35mm Summicron IV vs. 35mm Summilux Pre-ASPH vs. Zeiss Biogon f2 vs. VC Nokton f1.2

Wonderful pictures Simon. IMO the second one really gives an hint of why it is so famous for its bokeh.
I also own one and find it amazing. Yet I have not tried the other ones listed so can't really compare.
 
Thanks for all the great advice. Although rafael did bring up a good point that for $1500 i would get a VC Nokton f1.2 and a V3 cron rather then a aV4 cron or a lux pre-ASPH. Although the 35 v4 is a beautiful lens' I would really like something faster, but sometimes, size is an issue.

I think i'll jump on a cron v4 and a VC Nokton f1.2 and if after a couple months of shooting, i'll sell them, i should be able to get what i paid for them if i buy used...
 
edhohoho said:
I recently purchased the pre-asph 35 Summilux and while I am still getting acquainted with it, I liked what I saw from the lens from other users and no longer seek the pre-asph v4 35 Summicron. The pre-asph 35 Summilux is very sharp when stopped down and has a unique character when wide open. I like this combination because it saves me from having to carry an extra lens. Also, even though you don't necessarily need a super fast lens at the 35mm focal length, for my purposes I could use the extra stop because I often shoot my pre-asph 50 Summilux wide open in hand-held situations that call for 1/4 to 1/8 shutter speeds--still possible to do, but why risk motion artifact? I never really considered the slower or sharper 35mm lenses because I did not necessarily want sharpness all the time.

The key thing is the size. While being a fast lens, it is remarkably small. Very useful as an all day carry around lens with wide and narrow depth of field when needed. The pre-asph Summilux is a unique lens and is much maligned, yet it is curious to see that not all that many are available for sale at one time. It is definitely a low production sleeper of a lens and not many people talk about or use it (similar to the pre-asph 90 Summicron), but it's a great one when you "discover" it for yourself.

Regarding flare, I shot about 100 frames with it on my first day, and I only got it to flare once. But I almost anticipated it because there was heavy backlighting and reflections from the sun. I will have to shoot it more extensively at night with point light sources before I comment on its performance under those conditions.
Click to expand...

I can't comment about the M8 issue (since I don't have one) but otherwise it is exactly what I think about the 35mm Summilux pre-ASPH (and also 90mm Summicron-M pre-ASPH). For me, the Super-Angulon 21/3.4, 35mm Summilux pre-ASPH, 50mm Summilux pre-ASPH (or Noctilux), and the 90mm Summicron-M pre-ASPH make a very versatile and good kit. All these lenses have a similar character, with the 35mm Summilux pre-ASPH being the most versatile and smallest lens.

I had the 35mm Summicron IV for a while but found that the only advantage of that lens is the closer focusing distance of 0.7m. For low light shooting, the one f-stop faster 35mm Summilux pre-ASPH makes the difference from 1/8s to 1/15 s, which for me outweights the close focus disadvantage.

From some test I have done with both, the 35mm Summilux pre-ASPH and 35mm Summicron IV, my impression was that the Summicron is a little sharper in the corners at f/2.0 but the Summilux at f/2.0 has better contrast and resolves more details. I also had the 40mm Summicron-C for a while, which is quite similar to the 35mm Summicron IV except at f/2.0 where 40mm Summicron-C renders more similar to the 35mm Summilux.

Cheers,

Gabor
 
Apparently I don't shoot my ZM 35/2 wide open very much, since I don't have many pictures up online with a lot of bokeh, but it really has great looking bokeh in *****s. The image just gently dissolves from sharp to smooth in a wonderful manner.

You can see in the following image how my friend is nice and crisp (as is the clock to the right), yet the back corner of the room on the left just gently approaches a wonderful blur. This is a crummy 1-hour minilab scan of Kodak BW400CN, which I am only lukewarm about, but it is what it is.




It also just eats up flare. This is on a short film set and I was shooting directly into a fresnel light.



If you're going to get two lenses, I'd get the VC Nokton 1.2 and the ZM 35/2. Buy the ZM used for about $600 and if you don't like it, sell it and spend the extra to get the cron...

