Hesitating between a 35mm Pre-asph 'Lux and a version 1 (8-Elements) 'Cron

[tokyoshooter]

I am an M9 user and enjoy the 35mm focal length. I also like the look of slightly older (non-Asph) lens, both in colour and B&W.

I have the opportunity to buy and keep either:
-a 35mm pre-Asph 'Lux from early 1990s
-or a 35mm 'Cron (8-elements) from the mid-1960s

The lens will be used as a generalist lens (a mixture of people shots; street shots; landscape shots).

Which lens would you advise and why ? (note: both are in a good optic condition).

Thanks for your replies.

 

[Erik van Straten]

Buy both, they are very different in character.

Erik.

 

[johannielscom]

The 35mm Cron. Much harder to find in 8 element version. If you don't like it, it is easier to sell and easier to buy a pre-ASPH Lux.

Or if you are certain you need the 1.4 stop buy the Lux, but then there would not have been a choice to begin with.

 

[braver]

I think I'd take the lux. Bit more special, bit more of a 'look'. The cron may be 'better' and more practical, and the more reasonable option.

 

[Ron (Netherlands)]

8-lens Cron is typically renown for its high resolution, so if you go for sharpness take the cron. It is also loved by collectors.

If you are a low light photographer take the lux, however it has less resolution and more prone to aberration wide open, typically known and loved by many as 'Leica glow'.

for you to decide which one you 'need more' ;-)

 

[Penzes]

The glow with the Lux is great. 😀


Ingrid @ The Restaurant "Gusto" by Istvan Penzes, on Flickr

 

[mod2001]

really nice István, i have the 35 Cron IV, but this tiny little pre-summi is on my wishlist too. By the way, saw your Neopanshoots developed with Emofin on Flickr, is it possible to use a range from 200 to 800 on the same roll with Neofin?

Yogi

 

[raid]

I love using both lenses. It would be difficult for me to drop one in favor of the other. Max aperture 2.0 is quite fast.

 

[Penzes]

really nice István, i have the 35 Cron IV, but this tiny little pre-summi is on my wishlist too. By the way, saw your Neopanshoots developed with Emofin on Flickr, is it possible to use a range from 200 to 800 on the same roll with Neofin?

Yogi

I never tried it. You can push HP5 or Neopan 400 to 800 with Emofin, but the developing times are to different and I think it won't work with pull and push with the same time.

 

[maddoc]

Istvan, nice portrait !! 🙂 No regrets about buying that lens ? 😀

 

[BobYIL]

Using both since years, both deliver less contrast than their aspherical cousins but longer gradation... I have the Canada and Wetzlar versions of the Summilux, no difference at all. The Summilux has too much "glow" and coma at f1.4 emphasized by digital to the extremes (film is more forgiving). Stopping to f2 makes it somewhat reasonable, still not so sharp. The Summicron 8-element has glow but not exaggerated, you can still see the tiniest details. With Summilux you reach this sharpness level at f2.8. Edges and corners: Summicron shine there, no contest.. After f4, they are more similar.. For film Summilux has a very distinct signature and from f2 down so natural, less stretch toward corners, looks like wide 50 (even better than the Summicron in this regard) however for digital you may prefer the better corrected Summicron.

 

[Penzes]

Thanks Gabor, no, no regrets! I love it, even when its a bit soft, how cares! 😀

 

[raid]

The second version Summilux is reported to have less flare than the first version.
I have the Summicron 35/2 first version (meant for a M3) and also one that was meant for the M2 (or any other M mount camera).

 

[ferider]

Basically, from f2 on they are the same. Any difference will disappear in noise created by film, hand-shake, etc., unless you use a tripod and very high resolution film.

So you have to decide Lux speed/flare wide open, vs. Summicron 0.7m min. focus. Unless you are talking M3 version for both (same min. focus).

Roland.

 

[Erik van Straten]

Leica M2, Summicron 35mm f/2 8 elements, Tmax400, silver/gelatine print.

Erik.

 

[tokyoshooter]

Thanks, all, for your input.

I have tried the pre-Asph 'Lux and I find the "glow" at f1.4 to be a bit much on the digital M9. At f5.6, it is amazingly sharp, though.

I will go for the 8-elements Summicron. It seems its performance is "better" (dangerous word .... I mean, "better for me".....😉) at f2.0 on digital, compared to the Lux.

I love the size, weight and handling of these two lenses.

 

[peter_n]

I think a that's a good decision. I use a Wetzlar 8-element Summicron on film but it's more suited to your M9 as it's resolution is excellent. In addition you'll really like using it, it focuses down to 0.7M, handles beautifully and is built like a brick. Mine is a bit bashed looking and after buying it I sent it to Steve Choi for a CLA. After the work he said it's good for another 30 years. Great lens.

 

[BobYIL]

Thanks, all, for your input.

I have tried the pre-Asph 'Lux and I find the "glow" at f1.4 to be a bit much on the digital M9. At f5.6, it is amazingly sharp, though.

I will go for the 8-elements Summicron. It seems its performance is "better" (dangerous word .... I mean, "better for me".....😉) at f2.0 on digital, compared to the Lux.

I love the size, weight and handling of these two lenses.

************************************
A right choice for digital; the 8-element shows also less "smearing" around corners compared to the Summilux. Even with the smaller sensor of the Nex-5, this can be observed.. When buying check first for haze and then the front and rear surfaces carefully, old glasses are prone to cleaning marks comperatively easier..