50/1.4 Summilux Pre ASPH or ASPH?

K

kzphoto

Well-known
Local time
3:43 AM
Joined
Oct 20, 2009
Messages
1,174
I might upgrade my 50/1.4 pre-asph but I haven't had a chance to handle the 50 f/1.4 ASPH. I remember feeling like the focus action wasn't smooth like the action on the Pre-asph. Can owners of the ASPH version help me out here? Is the focusing action different because of the floating element?
 
50

50

I have had both and like the asph better but i shoot an m9 if you sre a film user and like tri-x. I might not get the asph., as I would not think you would see much difference. Digital there is abig defferece. I have not noticed a difference with the focus action.
 
My 50 asph came new from the factory with a loose aperture ring and very sloppy (bumpy) focussing mechanism. Only a CLA fixed it to some degree. But the focussing never was as smooth as any of my other Leica lenses (including the 50 pre-asph and noctilux) or the zeiss sonnar c.
In the end i sold all the 50mm leica summiluxes and stick with the 50 sonnar as my prefered fast 50mm lens.
 
Kzphoto, I have both lenses and I use them regularly both on film and on M8/M9.
While the new ASPH version is noticeably sharper (which is something that I myself don't particularly like)
IMHO it is a wonderful modern lens lens but I prefer to use it more on film more than digital, as I said it can be just a tad too "cynical" on digital, especially on the higher resolution files out of the M9. It is also true that the focussing on the pre ASPH version (E46) is much smoother
and the images, both on film and on digital, are slightly "softer" and to my eyes quite more pleasant, especially for black & white photography.
However, because of the type of photography I prefer (more "vintage" style looks) I am thinking to sell the ASPH version...
 
Last edited:
Same as LV1962; I use both and find the pre- smoother to focus than the ASPH. There is sample variation in the modern Leica lenses and I'm on my second ASPH which had a vaguely gritty focus feel when I bought it. I've worked on it assiduously for about a year and now it's reasonably smooth, still a little tighter at closest focus where the floating elements move though. Both of my ASPH lenses were the LHSA version without focusing tab, the regular lenses might be a bit better in the focusing department.
 
Hey Kevin,
The biggest difference will be with close focus and sharpness across the frame. At 1.5-2 meters the center resolution is pretty similar between the two, but the asph will be sharper across the frame. Closer in, the asph is really impressive. I've always assumed what people call clinical has to do with the sharpness across the frame. It just looks different than what people are used to.

The asph I had was no where nears as smooth in focusing as the pre-asph you now have, and it had the slight hang in the close focus. Robert's asph is pretty smooth after lotsa use. I was glad the asph had the ridged focus ring since the rougher focusing made the tab harder to use.
 
I would agree with Mike that the ASPH has better edge sharpness, but if you look at say the flickr pool, maybe 5% or less are really focused at the edges. For people shots, they're usually not at the edge, more center.

landscapes wide open would probably be better with the asph, but there are few of these to see. The bokeh is different, but not necessarily harsh or bad on the asph, just different. I've seen a lot of great photos from the lux asph, but many more from the pre-asph, could be because the pre-asph has been around about 50 years longer.

It's nice that they made an E43 verison with proper focus ring that takes the reversible hood, but I think that is a limited LHSA version only. The basic main product loses all the mojo of the original and is really just evil, IMHO, short focus throw and all.
 
If you have the money I wouldnt give it a second thought. The pre-asph is a 40+ year design great as it is. The ASPH is APO (if this matters to you) and its handling characteristics are excellent. For a fast 50, its pretty compact.

If you shoot with the 50 enough, its worth getting.
 
huh?

huh?

What kind of distortion? Any references or photos that show this?

The 50 apsh has significantly more distortion than the 75/1.4 lux, per the Leica PDFs.

I can't see any distortion with the pre-asph 50 (neither have I with the 50 asph though either).

Here's the lenses I see a lot of, and often annoying, distortion in:

CV 35/1.4, CV 35/1.2, Hexar AF, 35 lux asph (version before current), J3 50/1.5, lots of old Nikkor glass, and current AFS 35/1.8.

ferider said:
The pre-asph has significantly more distortion.
Click to expand...
 
Last edited:
kzphoto said:
I might upgrade my 50/1.4 pre-asph but I haven't had a chance to handle the 50 f/1.4 ASPH.
Click to expand...

I once "upgraded" from an e-46 pre-ASPH 50 Summilux to the ASPH version. While I really like the ASPH, I found that I missed the character of the older version. I eventually bought myself another copy.

Were I to keep only one of them now, the ASPH would be the one to go. It would no doubt be missed as well.

In my experience, the focus action hasn't been a consideration with any of them. Or more specifically, it's been a non-issue in practice.
 
Last edited:
peter_n said:
Same as LV1962; I use both and find the pre- smoother to focus than the ASPH. There is sample variation in the modern Leica lenses and I'm on my second ASPH which had a vaguely gritty focus feel when I bought it. I've worked on it assiduously for about a year and now it's reasonably smooth, still a little tighter at closest focus where the floating elements move though. Both of my ASPH lenses were the LHSA version without focusing tab, the regular lenses might be a bit better in the focusing department.
Click to expand...

I had the same experience on ASPH as Peter. However, in term of performance, there is nothing better than this lens, period. If you use 50 focal length, this is the lens to have.

Cheers,
 
I have the 43mm version and it is a great lens. But I have been considering a Zeiss 50mm Planar to add to my collection. It's a slower lens but focuses closer than the 43mm pre asph.
 
Kevin- The ASPH probably will have a focusing action that is a little less smooth and linear but wow, what a lens. It's about the only 50 I don't have from Leica and that's going to change pretty soon.

Performance is incredible.
 
I do use a 50 pretty often. In fact it's my most used focal length. I've been considering the purchase of a 24/2.8 to pair with my 50 or to upgrade the 50. I shoot film on an M7. I'm slowly realizing that I may only need one lens. Who knows! If I can find a great price on the 50/1.4 asph I'll take it.
 
I'd love to see a bunch of 1.4 asph photos at minimum distance to compare with my '67 or so v2, which I just took a bunch of snaps with here
 
Kevin,

I've missed the last couple for Bay area meets, but next time there's one, you can borrow my 50mm ASPH summilux and give it a try.

It's true that the focus action is not the best, with a bit of stiction. The compensation is that everything else about the lens is as good as it gets.

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