Latest Leica 35mm F2 asph lens

[tammons]

Latest Leica 35mm F2 asph lens.

I have read of the superb sharpness from this lens, but after getting into a debate over the actual sharpness compared to a 35mm slr lens i have a general question.

Forget the FL difference for now.

With something like velvia 80lp/mm or copex or panf 100lp/mm do you guys see a real difference in resolution and edge sharpness over say a Canon 50mm F1.5 or a cy contax 50mm

 

[jaapv]

This is a realm where sharpness is not an issue at all. Here you see differences in microcontrast, bokeh, general character etc. And yes- one sees a difference, provided all the other hardware, including the photog. himself, is of the same level as the lens.

 

[markinlondon]

Years ago I was impressed with the shots I got with a Pentax 50 f2 (used value ~ £20). They were crisp and contrasty. Then I got a 50 Summicron. Handheld the difference in sharpness is negligible . The difference lies as Jaap says in the more subjective qualities of the lenses. I prefer the 'cron because people no longer look like cardboard cutouts and because I can get nice results wide open. I have never measured the resolution in lp/mm, neither would I want to. I know what I like and that's it for me.

Mark

 

[Fred]

I just have to agree with Marks' comment, when selective focus is desired (narrow DOF shooting wide open or near wide open), the Leica just does that something a little better that I like.

Here's an example of what I mean, ignoring the FL.
http://www.rangefinderforum.com/photopost/showphoto.php?photo=33588&cat=500&ppuser=1521

http://www.rangefinderforum.com/photopost/showphoto.php?photo=33587&cat=500&ppuser=1521

 

[Nikon Bob]

Just what the previous posters have said. You might be able to see/prove a difference shooting on a lab bench but handheld in normal shooting circumstances I have my doubts.

Nikon Bob

 

[tammons]

It was for doing a set of test photos for a scanner test. My opinion was to use the best lens and best film to start to eliminate that variable.

Rent a Leica M and a 35mm asph lens and shoot E100G or Velvia and panF or copex or Efke 25 for B+W.

The other person I was in a mini debate with said his Oly 50mm, Elitechrome 200 and Hp4 was good enough.

Although the Oly 50 might be up to the task Elitechrome 200 only resolves 50lp/mm which is kind of weak when you get to drum scanners and such.

 

[Magus]

Post deleted by posters request

 

[markinlondon]

This shot on FP4 in Rodinal 1:50 printed to 7x5" and lightly selenium toned says everything I could want to about Leica glass. These are the qualities I have got used to, the columns have a fullness that my old Japanese glass didn't achieve. Sharpness is a given with modern primes. My v4 35 'cron is so close as to be indistinguishable in character. I don't own any aspherics, I don't feel the need.

Why I love my 50 summicron

Mark

 

[Benjamin Marks]

I've got to say. I noticed a real difference in sharpness between the 80's vintage chron that I used until I got the asph. Beyoinks! With the RD-1 it is AMAZING.

 

[jaapv]

What you are seeing is not so much the resolution difference but the greatly reduced flare, far better MTF and increased microcontrast. And a very nice sight it is indeed! You have a very nice lens. Drool!I might add that digital camera is much more sensitive to lens quality than film. Something to do with the acceptance angle of photoreceptors on the sensor. So your RD1 is bound to show up the difference most.

 

[J. Borger]

THe Asph cron is razor sharp and very contrasty and it has some 3D qualities for sure ... but it is THE only lens i own i do not realy like.
I have mixed feelings about the files. Not from a technical point of view (they print gorgous) ..... but from the way the pictures look. Every time i have been out with the cron and have looked at the pictures ----- i put it back deep in the closet and reach for the pre-asph lux.
I 'm really in doubt if i should keep it. I'm in fact doubting since the first day i bought it!

 

[Fred]

I'm lucky enough to have the ASPH 35 cron (bought used) and really like it. I also have the CV Ultron which for some shots for me really does it a tad better. I know that this sounds strange but the OOF areas of the cron are better for me but the old CV has a certain signature looking more like a classic, slightly lower contrast but a sort of glow not seen in many modern lenses. I like them both and do not regret buying either.

Example of the cron
http://www.rangefinderforum.com/photopost/showphoto.php?photo=22490&cat=500&ppuser=1521

Example of the CV Ultron
http://www.rangefinderforum.com/photopost/showphoto.php?photo=10717&cat=500&ppuser=1521

 

[Magus]

Post deleted by posters request

 

[J. Borger]

Hi Magus,

It's hard to put a finger on the dislikes ...it's mainly guts feeling and far from objective---- let's try .... some of my random feelings:

- A lot of the cron asph pictures i took ... i have the feeling i could have also taken with my Canon 1Ds and 35/1.4L ... the look is not that different
- Shadow blocking on sunny days .. yes perhaps it's partly metering .. but it is a problem with a digital sensor (R-D1) i use
- clean and clinical looking files a lot of the times


Here the likes of the Summilux pre-asph:

- it cries out ...... Leica files
- So creamy ...... and the king of midtones
- a "roundness" to people shots and other object like cars i only find in the older lens designs and realy like a lot

The ASPH always gives me files of outstanding technical quality .. but very seldom files with a real "wow" factor!

Han

 

[Magus]

Post deleted by posters request

 

[jaapv]

This is getting interesting, and a bit tormenting. Could it be the digital that "clinicises" the results?

This is relevant. It is well known that sensors react differently to lenses than film. For instance, some Canon lenses, that are fine for film, suddenly exhibit chromatic aberration on digital bodies, especially with wide-angle. It will be very interesting to see what will happen on the high-res sensor of the digital M and which lenses will be giving the most "leica-like" results.

 

[Magus]

Post deleted by posters request

 

[J. Borger]

Jaap & Magus,

I am not a technician .. know little to nothing about lens design, charts etc.
I am convinced the 35 asph resolves more resolution on the new Leica sensor .... as it does on film. But how important is that in the end ...... where every P&S digicam is capable of producing sharp pictures? Yes sharpness is the norm nowadays .. but how important is it for yourself in the end?
Is not character more important .. beyond a certain sharpness & contrast point .... the point where enough is enough?

I am leaning towards the older lenses more & more ..... because of the look.
Nobody believes me if i tell the pictures with the pre-asph lux were taken with a digital camera. The same when i use an older Canon Serenar.

These were taken today with a digital camera ...... in the bright noonday sun ...... with a pre-asph lux. I can't help it but i love the footprint of that lens ....... 😉

 

[jaapv]

Now that is a really nice car :angel: And a really nice dog and kids too 🙂 . But you make me very happy I did decide not to sell my pre-asph lux 50 in the end (due to some elbow-twisting by certain forum members, who shall remain unnamed here. 😛 )

 

[J. Borger]

A very wise decision Jaap ....... do not sell anything untill you tried it on the M8.
Wait and see .. you can always sell ...!