How Much Sharper is the 28mm Elmarit-M ASPH then Version iii and iv?

[Fragomeni]

Hi all,

I'm curious about this in real life photographic terms, as opposed to test charts and such. As far as the 28mm Elmarit-M goes, version iii is said to exhibit major improvements over the previous two versions and I know it has a following of its own. Version iv is smaller and does away with the big nose that block part of the viewfinder. I've heard some say that version iv optically tops version iii while others site its physical characteristics as the primary differences. The current ASPH version is smaller still and is said to be the sharpest of all the Elmarit-M lenses but many report that it doesn't quite have the legendary "Leica glow" that versions iii and iv are known for (the ASPH lenses are said to lose the glow due to the ASPH lens formula).

Can anyone with experience with the three lenses offer their perspective in real life photographic terms. I've seen the charts and am not particularly interested in tests. I'd love to hear user experiences in terms of the quality of the images produced. If anyone has side by side comparisons that would be great!

I own version iii and while I love it I don't have a way to see how it visually/optically compares to version iv and the ASPH version. I usually shoot from the hip with this lens but when I use the viewfinder, the hood obstructs nearly the full bottom right corner of the viewfinder and that bothers me. Without the hood its not so bad but I don't really know how this lens performs without the hood (don't know how much flare to expect). If version iv is optically better while still retaining the "glow" the smaller size and less viewfinder obstruction would make it even more enticing. I'm very interested in hearing user reviews of how much sharper the ASPH version really is and if it really loses the "glow" characteristic.

Thanks to all in advance for your insight!

 

[kzphoto]

You could rent the 28 Elmarit ASPH at borrowlenses.com. No relation but I use them for Nikon / lighting gear.

As far as the Version IV, I'd say get your feet wet with the ASPH and see where you stand.

 

[Turtle]

The asph will have significantly higher contrast than your V3 and no glow. Its a fairly clinical modern lens. As for sharper, I doubt there will be any significant difference, but at wider apertures the asph will likely be better at the edges/corners.

The asph is tiny and that would be the primary reason for change, or if you wanted a harder more modern look.

 

[awilder]

I wouldn't worry about sharpness differences as the 28/2.8 Viii and beyond are all excellent optics and only in lab testing will differences show up, primarily wide open. Vi and ii were not to good by todays standards. The main benefit of the ASPH version is it's smaller size.

 

[Fragomeni]

Thanks for the responses. That goes along with what I've come to understand. I've seen some great work done with some of the new ASPH lenses but the rendering does look different then the pre-ASPH lenses to my eyes and it seems most people agree. "Clinical" is a good way to describe the look of the ASPH lenses. I don't think that is a bad thing at all, it's just different and offers Leica users a choice in what they want from a lens. I just bought my Leica kit but I'd spent time with the same equipment in the past and so I went with pre-ASPH lenses to match my perception of the Leica look that I fell in love with long ago. I'll probably give an ASPH lens a try at some point but I'm not overly eager to at this point as I'm one of the people who love the glow.

So what about differences between V3 and V4? Are they basically the same lens in two different body shapes? If the V4 is the same lens as my V3 or superior and significantly smaller i.e. obstructs far less of the viewfinder, I would consider swapping my V3 for a V4 I suppose. What are thought on the different between V3 and V4? Anyone feel there is any particular reason to hold on to the V3 as opposed to trading it out for a V4? Thanks!

 

[Fragomeni]

I wouldn't worry about sharpness differences as the 28/2.8 Viii and beyond are all excellent optics and only in lab testing will differences show up, primarily wide open. Vi and ii were not to good by todays standards. The main benefit of the ASPH version is it's smaller size.

Thanks for the reply. Your roman numerals seem flipped and I'm not entirely sure I'm following you. Can you clarify which lenses you're talking about? V1, V2, V3, V4, and ASPH are probably better designations then I'd used before. Thanks!

 

[awilder]

I'm refering to the performance of V1 and V2 being well behind V3, V4 and the ASPH. Performance of V3 and V4 are of very high order with V4 only a hair better. The ASPH is on par with V4, only smaller.

 

[Fragomeni]

I'm refering to the performance of V1 and V2 being well behind V3, V4 and the ASPH. Performance of V3 and V4 are of very high order with V4 only a hair better. The ASPH is on par with V4, only smaller.

Thanks for clarifying for me. Thats on par with what I've heard elsewhere. Gives me some food for thought. I may just keep the V3 but I am attracted to the size of the V4 while still maintaining the "glow". If I could find one at a good price I might pick it up and sell the V3. Assuming nearly identical optics (V4 being perhaps a slight improvement) without losing the character of the lens that I love but a smaller less obstructive package might make the V4 worth upgrading to. Hmmm...