35 Cron ASPH on the M8

A

Adrian Nasti

Adrian N
Local time
6:02 PM
Joined
Oct 29, 2008
Messages
28
Hi everyone,

This is my first post in a while but I am a proud new owner of an M8.

I have a 35 Cron ASPH, a ZM PLanar 50/2 and an Elmarit-M 90/2.8

I have been delighted with the quality of the files and the images but what wanting RFF members experiences with the above camera lens combination specifically. The reason is that whilst the Cron does not have any focus issues, the files seem to have less "snap" and sharpness than the ZM Planar.

This revelation could ulmtimately be as a result of now having the opportunity to look at files on screen magnified compared to my film days, but I wonder whether the 35 Cron (and indeed most Leica M lenses) were optimised for film use and not perfectly flat digital sensors.

Regards
 
While my comment may come under heavy attack, the Planar wide open is a sharper lens compared to the Cron ASPH, which is nice wide open, but not amazing. The cron ASPH is a great solid performing lens, but not up to the level of the Planar which is exquisite!

The Planar is truly the best performing 50/2 available, and yes it outperforms the 50mm Summicron wide open, and yes, I've tested them side by side.

Enjoy them all, but don't get too caught up on pixel peeping. Concentrate on improving your pictures, before anything else. Happy shooting
 
Thanks for the response leicashot. I am very very impressed with the Planar and have found myself having to reduce the sharpness in LR3 on occasion because the RAW files are so magnificent out of the camera. The Cron is also fantastic but I concur with your observations about the Cron wide open
 
Interesting, I have many lenses, some of the sharpest made and the 35mm ASHP is one of them. Having said that, I find it is for some things, too sharp but I can live with that.
 
Hi Jamato - there is no doubt the 35 Cron is sharp but the Planar seems to be even more so. I would be interested in seeing how the ZM Biogon 35/2 performs as I suspect that it would be very sharp also
 
Probably. I know the 24 2.8 Biogon is excellent and gives up nothing to any Leica lens I have.
 
Adrian Nasti said:
Thanks for the response leicashot. I am very very impressed with the Planar and have found myself having to reduce the sharpness in LR3 on occasion because the RAW files are so magnificent out of the camera. The Cron is also fantastic but I concur with your observations about the Cron wide open
Click to expand...

Hey, you could save some cash by selling the ASPH and buying the 35mm biogon. It's very similar to the Planar...
 
Double Negative said:
The 2/35 Biogon is very similar to the Planar, but perhaps not quite so sharp wide open. Stopped down even a little though, it's neck and neck.
Click to expand...

Hmmm, not so sure it isn't as sharp... just maybe not as much seperation due to the biogon having more depth of field per aperture.
 
I don't think it's a fair comparison with the 50 and 35 focal lengths. Zeiss ZM 50 Plannar is no doubt an excellent performer at open f-stop (at the center image circle). Zeiss ZM Biogon 35 has similar characters for center sharpness, but of course not as sharp as the Plannar. Leica Summicrom 35 ASPH is, however, better for even performance across the entire image field. It all depends on what you're looking for in you shooting situations.

Cheers,
 
Double Negative said:
Possibly, yeah. It's been a while since I did my admittedly informal testing, but I was looking at the point of focus to judge sharpness.

One of these days I'll do a "ZM shootout" for LvL.
Click to expand...

Well, mine is more of a feeling than even testing. Hahaha. Even more informal.
 
Only prints matter to me. I still own a 35 Summicron asph, used extensively in my film days. I switched to a 28 Summicron asph for use on the M8.2 and apart from the FOV (roughly equivalent to my 35 in film), I prefer its rendering to the 35. In fact, it's one reason I'm reluctant to get an M9, which would likely prompt a switch back.

Jeff
 
Hmmmm. I guess I shouldn't be surprised that there are so many folks who are convinced that brand X is sharper than brand y. It has always seemed to me that when the pixels have been peeped there is: center sharpness, corner sharpness, sharpness across the frame, overall contrast, micro-contrast and accuracy of adjustment for your RF focusing system to consider. I have the 35 cron ASPH, the C-biogon and the planar and sharpness has nothing to do with why I choose one over the others when I head out of the house for the day. In terms of most-used: 1) C-Biogon, 2) ASPH, 3) Planar, but that's just recently. If forced to get only one, I think you need to go with the one whose rendering matches the way you want to present the world in photographs, with due consideration of your other needs/abilities (that is, what lenses you already own).
 
jsrockit said:
Hmmm, not so sure it isn't as sharp... just maybe not as much seperation due to the biogon having more depth of field per aperture.
Click to expand...

