Leica 35mm f1.4 pre ASPH or........

Leica 35mm f1.4 pre ASPH or........

  • Leica Summilux 35mm f1.4 pre ASPH

    Votes: 96 45.3%

  • CV Nokton 35mm f1.2 AND CV 35mm f2.5 with some money to spare

    Votes: 42 19.8%

  • CV Nokton Classic 35mm f1.4 (SC/MC) with lots of money to spare

    Votes: 74 34.9%
  • Total voters
    212
F

fixbones

.......sometimes i thinks
Local time
9:19 AM
Joined
Mar 31, 2009
Messages
759
Hi there,

Was just wondering what your choice would be.

A classic Leical s'lux 35mm f1.4 preASPH with the glow and vintage look

OR

A flexible combi of the CV Nokton 35mm f1.2 (huge but with great signature too) and the CV 35mm f2.5 (sharp and small).......... and probably with some money to spare.

OR

A CV Nokton Classic 35mm f1.4 (SC/MC) with plenty of money to spare
 
I have and like the 35mm Summilux pre-ASPH despite it flaws. It may be that I am lucky because my copy is a very late German-made version and "quite" sharp already at f/1.4.

As always, it comes down to personal preferences. If you shoot mainly BW, like Tri-X and the vintage look, the 35mm Summilux pre-ASPH is the lens of choice. If your other lenses are Zeiss, Leica ASPH, or Hexanons ... the CV might be the better choice, also for color.
 
CV 40mm f/1.4 SC on my CLE and R-D1, and 35mm Summilux ASPH on my Leicas...

...with plenty of money NOT to spare! ;)
 
Maddoc: I have come across some of your images from the leica 35mm f1.4 preASPH sticky thread. You are doing well the the lens!!

I have the opportunity of buying a minty late version lux 35mm f1.4 preASPH for around USD1.5k .... just wondering if i should......... thats all.
 
I have a late (36xxxxxx) titanium 35 lux pre asph which renders beautifully at 1.4 with quite acceptable sharpness and which is really sharp from 2.4 (between 2 and 2.8 down)
For some reason, I often prefer the way it renders to my 35mm summicron ASPH and from f2.8 down the sharpness in the central part of the image is for all practical purposes equal. Obviously the crop factor of my M8 helps.
I did have an earlier version of the same lens and its image quality wasn't quite as good. But I regretted selling it enough to purchase my present one.
After I solld it
 
Wow.... i was expecting the CV Nokton 35mm f1.2 and 35mm f2.5 to be the popular choice. Guess i was wrong. Then again, its still early.
 
fixbones said:
Maddoc: I have come across some of your images from the leica 35mm f1.4 preASPH sticky thread. You are doing well the the lens!!

I have the opportunity of buying a minty late version lux 35mm f1.4 preASPH for around USD1.5k .... just wondering if i should......... thats all.
Click to expand...


$1500 is kind of pricey in my mind; usually the cost for a Titan. My black mint- came in at $1200.

PS: The lens shade costs $125 +/-
 
I had a very early pre-aspheric 35/1.4 back in the seventies. It was "interesting" for sure, but after the novelty wore off, a matter of a month or two, I got a Summicron. I still have the Summicron.
 
You could also consider the Canon 35mm f/1.5 for about half the price of the lux.
It is a sharp lens from my experience (In the corners the sample I tested resolved somehow between a canon 1.8 and a cron asph)
If I were to decide, I think my first option would have been the nokton 1.4.
Best combo of price/supposed IQ/close focusing/size.
 
You'd have to get a late-production copy of the pre-Aspherical, or else it will be plagued with flare and other problems (run a search for this lens here and you'll find a thread with loads of examples).

Some time ago, I was ready to spring for a titanium pre-Asph, but the thread mentioned above made me reconsider. I ended up buying an Aspherical from KEH, and I am quite happy with it. This was a while ago, before the CV version of the 'lux came out.

If you're after the speed, and are interested in sharpness also, go for the CV instead.
 
I have the pre-ASPH; the ASPH; the version I Summicron; the version IV Summicron; the f/2.5 CV; and a 40mm Nokton MC. Oh, and the 40mm Rokkor. I use them all, but am rather partial to the Nokton for its combination of sharp imaging with small size. A wonderful walkaround lens! Nostalgia and "atmosphere" have their place, but much of the time I seem to value a sharp image more. But that's just me. It's a value judgment with no right answer.
 
Al Kaplan said:
I had a very early pre-aspheric 35/1.4 back in the seventies. It was "interesting" for sure, but after the novelty wore off, a matter of a month or two, I got a Summicron. I still have the Summicron.
Click to expand...

Do you still use all of this gear Al? I thought that you had gotten into the world of the 15mm Heliar and supermarket film
 
The 35mm 'lux is the lens that seduced me into photography, and yet I would not, in good conscience, recommend it. I will also never sell it.
 
35mmdelux said:
The great Matisse used off-the-shelf supplies for his artworks.
Click to expand...

You don't know what you're talking about. All painters buy their paints off the shelf, where else would they get them? Grind the paint themselves? No one's done that since the 16th century, unless they're more interested in making paint than painting. Looking at Matisse's paintings it's obvious he used the very best materials, they are still vibrant after all this time.
 
I still have a fair amount of gear. I got rid of the 4x5 view camera, the Haselblad w tree lenses and 2 extra backs as well as a polaroid back for it. I still have a Rolieflex T and a Minolta Autocord in medium format. I'm down to 1 Bessa L, a Leica CL with a 40 'cron, M3 single stroke, button rewind M2 and an M2-R. 15mm Heliar, 21/3.4 Super Angulon, 35/2 second model Summicron, 50mm/2 Summicron 1969 vintage, 85/2 Nikkor, 90/2.8 "long" Elmarit, 135/2.8 Elmarit, Visoflex II-S, 65/3.5 Elmar, and a 400/6.3 Tele-Astranar adapted to fit the Visoflex, plus a few antique cameras and lenses and a scattered mess of flashes, cords, lens adapters, filtes, assorted bags...but there's a lot less than I owned five years ago. I should sell some fly fishing tackle which I rarely use anymore.

"Drugstore" color film is surprisingly good, especially in mixed lighting situations. I've got a wedding coming up in September and I plan on using amateur Kodak Gold 200. Then I'll hand the rolls to the bride. She can get them souped, scanned to disc, and an index print of each roll. On HER computer she can play with the images and make her own prints. She's quite good at it and drugstore scans will give a very good 8x10..

I'm also still shooting, developing, and printing B&W in my darkroom, which hasn't much changed since l built the place in 1968.
 
Last edited:
I'm very lucky and have the Pre ASPH Lux, very late serial, 35mm Skopar and 35mm f1.2 Nokton. I've tried the 35mm f1.4 Nokton and I can't see why there is a lot of the bad press about it. If I had only 1 35mm lens it would be the 35mm f1.4 Nokton. It is small, handles flare well, is very sharp and priced excellently. IMHO the best bargain buy is the CV f1.7 Ultron, the cheapest 35mm ASPH you can get.
Andrew.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top Bottom