king of bokeh vs ASPH

[jerdjets]

I am buying a 35 summicron soon, but I haven't decided which one to get. I handled and took some test shots with the pre-ASPH canadian version and it was a sweet little lens, is the ASPH version significantly better? I want to hear your thoughts about the current ASPH version and the pre-ASPH version.

 

[ampguy]

I've had both and did a year of tests side by side. The asph cron is a bit sharper wide open at the edges, and has slightly higher contrast. They both have great, but slightly different bokeh, and the asph will in some flare conditions give off a cinematic 8 blade aperture pattern.

The cron asph is a great lens, possibly the only modern lens that looks better than the vintage lenses.

However, it is noticeably heavier and longer side by side so if it's your carry everywhere lens, it can be a burden. Uses the same hoods 12524/6, or E39 round, as the pre-asph.

 

[JWW]

I have both but tend to prefer the lighter, smaller version 4 since it makes the camera package very portable. I like the imaging from the lens even wide open on the M9. I feel the bokeh is good from either one but in certain light situations stopped down a bit maybe at f4 or so the version 4 can provide some great bokeh. Can't really go wrong either way though.

 

[kipkeston]

sharper images > ASPH
more pleasing rendering > v4

no significant difference in sharpness or pleasing rendering

 

[Chriscrawfordphoto]

I'd suggest the 35mm f2.8 C-Biogon if you don't absolutely need f2. I sold my Version IV 35 Summicron for it. The Biogon is cheaper, sharper both wide open and stopped down, has better bokeh (YES!) and less light falloff toward the edges. It is slightly bigger than the Summicron but that didn't matter to me, as it is still a small lens.

 

[dfoo]

I have both the biogon c and a summicron v3. The biogon C is sharper at 2.8, but past that I cannot see the difference. I prefer the summicron ergonomics to the C. The 1/3 stops irritate me, and so does the lack of focusing tab.

 

[semilog]

I agree with Chris. Mike Johnston, who crowned the 'cron v. IV "bokeh king" in the first place, noted from the start that the "king's" bokeh "worsens considerably as focus gets closer and apertures get wider." He points out that this is true of many lenses but calls out the IV in particular for this failing.

The Biogon-C has, in my opinion, the best bokeh at 2.8 of any 35 that I've seen or used.

For me the bigger issue is that I shoot in difficult light at least as often as I shoot in low light, and the Biogon-C is probably the most flare-resistant 35 on the market. It also has very low geometrical distortion, and it has less curvature of field and less astigmatism than either of the Leica ASPH lenses or the summarit. If you shoot landscapes or cityscapes, field curvature can be real pain.

Biogon-C images and discussion here and here and here.

 

[aizan]

the pre-asph has harsh bokeh wide open and closeup (not a problem the more you stop down and the farther you focus). that was reason enough for me to get the asph.

 

[david.elliott]

I think the cv 35/2.5 and zeiss 35/2.8 have the best bokeh

 

[peter_n]

A lot of threads here on this topic. Also Jim Arnold's comparison.

 

[ferider]

I think the cv 35/2.5 and zeiss 35/2.8 have the best bokeh

Never tried the Biogon, but I agree wrt Color Skopar - both more center sharpness and better bokeh than the "bokeh king".

 

[semilog]

Never tried the Biogon, but I agree wrt Color Skopar - both more center sharpness and better bokeh than the "bokeh king".

The pre-ASPH Summicron is a great lens. It's just that we are lucky to have several great 35mm lenses in M mount .

 

[dof]

I own both and my preference is based on the medium. This goes back to the old and time-tested maxim of high-resolution/low-contrast lenses being best suited to black and white emulsions.

I much prefer the pre-ASPH when shooting Tri-X on the M6. It provides full-range negatives when attention is paid to processing times.

The macro contrast of the ASPH is preferable when shooting with the M8. Given its edge-to-edge performance I can only assume its performance is equal on the M9.

All the best with your decision!

 

[jk251]

I had both, they are good lenses. You won't regret to have one of them.
The slight differences vary from circumstances.
I would choose the lens in good condition and price.

 

[J. Borger]

I had both and prefer type IV on digital. On film i do not care.
I find the 35 cron asph too clinical with digital ... a matter of personal taste.
There is nothing more subjective than bokeh! I personaly prefer the sometimes wilder bokeh of the type iv.