nevin
Established
Yap, resale value is one of the thing I'm considering as well. Since some point in the future I would probably sell it out for other new "toy"....GAS...GAS...
The condition for the German made one is excellent+ and the Canadian made one is suppose mint.
Tom A
RFF Sponsor
The ASPH is considerably sharper wide open than the 8 element. The contrast is also higher.
At 5.6 you wont see much difference, except contrast is higher in the ASPH and for all practical purposes, any of the 35's will perform well at 5,6.
There are a lot of "myths" surrounding the 8 element Summicron's and most of them are unsubstantiated! It was, as I said, a good lens in 1958 but modern glass technology, modern coatings have vastly improved the image quality of later lenses.
If you are looking for "vintage" image quality - yes, it is a good lens - it does scream 60's, particularly in black/white, but at those prices you can get a whole lot of other lenses that does it just as well or even better, Canon 35f2 or f1.8, Nikon 35f1.8 LTM (in my opinion a better lens than the 8 element Summicron) and even modern lenses like the Voigtlander Nokton 35f1.4 Single Coated or the 40f1.4 Single coated.
If collectors are willing to pay vastly over inflated prices for a lens, let them! It is a typical "fad" lens and at $2000+ it is highly unlikely that it will sustain that price level in the future. There are simply too many alternatives at far more attractive prices around.
HuubL
hunter-gatherer
I know the price sounds crazy. But thanks to Leica (they increase the price twice/yr here) and Chinese (they have the money), the lens' price keep reaching rocket high point! Last year the price is in the range of 2K and this year it's 2500+. If you take a look at the evilbay you will see what I mean.... :bang:
At such a price point, I wonder if I should sell mine...
nevin
Established
nevin
Established
Thanks Tom! What if we compare the 8-element to 35 lux pre-asph?
Tom A
RFF Sponsor
Nevin, the 8 element versus the pre-asph 35f1.4 is a better comparison. The earliest version of the Summilux was a strange beast - I think it did exhibit just about every optical aberation possible, coma,flare, field curvature etc. However it has a very distinct "signature" and I, for one, kind of like it. The 8 element Summicron 35 was a better lens, albeit with a 1 stop speed loss (remember too that in the late 50's and early 60's - films were considered "super speed" at 800 asa so lens speed was far more important than today).
The revised Summilux 35, which largly remained unchanged until the Asph 35 is a good lens. I would put it ahead of the 8 element Summicron, both in contrast and sharpness (it is a bit soft at f1.4 but "perks up" at f2.0 and onward).
Bear in mind that my judgement is based on a/shooting black and white - and usually tri X and b/ performance of a lens is probably less indicative of lens design and formula than that of the operator.
The modern lenses from Leica,Zeiss, CV and Konica are huge improvements over the 40 year old designs we are talking about here.
The revised Summilux 35, which largly remained unchanged until the Asph 35 is a good lens. I would put it ahead of the 8 element Summicron, both in contrast and sharpness (it is a bit soft at f1.4 but "perks up" at f2.0 and onward).
Bear in mind that my judgement is based on a/shooting black and white - and usually tri X and b/ performance of a lens is probably less indicative of lens design and formula than that of the operator.
The modern lenses from Leica,Zeiss, CV and Konica are huge improvements over the 40 year old designs we are talking about here.
raid
Dad Photographer
Still, the 8-element Summicron was a historic mark in the Leica line, and I believe that it is not a temporary fad for collectors. Just the opposite; its value will go up with time.
Tom A
RFF Sponsor
My point is that, is it worth the money? It might be a collectible lens, but if you are buying it to use - it is not a $2000+ performance lens.
I stll have one and I occasionally use it. It was reconfigured to black paint some years ago as it is mainly on a black M2 and the chrome was a bit glaring. Would I buy one today at $2000 - no way!
I stll have one and I occasionally use it. It was reconfigured to black paint some years ago as it is mainly on a black M2 and the chrome was a bit glaring. Would I buy one today at $2000 - no way!
pfoto
Well-known
That is a very nice looking one. Mine is rather beat up and the serial is much later than yours but the lens works well, which is what really counts. Two recent sales on eBay for this lens - a German one went for $1100 and a Canadian one for $1700. I also use the current ASPH version of this lens but to be honest prefer the "look" of the first version. Sharpness isn't everything.
gohaj
Well-known
Tom A
RFF Sponsor
For a user lens with perfect glass I dont think much more than $800-1000. Less than a III/IV generation anyway.
