snaggs
Established
Im not entirely happy with my 35mm lux, have been getting flare in some pictures, and since its my only lens, thats a problem. I have the $$ and ability to hand it back to the dealer for what I paid for.. Im wondering whether I should get the 35mm summicron (which he has in stock and I can beat down the price).. or whether I should get the summilux, which is not cheap 
Other options are to get a whole pile of Zeiss lenses, like getting the 35mm f/2 and the 85mm f/2..
Daniel.
Other options are to get a whole pile of Zeiss lenses, like getting the 35mm f/2 and the 85mm f/2..
Daniel.
Terence T
Where'd my Bessa go?
Email sent about a possible trade. Thanks.
Kevin
Rainbow Bridge
Hi Daniel,
The 35mm f/1.4 Summilux ASPH is a fantastic lens but expensive new. With the lens hood and cap on, it extends over 7cm (2.75 inches) from the body, which is much longer than the normal lux and summicron.
Most members here would probably recommend another solution. There seems to have been lots of different 35mm f/2 Summicron versions. The version characteristics are unknown to me, however.
Kevin
The 35mm f/1.4 Summilux ASPH is a fantastic lens but expensive new. With the lens hood and cap on, it extends over 7cm (2.75 inches) from the body, which is much longer than the normal lux and summicron.
Most members here would probably recommend another solution. There seems to have been lots of different 35mm f/2 Summicron versions. The version characteristics are unknown to me, however.
Kevin
Alec
Amateur
Lux asph
Lux asph
Hi Daniel.
Before you complain about the Lux flaring, I hope you are using it with the proper shade and without a dirty protective filter
As you are asking me :angel: , your quandary should be Cron pre-asph vs Lux asph.
[Disclaimer : I have yet to see the new Zeiss lenses.]
I used to own both (actually the Lux was the first series labelled "aspherical") but sadly had to part with them (another story ).
The pre-asph Cron is tiny, sharp (at least enough for me) and should be found much cheaper than the asph. I can't imagine there was much room for improvement (as opposed to the Lux pre-asph, which does seem a little 'creamy' to me wide open).
In short, the Lux asph is still the lens of my dreams, and I don't see it could disappoint you.
So *if you can afford it*, treat yourself. And keep us posted.
Regards,
Lux asph
Hi Daniel.
Before you complain about the Lux flaring, I hope you are using it with the proper shade and without a dirty protective filter
As you are asking me :angel: , your quandary should be Cron pre-asph vs Lux asph.
[Disclaimer : I have yet to see the new Zeiss lenses.]
I used to own both (actually the Lux was the first series labelled "aspherical") but sadly had to part with them (another story
).The pre-asph Cron is tiny, sharp (at least enough for me) and should be found much cheaper than the asph. I can't imagine there was much room for improvement (as opposed to the Lux pre-asph, which does seem a little 'creamy' to me wide open).
In short, the Lux asph is still the lens of my dreams, and I don't see it could disappoint you.
So *if you can afford it*, treat yourself. And keep us posted.
Regards,
My thoughts exactly, are you useing a hood?
Alec said:Hi Daniel.
Before you complain about the Lux flaring, I hope you are using it with the proper shade and without a dirty protective filter
As you are asking me :angel: , your quandary should be Cron pre-asph vs Lux asph.
[Disclaimer : I have yet to see the new Zeiss lenses.]
I used to own both (actually the Lux was the first series labelled "aspherical") but sadly had to part with them (another story
The pre-asph Cron is tiny, sharp (at least enough for me) and should be found much cheaper than the asph. I can't imagine there was much room for improvement (as opposed to the Lux pre-asph, which does seem a little 'creamy' to me wide open).
In short, the Lux asph is still the lens of my dreams, and I don't see it could disappoint you.
So *if you can afford it*, treat yourself. And keep us posted.
Regards,
snaggs
Established
Its going to cost me US$2100 to upgrade.. it is brand new, will have to be ordered in and will hence help Leica.