Here's one last one of the ZM, probably shot close to wide open:



EDIT - apparently I can't write s-p-a-d-e-s...
 
With the v4 you paying the money for some qualities that are difficult to express in words.
Click to expand...

It's a lens, right? It's qualities shouldn't need words to express themselves, a picture should do nicely.

Truth is the V4 is absolutely average wide open. The 40 Rokkor/Summicron is better there, IMO, and a relative steal. The famous "bokeh" of the V4 is in the f2.8 to f5.6 range, but wide open it's bested by a host of better built, cheaper alternatives. The size and handling of the lens are a perfect match to the M body, though.

....the extra cost is a small price to pay for your visual discernment...
Click to expand...

Substitute "audio" for "visual" and I had a salesman tell me the same thing about "oxygen-free" speaker cable. :rolleyes: The extra cost is a sort of tax you pay for snob appeal, and believing internet gossip.
 
Turtle said:
if buying Leica, the new Summarit surely deserves a mention as teh tests I have seen suggested it has smoother bokeh than the V4 cron. It is also said to be better made and sitting somewhere between the old and new in terms of look.

For me I will keep using the Biogon but am not sure that it would compliment a pre-asph 50 lux well. The new Summarit 35 might - any used ones about yet?
Click to expand...


I have this summarit and it is a great great lens. I don't why it is not popular. It has the latest technology but classic taste is reserved.
 
maddoc said:
...For me, the Super-Angulon 21/3.4, 35mm Summilux pre-ASPH, 50mm Summilux pre-ASPH (or Noctilux), and the 90mm Summicron-M pre-ASPH make a very versatile and good kit. All these lenses have a similar character...
Click to expand...

I was just thinking that the 35/1.4 pre-ASPH would 'match' the look of his 50/1.4 pre-ASPH pretty nicely myself Gabor.
 
maddoc said:
I can't comment about the M8 issue (since I don't have one) but otherwise it is exactly what I think about the 35mm Summilux pre-ASPH (and also 90mm Summicron-M pre-ASPH). For me, the Super-Angulon 21/3.4, 35mm Summilux pre-ASPH, 50mm Summilux pre-ASPH (or Noctilux), and the 90mm Summicron-M pre-ASPH make a very versatile and good kit. All these lenses have a similar character, with the 35mm Summilux pre-ASPH being the most versatile and smallest lens.

...

Gabor
Click to expand...

Second that - after some experimenting and trial/error (or better, buy/try/sell), I settled for a very similar kit:
- 21 Super Angulon;
- 35 Lux pre-ASPH;
- 50 Noctilux;
- 75 Lux;
- 90 Cron pre-ASPH.

Very consistent look, great IQ (at least for my taste & for my work). To get here, I went through (in chronological order):
- 21: f2.8 pre-ASPH;
- 35: Cron ASPH; Zeiss Biogon f2; Lux ASPH; Cron v4;
- 50: Zeiss Planar, Sonnar; Lux ASPH;
the 75 & 90 I got right at first attempt :D

As well, I got a Canon 50 1.4 LTM, 50 f2.8 Elmar laying around (the Canon I got for a song, the Elmar came with a M2) which I decided to keep because I really like their IQ.

To the OP, quite obviously my choice would be, after going through many 35s, the 35 Lux pre-ASPH.
 
It's a lens, right? It's qualities shouldn't need words to express themselves, a picture should do nicely.
Click to expand...

Words are necessary to discuss the images, though. Otherwise we have no common basis for reasoning. Yet there are aspects to images that words can fail to express.



Truth is the V4 is absolutely average wide open.
Click to expand...

Technically, yes. But the signature of a lens is often desirable quite in spite of its technical weaknesses.

The extra cost is a sort of tax you pay for snob appeal, and believing internet gossip.
Click to expand...

I assume this remark is directed right at me as you quote me and address me. As such, I think it is rude to remark pejoratively that I form my beliefs on a lens through gossip and that I am a follower of snob-appeal.
 
First- I bought an M6 TTL (yay), and will soon be analog again (if it ever arrives). I am debating selling my D300 already. Anyways...

