need advices for summicron 35mm v4 or asph

leicacanonfan

Member
Local time
6:26 PM
Joined
Dec 1, 2006
Messages
12
hi everyone
thx for coming to hv a look my topic,
any comments will be appreciated

recently i saw a seller was putting
a 99% new boxed silver summicron 35mm v4 (933GBP)
&
a 95% new boxed silver summicron 35mm asph (733GBP)
for sales
both of them are very attractive to me.:bang:

here comes to my questions
1. im a bokeh hunter, (but i dont like smooth bokeh,coz it just looks the same as digital) im wondering which one would give me more attractive & interesting bokeh, just like the nocilux's bokeh
2. what is your estimated price for both of the lens?
3. does it still worthy to get the v4 with this price?
4. can anyone show me some nice bokeh pic of these 2lens

many thanks guys
😀
 
go for the asph, most people will say just get the lux but that doesnt seems to be in there. Anyway, I dont care for the bokeh on the v4 despite what everyone says, the asph is the one for me. And while you are at it check out the zeiss options
 
If I were to pick one today, the ASPH would be the choice. I own a V4 for 20 years and use it mostly F4 and smaller so I would not gain much from an upgrade. With the V4 at F2, the center is sharp and edges fairly soft. For this reason, I believe the ASPH is the better choice. To me the only purpose of F2 is for full across the frame sharp. I have a V1 35 cron and 35 3.5 Summaron. They are similar in nature and nice, but frankly don`t see why the V1 is so hot.

If you want bokeh, try a 50 `Lux, any one or a Summarit. I bought the Summarit just for it and I got it. 35mm is too short for great bokeh. My 75 1.4 is great also, but out of focus just is not for 35mm focal length glass to me.

One advantage of the V4 is the smaller size and that is another reason I keep it. The 3.5 Summaron is screw mount and I keep it for my 111c and 111f.
 
FWIW... I owned and shot with both of these leneses for over a year... sold the ASPH and kept the v4. One thing that I miss most (and nobody else ever seems to mention!) about the 35ASPH is its ability to resist flare even in strong backlight. The ASPH is sharper at f2... but if, as you claim, you want the one with the more interesting out-of-focus areas, chose the v4. It weighs less, and for me, handles better because it's a smaller lens.
 
I have owned both. I sold the v4 - overpriced and the ASPH kills it for sharpness AND "bokeh" (arghhhh, hate that word...). Actually, I got more for the v4 then I spent on buying the ASPH. The world is mad.
 
haha, thx for all your advices guys
to peter_n: i have read that test b4, and i cant really notice the difference between them

to avotius: yes, i think i will go for the asph due to cheaper price and better performance

to ronald M: i have the 50mm lux already, it does give me really nice bokeh,but i found the view of angle is a bit narrow sometime. so i decided to go for a 35mm

to Magus: haha, thx for hidding the 'canon' for me, actually im no more a canon fan i moved from digital to film few months ago, and i found i really enjoy it

many thx again.

here is my recent pic taken by my R2a+50mm lux

http://www.flickr.com/photos/hbfcom
 
There might be a size or convenience difference when on your (M) body, suggest trying in a olde brick camera shoppe. It depends on the hands you have, difficult doing anything about big fingers...

I use both eyes so dont mind (detect) hood scaloping view finder.

Noel
 
Back
Top Bottom