The "collectible" lenses are in another ballpark and has nothing to do with reality anyway. I sold a black paint 35f2 8 element in a M3 mount last year for $1100 and thought is was fairly priced. It was used, but had clean glass and the prisms in the "goggles" worked well.
The "collectible" lenses are in another ballpark and has nothing to do with reality anyway. I sold a black paint 35f2 8 element in a M3 mount last year for $1100 and thought is was fairly priced. It was used, but had clean glass and the prisms in the "goggles" worked well.
HuubL
hunter-gatherer
PM me your offer won't hurts I guess
Well, I meant the 3000 US$ price point, of course...
...nevin
Established
Platinum RF
Well-known
$2000+ is a bit high, but for M2 version $000-1500 would be a reasonable price since Version 2-3 usually reach $800-1000. ASPH has its advantage optically, however, sharpness is not everythig to creature a good picture,. Finrst version has its unique characters, reflect that period optical achivement. If you like 50 DR/Rigid, you will like First version. The build quality is much better than 3rd version. I have all version of 35/2 to explore the difference of these lens, I still want to keep the first version.
Nikon 35f1.8 LTM can not compete with first version in term of general picture quality, hue, out of focus area. Personally, I thinkVoigtlander Nokton 35f1.4/40f1.4 Single coated lens are loser lense. They do not have the optical character of first version, the out of focus areas are very harsh, more or less like Nikon.
Last edited:
35mmdelux
Veni, vidi, vici
My 35 Cron IV is good enough for my K14 and HP5...and my shooting skills.
The 8-element is more for collectors or die hard B&W shooters.
The 8-element is more for collectors or die hard B&W shooters.
nevin
Established
OK. I finally did bought the Canadian version. I bought it because the lens itself is newer than the German made one. I did a non scientific test using both the 8-element and the ASPH summicron.
First of all, two full images taken with aperture wide opened, apart in about 1 min, same shutter speed.
First of all, two full images taken with aperture wide opened, apart in about 1 min, same shutter speed.
Attachments
Last edited:
nevin
Established
Here's the center 100% crop:
A bit lower left from the center, the tree's crop:
From the top-left corner:
From the top-right corner:
A bit lower left from the center, the tree's crop:
From the top-left corner:
From the top-right corner:
Last edited:
ampguy
Veteran
The tree, window, and building crop shots show that the asph probably has clearer glass, and could use a faster shutter speed. I had both the pre asph v4, and the asph and used them extensively to find differences, but one factor that eluded me until I used them with a stepless shutter AE camera was that the asph glass was slightly clearer than the older cron.
Nevertheless, your summicron is showing excellent results for a lens of this age, and with an older design.
Nevertheless, your summicron is showing excellent results for a lens of this age, and with an older design.
nevin
Established
Yap, you do point out something that I have ignored, the "right" shutter speed for the ASPH. With a MP I'm not able to use shutter speed other than a full stop's one. I'm not sure if a fair test should use identical parameters in an outside environment.
The image on the left is from the old lens while the right is from ASPH.
IMHO, and this is speaking from my subjective impression,
I think what surprised me is the resolution from the old lens in the center, even wide opened, is even a bit more than the ASPH. If you look at the small Chinese characters at the bottom in the center 100% crop, to me I see a finer edge and details.Secondly, look at the tree's crop and the overall images. The 8-element has a smooth transition from the foreground to the the background and it starts immediately. While in the ASPH's image you still see the tree is still in the "foreground" zone and suddenly all other things transited into background. This may gives the ASPH a more 3D look, or "Pop-up" effect, or a "razor-cut" foreground.
Thirdly, from the top-left corner which showing the windows. The old lens shows more defined texture than ASPH (look at the tiles). I would say this may or may not a good thing and is purely personal preference. Since some who say this will create a distractive background.
Fourthly, the old lens vignetted quite a bit when wide opened. Close it down to f/2.8 or even f/4.0 helps a lot. From other test images I also observe that the old lens gives a warmer color rendering, comparatively the ASPH's image will have a little bit blue casted.
Conclusion: Individual lens will have variation so I cannot generalize it. But is there a big different in these two particular lenses in a day to day use? IMHO, no. The different is there when you put two images side by side to compare, but no, I do not think it's day and night kind of different.
Will I keep both? I'm not a millionaire (I hope I'm
) and they both give me satisfied results and so there's no reason for me to keep both. Hey...anyone wants to have a chrome ASPH with full package?
Last edited: