the r-e-a-l-l-y old 35 Elmar. I also had a pre-asph 28 for a while. I got rid of it because of the barrel distortion when I did group portraits (sorry, I like wide lenses for portraits - it's not in the instruction book ). Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
gravastar Posted December 8, 2008 Share #36 Posted December 8, 2008 Tofsla: Remember that with the M8, you are not using the outermost part of the lens' field of view. But that part of the image is still bouncing around in the lens and the camera body. ..............................................................Peter That's why I'd like to see a set of lens hoods with a restricted field of view specifically for use with the M8. I've managed to find suitable ones on eBay for some lenses, for others such as the 28mm Summicron ASPH, 35mm Summicron ASPH and older 50mm Summicron I've found the following to be a good match: 28mm Summicron ASPH -> Hood #12589 originally for the 35mm Summilux ASPH. 35mm Summicron ASPH and old version 50mm Summicron -> Hood #12575 originally for the 90mm Tele-Elmarit. There is a #1275N version of this hood which has a chrome rear mounting ring and looks good on chrome lenses. The 12575 hood will vignette on the pre ASPH 35mm Summilux (a very flare prone lens) unless you remove some of the front of the hood. How much I've yet to determine. I've found that vignetting due to a hood isn't always equal in all corners and varies between cameras. There appears to be a significant tolerance in the mounting of the M8 sensor with respect to the lens axis! Bob. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
wparsonsgisnet Posted December 8, 2008 Share #37 Posted December 8, 2008 On both my 24 and 35, I use the inexpensive steel hoods that are available on ebay. I use them without a cap, counting on the steel hood and the IR filter to protect the lenses. They're less than $10. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
brill64 Posted December 9, 2008 Share #38 Posted December 9, 2008 I'm not sure what you mean by modern, this lens was designed in the 1960's, not what I would call a modern lens by Leica standards, or anyone elses either. It was th first 35 1.4 lens design to make it to the market and by the then standards it was the best available at the time. This design was the Leica 35 1.4 lens until the asph came out. By the way mine seems to perform far better on the M8 than on my M6TTL. Go Figure... Gene depends what your definition of "modern" is, certainly it exhibits simplication of form and design which could be deemed to be modern, the 60's being considered the pinnacle of "modernist" design and thought, of which the lux1.4 certainly came out of:D Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
lars_bergquist Posted December 9, 2008 Share #39 Posted December 9, 2008 Are you talking about the 35 'Lux or the 35 'Lux asph? The 'Lux has no filter threads, and requires the 12505 hood to use Series 7 filters. Gene Well, obviously I do. And the hood that came with my pre-asph. Summilux, in the original box, was a 12504 as I seem to remember. The old man from the Spherical Age Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
lars_bergquist Posted December 9, 2008 Share #40 Posted December 9, 2008 - - - I've found that vignetting due to a hood isn't always equal in all corners and varies between cameras. There appears to be a significant tolerance in the mounting of the M8 sensor with respect to the lens axis! Bob. Correct. I had to give up using a Milich filter adapter on my CV 15mm becuse it vignetted in the upper corners of the image (and not in the lower, which would have been easier to tolerate). So the sensor on my M8 is obviously a little bit off-center. I think other users have had similar problems. Would that be a legitimate cause to invoke the guaranty? The old man from the Age of Roll Film Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Archived
This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.