Second- I have been agonizing over this same decision. I am between two choices now, based on the examples I have seen from various threads and flickr libraries:
a) buy a CV 35 1,2 and a CV 35 2,5, using the 2,5 whenever I am not necessarily hunting photos/in good light. I like the drawing of both these lenses very much, but will have to decide size vs ability with every chance to switch lenses.
b) buy a summilux pre-ASPH 35 and get a little from both worlds: character, speed and size, but lose sharpness wide open and spend a little more money (but in one lens to carry). The lens will obviously be older as well.

I have narrowed it down to this but am stuck. I should have gotten in on the CV sale in the classifieds about a week ago and this decision would have been over.

Sway me?
 
I have both the Nokton 1.2 and the Color Skopar (Classic). When size and weight aren't issues, I take the Nokton. When I want to go light, the Skopar comes along. Although they draw very differently, I find this to be a very complimentary combo.
 
I've owned all these lenses, and also the M-Hex 35, UC-Hex 35 and Cron asph. I started with a cron IV, and sold it to investigate the other options, one by one. I am back with a cron IV. There are lenses I prefer but each has a niggle. My favourite was the VC 1.2 (size is the niggle). Then the UC-Hex (close focus 1m, I do a LOT at 0.7-1m). Then the pre-asph Summilux is an even tie with the cron IV for me (hated the hood/filter situation, and the close focus too).

Hated the biogon (and the planar, but that's another story), found the M-Hex characterless, and found the cron asph functional with no "magic".

I'm done with 35s now, and am sticking with my cron IV. No snobbery there.
 
The sleeper lens that hasn't been mentioned is the Voigtlander 35/1.7. I sold a Leica 35/2 ASPH and picked up the Voigtlander 35/1.7 used for $300. No regrets. I actually prefer the bokeh of the Voigtlander.
 
I just purchased a summicron version IV and did an extensive shoot with it yesterday. It stellar, quite sharp at F2, exceptional bokeh from F2 down. I can only compare to the 35 lux asph and find it a bit warmer, with better bokeh. (I love the lux). It's the first small Leica for me and that was a big reason to get it, I wanted a really light 35 for a 1 lens, go everywhere option. best....Peter
 
I traded my summilux 35 for the CV1.2 and never looked back.
I might had a bad version of the summilux but in my opinion the summilux is not a 1.4. 2.0 at best. The CV1.2 is better at 1.2 then my summilux was at 2.0.
Cheers,

Michiel Fokkema
 
Michiel Fokkema said:
I traded my summilux 35 for the CV1.2 and never looked back.
I might had a bad version of the summilux but in my opinion the summilux is not a 1.4. 2.0 at best. The CV1.2 is better at 1.2 then my summilux was at 2.0.
Cheers,

Michiel Fokkema
Click to expand...

You had a bad sample, or just one that was out of alignment for sure. Don't know what the CV does, it may be great, but a properly adjusted 35 lux asph is pin sharp with excellent contrast at 1.4. best....Peter
 
very good points being made .......but words can only express so much. Any one of us gearheads have at least 3 of these 4 lenses to post some side-by-side comparisons??

I would certainly appreciate it (I would turn towards Flickr, but find much less objectiviity in terms of comparisons)-->>
 
sepiareverb said:
I was just thinking that the 35/1.4 pre-ASPH would 'match' the look of his 50/1.4 pre-ASPH pretty nicely myself Gabor.
Click to expand...

I agree with sepiareverb...
I have both, and they are great combo, with very similar looks on N8 and MP.
If I had the money for a 35ASPH, I'd sell my M8 and get an M9 rather than the 35..
 
I should say that I sold the 35 Summicron ASPH to get the lux.
The lux usually is in my MP, with the UC Hexanon on the M8.
 
Innerimager said:
You had a bad sample, or just one that was out of alignment for sure. Don't know what the CV does, it may be great, but a properly adjusted 35 lux asph is pin sharp with excellent contrast at 1.4. best....Peter
Click to expand...

I'm not talking about the asph. It's the one before.

Cheers,

Michiel Fokkema
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top Bottom