whitecat
Lone Range(find)er
I heard at one time the pre-asph was the finest standard lens made. How does this compare to the ASPH Summilux? I'm asking more about the results than the design.
Thanks
Thanks
Leica 50/F1.4 Summilux ASPH vs. Pre ASPH
- Thread starter whitecat
- Start date
- Latest activity Latest activity:
- Replies 24
- Views 16K
awilder
Alan Wilder
Imaging with the ASPH version extends the zone of critical sharpness a several mm radius across the frame compared to the earlier version which has a sharp image but only within about a 5 or 6 mm radius wide open. The pre-asph. gradually increases critical sharpness to cover most of the frame when stopped down to f/8. The ASPH version has a flatter field of focus, is very sharp wide open even at a several mm radius and quickly extends sharp correction across most of the frame by f/3.4 or f/4. Practically speaking, this makes the pre-asph. great for portaiture and street work especially in low light, while the ASPH. version would give an added benefit of greater sharpness for distance landscapes at larger apertures if a tripod is not handy.
Last edited:
whitecat
Lone Range(find)er
Very well explained, thanks.
Broke
Established
I just put down the money for a pre-asph E46 Summilux -- big ole' GAS attack -- can't wait. Looks like my 90 Hex is going on the block hehe.
Cheers,
JB
Cheers,
JB
Mike Richards
Well-known
My favorite lens. You won't be disappointed. Besides the technical info provided above, I prefer the wider focusing ring of my pre-asph to the narrow ring and tab found on the asph. Just a personal preference, of course, but the lens balances and handles perfectly for me on any of my Ms.
35mmdelux
Veni, vidi, vici
actually, until the 50mm summilux ASPH, the 50mm summicron was the finest 50mm possibly ever made. The pre-asph 50 lagged well behind the summicron until the 50 ASPH model. The summicron had better micro-contrast and was sharper (if sharpness interests you). except for some minor changes, the pre-asph optical formulea remained unchanged for some 4 decades. Then, Leica came back with a vengence with its 50mm ASPH.
other than f/1.4, they are not comparable.
tmfabian
I met a man once...
the pre-asph is a dandy lens, it's got some charm to it that i personally enjoy. The asph is EXTREMELY sharp. I think it's been said already but the pre-asph is stunning for portraits(if you like 50mm portraits) and the asph is, well it's just damned sharp. Not that the pre-asph isn't sharp, i've done alot of work with it and it produces outstandingly sharp images with a little charm to them where the asph produces images that are super sharp that are superb for landscapes/urbanscapes.
Last edited:
nobbylon
Veteran
I like the images that my pre aspheric gives however to me they don't have that 'blow me away' look that I get from my asph 35 summicron. I've actually been looking at getting a zeiss planar f2 50 and selling my lux. I'd agree with previous poster that portraits with the lux, when you get them right are fantastic, a kind of sharp, zingy but soft look, if that makes sense! I've persevered with the lux but I'm leaning toward a sharper asphish look? I will get hold of a planar and then make my decision! I know ultimately that a lux asph is the way for me but the cost is, well to me ridiculous!
nobbylon
Veteran
Nigel,
I believe you went Planar? any thoughts? j
I believe you went Planar? any thoughts? j
pfoto
Well-known
Then you would like the LHSA version of the ASPH, which looks exactly like the pre-ASPH first version.
awilder
Alan Wilder
RITskellar's images perfectly demonstrates the strength of the 50 pre-asph. Summilux. Potentially, it's very sharp for portraits but please note how the subjects are composed; the sharp points of interest are a little off center following the classic compositional "rule of thirds". Thus, the point of interest is just within the sweet spot of the lens' orthodox design. Moving a little further off axis can result in a softer slightly smeary image due to field curvature and residual astigmatism unless you make some minor focus adjustments. The pictures also demonstrate one of the best features of this lens that makes it a continuous favorite among it's many fans... it's beautiful creamy OOF imagery.
Last edited:
Mike Richards
Well-known
GAS Attack
GAS Attack
Wow! Did not even know about the LHSA version. But I have no business even thinking about another 50. So please provide a list of sources where I could possibly get one, so I'll know whom to avoid.
GAS Attack
Wow! Did not even know about the LHSA version. But I have no business even thinking about another 50. So please provide a list of sources where I could possibly get one, so I'll know whom to avoid.
awilder
Alan Wilder
The limited suplpy price of the LHSA version makes it's purchase almost prohibative unless you have deep pockets or are willing to sell a few Leica lenses or bodies to finance the lens. It's certainly a lens to lust after, but at around $2900++, would you really pull the trigger in today's economy? That said, there are members of this forum that have one or more of these babies and if you made a serious offer to purchase one, they might comply.
Last edited:
summilux
Well-known
personally I prefer the pre-asph lens more, for the kind of pictures I take with it, but the asph is certainly very exciting to use, below is two comparison shots:
summilux
Well-known
spot on. i also like pre asph because it is smaller.
awilder
Alan Wilder
What f stop was used in those two shots?
summilux
Well-known
@1.4 in both.
just to complete the test, here are 2 shots from another two lens, all shots at @1.4 and @f1.5:
pre asph summilux 1960s vintage
zeiss c sonnar zm
just to repeat again: sharp image does not make a good picture, sometimes sharpness does more harm.
just to complete the test, here are 2 shots from another two lens, all shots at @1.4 and @f1.5:
pre asph summilux 1960s vintage
zeiss c sonnar zm
just to repeat again: sharp image does not make a good picture, sometimes sharpness does more harm.
awilder
Alan Wilder
Great comparison shots, certainly confirms my opinion of the relative correction wide open of these four optics. The cropping fooled me about the lack of vignetting in the imaging.
jsuominen
Well-known
I agree. I like my new Zeiss C-Sonnar T* 50/1.5 (for S-mount) a lot, although it's not razor - or clinical - sharp at wide open. Two current sample shots here:
http://www.flickr.com/photos/jsuominen/2603840154/
http://www.flickr.com/photos/jsuominen/2600969949/
ali_baba
Well-known
i have the pre-asph, was thinking of upgrading, i shoot mostly stage (music) work, always wide open.
which would be better.
im truly after a nocti, but prices being what they are...blah blah blah...
which would be better.
im truly after a nocti, but prices being what they are...blah blah blah...