Ok, so what colour then ? My camera is black, but I want to get a silver body one day... Is the 35mm lux asph really that good?
Daniel.
Ok, so what colour then ?
My camera is black, but I want to get a silver body one day... Is the 35mm lux asph really that good?Daniel.
snaggs
Established
PS. I am using the lux with the lens hood and NO filter, nadda, none, zip.
Film dino
David Chong
snaggs said:Ok, so what colour then ?
Daniel.
Hi Daniel, I've got one; it really is very good in terms of resolution & contrast, & beats the non-ASPH version (the only other 35mm 1.4 ever built in M mount) hands down at max aperture, no question. Best aperture is probably f4. [You might like to look at the few pics in my gallery- not that great, but maybe you can get some idea of the lens' capabillities in terms of resolution & colour rendition]
Drawbacks are (1) relatively large size & weight, as pointed out. The chrome version is even heavier, because of the solid brass mount, & will tilt your M forward. Leica is stopping production of chrome lenses BTW.
(2) Can flare in some situations, particularly (I find) if you have a filter on. (3) Some don't like the rectangular hood with cut out; obtrudes into lower right corner of the 35mm frame on my M2. Can be somewhat annoying. Comes with two lens caps- one regular cicrcular, the other is a rubber thing whch fits over the hood & can fall off easily. I never use this one.
Filter size is 46mm. Focus throw is approximately 135 degrees
For me the 35 ASPH 'lux is a long-term proposition, i.e. investment & used as a standard lens on the M2.
I think you've got a nice problem to solve! From what's I've read you can't really go wrong with the ASPH 'cron either,. If you like lower contrast, smooth tonal rendition & nice bokeh, an early 8 or 7 element might suit; these are still much much better than the old 35 'lux.
Cheers
peter_n
Veteran
If as Dino says the best aperture is f4 what's the point in getting an f1.4 lens? My understanding of the Summilux designs (at least the earlier ones) is that they were optimized for wide-open apertures, at least the 50's were. Now maybe the lens is still really good at f1.4 (I bet it is) but still...
M
mad_boy
Guest
If you compare the lux and the cron, the Lux has a large number of disadvantages:
- It is much more expensive
- It is Much heavier
- It is Much larger.
- Comes into the view-finder
And only one main advantage.
+ slightly faster.
Hence only go for the lux if you NEED the 1,4.
Otherwise choice is simple go for one of the crons.
And for colour, Black!
- ligher than Chrome,
- Looks good on Chrome and on Black cameras
(I've got a chrome M6TTL and all my lenses are black and look great on it).
mad_boy
- It is much more expensive
- It is Much heavier
- It is Much larger.
- Comes into the view-finder
And only one main advantage.
+ slightly faster.
Hence only go for the lux if you NEED the 1,4.
Otherwise choice is simple go for one of the crons.
And for colour, Black!
- ligher than Chrome,
- Looks good on Chrome and on Black cameras
(I've got a chrome M6TTL and all my lenses are black and look great on it).
mad_boy
Steve Hoffman
Leicanutt
Wait, I don't understand this at all. It is going to cost you $2100.00 to upgrade? Heck, the Lux 35 ASPH is only $2300.00 new to begin with. You're going to lose a perfectly good non-ASPH lux for only 200 dollars? That is madness.
HenningW
Well-known
I've had various 35 Summicrons and Sumiluxs since the 60's, and now have a 4th gen. (last) pre-asph Summicron and a Summilux ASPH. The Summilux is sharper at 1.4 than any of the pre-asph lenses at f/2, and can be used at any aperture without concern. With some lenses, like the pre-asph Summilux, you set the aperture with a strong regard to the type of performance you wanted, as in 'do you want a textbook illustration of coma and astigmatism, and with lots of soft glow' (f/1.4) or do you want a regular look with most of the image sharply rendered (f/4 to 11). This was my constant companion until the ASPH came out, but it had some issues.
