35mm: Used Summilux FLE vs. New Cron asph

[Huss]

35mm 'cron ASPH flare. What's not to love?!

Yoyogi flare

Shinjuku backlight

Yuko

The awful lens flare with veiling, haze and hot spots for $3700.
My 7A 35mm f2 at $200 does a better job.

 

[WJJ3]

I am curious if the flaring issues are there when using the hood?

Hood and filter on in all three of these. The filter is creating the ghost, and increasing the veiling flare. FWIW I don't think this lens has flare issues. Yes it will flare in certain situations. You have to have direct sun near the edge of the frame or just outside it for it to misbehave. For the top and bottom shots I posted, I was intending for the flare to happen. For the middle shot I wasn't, but the little flare that showed up doesn't detract from the composition.

Just have to learn how your lens behaves and use it accordingly.

The awful lens flare with veiling, haze and hot spots for $3700.
My 7A 35mm f2 at $200 does a better job.

Not sure what you mean by hot spots, but the ghosts are from the filter. I paid 2KUSD for mine about 7 years ago and it has been great. And it's still worth 2KUSD. The 7A 35mm f2 looks like a fun lens. Chinese makers are really stepping it up it seems...

 

[filmtwit]

Like I said, you just gotta work the flare to your advantage, mainly expose for the flare.

 

[Larry Cloetta]

I like that photo^^^^^as it is very striking, and would agree that you have done an admirable job working with the characteristics of the lens, something I never managed to that extent (just sold mine). But, I have a hard time believing that Leica themselves really believe that this is a good thing, or something that was designed into the lens intentionally. In my mind, owning the lens, even though there were obviously some positives, defending the flare behavior to myself always felt like The Emperor’s New Clothes. It’s just really difficult to see it as anything but an unfortunate flaw in the design or execution (coatings) of the lens. I had to admit to myself, that it was behavior I would never make excuses for had it been in an M42 Pentax lens.
50mm V5 ASPH Summicron, same thing, though I haven’t sold that one.
Original question, given the choice, I’d personally opt for the Summilux FLE for the same money, but they each have their virtues.

 

[filmtwit]

I have/had few 35's over the years, including a Zeiss, Voitlander Konica Hex and an older Canon and Nikkor, all of em flare when you expose the lens straight to light. Some a little more than others (Voitlander and Nikkor). i tend to think that folks are over blowing the flare problems with cron here. Personally I like mine and I like it more then Voitlander, the Zeiss and in digital, the nikkor (I like the nikkor slightly more when I shoot film). The Canon wasn't that great to start with. The cron asph (for me) has been great, espeically once I learned what you can really do with it.

Lux vs Cron question: On the used market, the cron asph is 40%-50% the price of a used lux asph. I sdimply don't have the money for $3500-$4k lens. And having taken a few workshops with some fairly well known folsk, all of them had 35mm f2 cron asph as their prime lens.

I like that photo^^^^^as it is very striking, and would agree that you have done an admirable job working with the characteristics of the lens, something I never managed to that extent (just sold mine). But, I have a hard time believing that Leica themselves really believe that this is a good thing, or something that was designed into the lens intentionally. In my mind, owning the lens, even though there were obviously some positives, defending the flare behavior to myself always felt like The Emperor’s New Clothes. It’s just really difficult to see it as anything but an unfortunate flaw in the design or execution (coatings) of the lens. I had to admit to myself, that it was behavior I would never make excuses for had it been in an M42 Pentax lens.
50mm V5 ASPH Summicron, same thing, though I haven’t sold that one.
Original question, given the choice, I’d personally opt for the Summilux FLE for the same money, but they each have their virtues.

 

[Ko.Fe.]

The awful lens flare with veiling, haze and hot spots for $3700.
My 7A 35mm f2 at $200 does a better job.

I'm surprised as well. 7A 35 f2 barrel distortions, plus J-12 flare = 35 Cron ASPH. 🙂

BTW, I have filters at all of my lenses. No such, I'm very sorry to say this, crap.
I have had it in earlier 2010s with cheap protective filters, but it is long gone once I switched to normal brands.

 

[jacobjuul]

I like that photo^^^^^as it is very striking, and would agree that you have done an admirable job working with the characteristics of the lens, something I never managed to that extent (just sold mine). But, I have a hard time believing that Leica themselves really believe that this is a good thing, or something that was designed into the lens intentionally. In my mind, owning the lens, even though there were obviously some positives, defending the flare behavior to myself always felt like The Emperor’s New Clothes. It’s just really difficult to see it as anything but an unfortunate flaw in the design or execution (coatings) of the lens. I had to admit to myself, that it was behavior I would never make excuses for had it been in an M42 Pentax lens.
50mm V5 ASPH Summicron, same thing, though I haven’t sold that one.
Original question, given the choice, I’d personally opt for the Summilux FLE for the same money, but they each have their virtues.

I came to the same conclusion. I went to see the FLE, but it seemed like it had been cleaned too much on the front element (the edges of the lens looked dirty and I couldn't clean it).

 

[jacobjuul]

I have/had few 35's over the years, including a Zeiss, Voitlander Konica Hex and an older Canon and Nikkor, all of em flare when you expose the lens straight to light. Some a little more than others (Voitlander and Nikkor). i tend to think that folks are over blowing the flare problems with cron here. Personally I like mine and I like it more then Voitlander, the Zeiss and in digital, the nikkor (I like the nikkor slightly more when I shoot film). The Canon wasn't that great to start with. The cron asph (for me) has been great, espeically once I learned what you can really do with it.

Lux vs Cron question: On the used market, the cron asph is 40%-50% the price of a used lux asph. I sdimply don't have the money for $3500-$4k lens. And having taken a few workshops with some fairly well known folsk, all of them had 35mm f2 cron asph as their prime lens.

Interesting that you mention the hex. I just found a mint copy of the 35mm m-hexanon and pulled the trigger (half the price of a used 35mm chron).

 

[Rob-F]

I have both the Summilux ASPH (non-FLE) and the Summicron ASPH. The latter gets more use because of its smaller size. I don't do a lot of shooting against the light, but I haven't noticed the flare problem. Still, in your situation, I would be tempted to get the Lux. More lens for the money!

 

[filmtwit]

I really liked the UC Hex, but when I picked up my M240 the edges picked up color and corners darkened and no setting on the camera would fix it so I'd spend too much time in post trying to fix stuff. I sold it and got the cron asph. Oh, I think I only paid a $200 for a used cron asph. My 3.5 f1.8 nikkor does the same, but I use it only for film.

Interesting that you mention the hex. I just found a mint copy of the 35mm m-hexanon and pulled the trigger (half the price of a used 35mm chron).

UC Hex flare

On film

 

[jacobjuul]

If anyone is interested, this is what the lens element looked like

 

[cboy]

What did the Op decide on and how he fair with their choice?