Aspherical Lenses: +/-

[wizard]

Advertisement (gone after registration)

Carsten, good point.

 

Andy

[Advertisement]

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

[lars_bergquist]

Lars, with all due respect, as someone who is lucky enough to own both older Leica lenses (from e.g. the sixties) and their latest glass, I have to say your statement is NOT true. Take e.g. the Summicron 35mm 8-element lens, the Summicron 35mm 7-element lens, the Elmar 90mm 3-element lens and the Summicron 50mm 7-element lens (in both rigid and DR form) to name just a few, those lenses are amongst the sharpest Leica has ever produced, and in this regard are not surpassed by the latest designs. Where the new designs excel is contrast and image quality wide open.

Andy

 

Hi Andy,

I'm seventy, and knee deep in M lenses, old and new. Sharpness is not a measurable quantity, but a perception, and, like beauty, largely in the eye of the beholder. The edge, literally, that the new 'super lenses' have is in microcontrast, i.e. definition at high line frequencies. This gives a superior impression of sharpness IN THE PLANE OF BEST FOCUS. Meaning that the difference between that and the more or less unsharp areas is greater, which seems to disturb some people.

 

Given that, few of the great photographs of the past would have been materially greater with a sharper lens. A lens is a tool; it was not Rembrandt's brushes that created Rembrandt's paintings. I take the new tools and like them for what they are. Given that, one of my all-time favourite 50 mm lenses is of course the Summilux ASPH; but the other one is the Rodenstock Heligon that sits forever on my Retina IIIC, 1957 vintage!

 

The old man from the Age of Simple Triplets

[peterv]

OK

 

So the pre-ASPH lenses are maybe not as sharp as it gets, but they are sharp (enough). Especially when taking pictures of people. Right?

 

Today I'm going to pick up the 'old' 50, 90 and 135mm.

 

Should I have them coded?

[tom0511]

Interesting discussion...

 

I was thinking my first M-lens would be a 50 Lux ASPH.

 

now I can buy:

 

Leica Summilux 50mm/1.4

Leica Summicron 90mm/2.0

Leica Tele-ELmar 135mm/4.0

 

for appr. the same price.

 

What would you guys prefer? (and why?)

 

I personally sold my 50cron and got myself a 50/1.4asph.

I did some bokeh test comparing the 50cron, 50/2.8, Noctilux and 50/1.4asph at f2 - f4 and have to say I do find the the Summilux/1.4asph does not have a "cold" or "harsh§ Chraracter IMO. I prefered the bokeh compared to the bokeh of the cron at the same f-stops.

I own a 35/1,4asph but kept my 35/2.0 pre-asph. ....in the end I allways use the asph.

 

If you are someone who often shoots wide open I wouldnt have second thoughts to get asph lenses.

 

On the other side I really have to say that when I had a fixed budget and could choose between only getting one asph lens or getting 3 non-asph-lenses (and really wantiong those three focal length) I would rather go and get the three lenses.

 

IMO the differences between saph and non-asph lenses are overrated.

[peterv]

@ Thomas:

Thanks for the info!

Cheers,

Peter

[wizard]

I'm seventy, and knee deep in M lenses, old and new.

 

... but the other one is the Rodenstock Heligon that sits forever on my Retina IIIC, 1957 vintage!

 

Hi Lars,

 

as I am quite a bit younger, I will now stop arguing against an older, wiser man , although I am into Leica lenses for almost 35 years myself, nowadays knee deep as well.

 

What I found very interesting is your comment on the Rodenstock Heligon. I too own a Retina IIIC, albeit with a Schneider Xenon-C 2/50 lens that looks like fresh from the factory. When I bought that camera, my idea was to have a pocketable 35mm camera with a lens that could equal the Leica 50mm lenses of that day. I soon realized, however, that the Xenon lens is far from being a rival to e.g. the Summicron of its day. Fully open, the Xenon produces "romantic" shots, but sharp they ain't. You will have to stop down to f4 to get decent quality, and even there the Leica lens clearly has the edge.

 

I even sent my Retina to a retired Kodak serviceman here in Germany to make sure everything is correctly adjusted, but it was ok.

 

So here is my question: In your experience, is the Rodenstock Heligon significantly better than the Schneider Xenon? And why do you like your Heligon so much?

 

Regards,

 

Andy