First off.....I am speaking as someone who has owned the 35 Biogon, 35 Cron ASPH, 35 Lux ASPH I, 50 Planar and 50 Cron. All copies were perfectly calibrated with my M8/M9.

Regarding the 35s, wide open the 35 Cron ASPH is clearly the sharpest from corner to corner. The 35 Biogon is a little soft when shooting wide open. Soft on center and in the corners. The Cron ASPH also has much smoother bokeh at minimum distance. The 35 Biogon is very busy at/near mfd. At mid-range the Biogon does have nice smooth bokeh. The 35 Cron ASPH doesn't have as smoothly rounded bokeh when at mid range. Stopped down to f/4 the sharpness of the 35 Biogon really comes in and is clearly the sharpest all the way down from there. It really has to be one of the very best landscape lenses at this length (I have not used the 35 C Biogon which is supposed to be as good/better). Just for fun, the 35 Lux ASPH I isn't as sharp as the other two lenses mentioned past f/2.8 probably due to focus shift. Not saying its soft, just not as sharp. However, for portraits it doesn't get any better in my opinion. It is sharp enough yet so smooth. Wide open sharpness is very impressive though for being f/1.4

The 50 Planar is extremely sharp wide open dead center. Look at the edges and it isn't so. It is considerabley softer than the 50 Cron in the corners wide open and NEVER catches up. Center sharpness though goes to the 50 Planar at every aperture. Bokeh is much smoother on the Planar as well. If you want a lens that is sharp from corner to corner, the Cron would be my choice. If you want a casual 50 for portraits/street shooting/etc I would get the Planar. Very beautiful rendering. I don't know why, but I think the 50 Planar also produces some of the most stunning B/W pics
 
rsolti said:
Regarding the 35s, wide open the 35 Cron ASPH is clearly the sharpest from corner to corner. The 35 Biogon is a little soft when shooting wide open. Soft on center and in the corners.
Click to expand...

Wow, if the Biogon is considered soft, I guess I just don't know what sharp is...
 
rsolti said:
First off.....I am speaking as someone who has owned the 35 Biogon, 35 Cron ASPH, 35 Lux ASPH I, 50 Planar and 50 Cron. All copies were perfectly calibrated with my M8/M9.

Regarding the 35s, wide open the 35 Cron ASPH is clearly the sharpest from corner to corner. The 35 Biogon is a little soft when shooting wide open. Soft on center and in the corners. The Cron ASPH also has much smoother bokeh at minimum distance. The 35 Biogon is very busy at/near mfd. At mid-range the Biogon does have nice smooth bokeh. The 35 Cron ASPH doesn't have as smoothly rounded bokeh when at mid range. Stopped down to f/4 the sharpness of the 35 Biogon really comes in and is clearly the sharpest all the way down from there. It really has to be one of the very best landscape lenses at this length (I have not used the 35 C Biogon which is supposed to be as good/better). Just for fun, the 35 Lux ASPH I isn't as sharp as the other two lenses mentioned past f/2.8 probably due to focus shift. Not saying its soft, just not as sharp. However, for portraits it doesn't get any better in my opinion. It is sharp enough yet so smooth. Wide open sharpness is very impressive though for being f/1.4

The 50 Planar is extremely sharp wide open dead center. Look at the edges and it isn't so. It is considerabley softer than the 50 Cron in the corners wide open and NEVER catches up. Center sharpness though goes to the 50 Planar at every aperture. Bokeh is much smoother on the Planar as well. If you want a lens that is sharp from corner to corner, the Cron would be my choice. If you want a casual 50 for portraits/street shooting/etc I would get the Planar. Very beautiful rendering. I don't know why, but I think the 50 Planar also produces some of the most stunning B/W pics
Click to expand...

Ryan,

I have had very similar experience as what you described in your post.
 
Jeff S said:
Only prints matter to me. I still own a 35 Summicron asph, used extensively in my film days. I switched to a 28 Summicron asph for use on the M8.2 and apart from the FOV (roughly equivalent to my 35 in film), I prefer its rendering to the 35. In fact, it's one reason I'm reluctant to get an M9, which would likely prompt a switch back.

Jeff
Click to expand...

Jeff:

Interesting comment per your liking of a lens and, thus, not wanting to go from M8 to M9. I have a similar feeling about my Rollei Planar 80mm. I love it on my M8, but don't think it would work nearly as well for me on FF.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top Bottom