The 'lux ASPH is larger than other 35's, except the Cosina f/1.2, but it delivers and is no larger than the 50 'lux. It is my most used Leica lens, and I've enjoyed it immensely since it came out. The black on is heavier than the 'cron ASPH in black, but not heavier than the 'cron in chrome. It can be used without a hood, but don't put a filter on it. If you feel worried about your investment, leave the hood on it to protect it.
Henning
The 'lux ASPH is larger than other 35's, except the Cosina f/1.2, but it delivers and is no larger than the 50 'lux. It is my most used Leica lens, and I've enjoyed it immensely since it came out. The black on is heavier than the 'cron ASPH in black, but not heavier than the 'cron in chrome. It can be used without a hood, but don't put a filter on it. If you feel worried about your investment, leave the hood on it to protect it.
Henning
egpj
50 Summilux is da DEVIL!
That little 35 Summilux ASPH is going for close to 3K US now. :bang: I did not realize how much the price was going to be going up. Now my used stuff is like gold, or is that just wishful thinking? Anyway, I saw the Noctilux is now being advertised for 3,600....DOOOHHH! Sorry about getting OT.
Go for 35 Summilux ASPH. Or, you can pour a little more research into it and see what Putz says about the new Zeiss lens'. If you HAVE to have leica then of course there is no real substitute.
Jeez! I am so glad I got my lens' when I did!
Go for 35 Summilux ASPH. Or, you can pour a little more research into it and see what Putz says about the new Zeiss lens'. If you HAVE to have leica then of course there is no real substitute.
Jeez! I am so glad I got my lens' when I did!
Roger Hicks
Veteran
Why worry? Unless you're very, very good, any of them is a better lens than you are a photographer. That's why I'm still using the last pre-aspheric Summilux. Yes, I've tried the (first-generation) aspheric. It was bigger and heavier and certainly didn't make me a better photiographer.
Cheers,
Roger (www,rogertandfrances.com)
Cheers,
Roger (www,rogertandfrances.com)
jdos2
Well-known
I've had both ASPH- the 'lux and 'cron. The word is that the 'lux is just a 'cron with an extra stop, and I'd agree. I had a pretty bad sample 'cron, but the shots from the f/1.4 lens are just beautiful, and wide open gives a wide perspective and shallow DoF.
I'd simply ask myself if I needed the stop, since the lenses perform so closely over their range. I do- shooting people in restaurants, bars, and coffee shops. The extra stop is worth it to me.
Watch the build quality on the 'lux, though, as my trim ring has already fallen off and I'm figuring out how to re-glue (yes, glue) it back in a "non permanent" way.
I'd simply ask myself if I needed the stop, since the lenses perform so closely over their range. I do- shooting people in restaurants, bars, and coffee shops. The extra stop is worth it to me.
Watch the build quality on the 'lux, though, as my trim ring has already fallen off and I'm figuring out how to re-glue (yes, glue) it back in a "non permanent" way.
Steve Hoffman
Leicanutt
Geez, you need to contact TONY ROSE at Popflash Photo but quick!egpj said:
T
Tim
Guest
AUD, not USD. Leica gear is more expensive here anyway, but you need to factor in the .75 currency conversion factor too.....
a 35 lux, new, runs about AUD 4.5k...........
a 35 lux, new, runs about AUD 4.5k...........
Steve Hoffman said:
Film dino
David Chong
http://www.photo.net/bboard/q-and-a-fetch-msg?msg_id=00Cy7o
A current thread from Photo.Net on the 35 Lux
A current thread from Photo.Net on the 35 Lux
snaggs
Established
Steve Hoffman said:
Are you serious? Where can I get one for $2300? Here a new lux, is US$4k! Can you give me some links? So I can bash my dealer?
Daniel.
snaggs
Established
Tim said:
I dont know where your buying. I've seen the RRP in the price list, and its $5.5k. Who quoted you A$4.5k? Anyways, thats still US$3.5k, certainly not US$2.3!!!
Daniel.