Pre-Asph 35mm Lux

N

nikon_junkie

Established
Local time
5:05 PM
Joined
Mar 26, 2005
Messages
132
I just bought (hasn't shipped yet) a M2 and bought an Excellent+ rated 35mm f/1.4 Summilux pre-Asph. I'm a bit troubled my many of the negative reviews of my new (old) lense I've come across on the net.

My ultimate goal is to use it shooting weddings and eventually add another body and the and 75mm lengths, and eventually either Lux 50mm or possibly the 50mm f/1.

With these other light vacums I'm wondering if the Lux 35mm F/1.4 would be overkill and if I should get a 35mm f/2 Summicron instead?
 
If the Summilux is for DOF effects then obviously you need to keep it. If you got it just because its the fastest lens then maybe you should think about it.

I just got a 50mm Summilux and my express intention is to use it at f1.4. I have a perfectly good 50/2.8 for everything else.

 
Snaggs just returned his because he said it flared too much for him in the bright sun. That is the complaint that I have seen most often on the net and that it is soft wide open. I have one for the simple reason that I did not want the 50 Lux that was also with the camera. Being aware of the flare issue and using it with that in mind, along with the proper hood, I have not been noticably bothered by flare. I try using it in a way that does not promote flare. I rarely use it wide open but again it is there if I need it. I really like it's small size and find it a good travel lens so I will save myself quite a few dollars (being cheap) and not get the new asph. which is likely better and bigger. It might a good idea if you can get a return policy on the 35 Lux if you do not like the results under the conditions you will be using it.

Bob
 
Last edited by a moderator:
I owned the 35 1.4 pre asph for many years and shot thousands of images under the worst light possible. Most of my work was B&W but never can say I had a flare problem atleast no more than any other lens that I wass using. I never hesitated to shoot wide open and it always produced excellent images. I don't think I've ever seen any lens that didn't improve stopped down a stop or two and this is certainly one of those lenses. Even my canon 200 f1.8 L improves slightly when stopped down a stop. Unfortunately I sold it and really miss the extra stop over my summicron 35. If you take a lok at my gallery you will find a few images shot with this lens. The web really doesn't show the quality of a lens but the summilux is a fine piece of glass.

http://www.rangefinderforum.com/photopost/showgallery.php?cat=5045
 
Nikon Bob,

Say it ain't so! The old 50 'Lux is one of the best Leica lenses. Don't believe everything you read or hear. Contrast is NOT everything. Why didn't you grab that 50? :(

Thomas Pastorello described the 1990's version of the 50mm Summilux like this:

------------------------------
I believe the non-ASPH Summilux-M 50 IS the best
lens Leica (or for that matter anyone) ever made. In
addition to its two main attributes of near absolute
freedom from flare and a signature bokeh of subtle
beauty, it is characterized by an artistic balance of
high resolution and realistic contrast -- even wide
open. It is perfectly balanced on the M body, such
that hand-holding is easy at 1/4 -- which makes it
very fast indeed at f1.4 (more so than the less well
balanced and holdable Noctilux at f1.0).
Will the new Summilux-M 50 ASPH have higher
contrast and resolution than the current? Of course
-- no need to wait for the Puts report! If all I
wanted was the highest possible (and most useless)
resolution and contrast, all I'd have to do is slap an
adapter and a process lens on any camera body. If the
new Summilux-M 50 ASPH has the look and feel of most
other new Leica ASPH lenses, with harsh bokeh and
flare proneness, I will not buy. To learn about flare
and bokeh, I'll have to look at reports other than
Puts'. Tom
 
Last edited:
Steve Hoffman said:
Nikon Bob,

Say it ain't so! The old 50 'Lux is one of the best Leica lenses. Don't believe everything you read or hear. Contrast is NOT everything. Why didn't you grab that 50? :(

I did not grab the 50 pre asph lux because I do not get on well with the 50mm focal length in general and prefer a 35mm. Just personal taste and nothing bad to say about the 50 Lux. Why spend money on a focal length that I don't use much? I like the pre asph 35 Lux so I don't really put alot of stock in what I read or hear as it has an even worse reputation.

Bob
Click to expand...
 
To me some of the newer lenses have lost their personality. Some of them are just too contrasty and hard looking. There's a beauty in a little flare and softer images in some cases. I sometimes shoot with my old IIIC and uncoated 28, 50 and 90 lenses just to get that vintage look.

http://www.rangefinderforum.com/photopost/showgallery.php?cat=5045


FS:

Like new Imacon 343 with 2 custom flex frames and a very good condition epson 1680 pro scanner.


www.x-rayarts.com
 
It's been my standard lens for close to 25years. My first was stolen in India in the early 80s; I replaced it with a new one I'm still using.

Other RF 35s I have owned/used: pre-aspheric Summicron, 1st generation aspheric Summilux, Voigtlander f/1.7 and f/2.5, Russian/Ukrainian Zeiss-copy f/2.8. I have no complaints about the 35/1.4 pre-aspheric. Sure it's ever so slightly soft and has bad coma wide open but who cares? At f/1.4 I don't expect f/5.6 performance. By f/5.6 the Summilux is as good as the Summicron for any practical purpose -- and the Summicron is no good at all at f/1.4...

Cheers,

Roger
 
Agree with Roger's comments on lens character - though I'm sure my first example was a touch better than the current one I use. Just wish those big hood lugs didn't interfere with the aperture ring lugs so much!
 
As for the pre-ASPH having the "old look".. the 60's was a long time ago, I didn't pay big bucks for Leica for flare.. really, if you want artistic looks, buy a holga or lomo, and any of numerous lenses designed before computers and hence inherently faulty in some respects.

You cant buy old Leica lenses and pretend your getting the same performance as the asph models due to the name on the lens, Leica is not immune to progress.

Daniel.
 
This sounds very narrow minded to me Snaggs.
There IS a difference in look between older & newer lenses, you can't deny that.
So it all comes down to taste ......... the latest is not always the greatest for all circumstances! THat holds for lot of things in life ....... lenses included.


Han
 
Last edited:
I contemplated switching my order to the M3 with a 50mm Cron or Lux, but I'm gonna ride with the horse I bought. At least for awhile...

I bought it for available light, wide open indoor, light weight, minimalist, artsy fartsy, wider angle shooting than what I get from my Nikon, OM1, Yashica 50mm.

I thought for $1000 the 35mm Summilux was/is a lot of money. However it would be more akin to my style of shooting than my other choice for the camera, the 50mm ...
 
Snaggs

For me everything is a trade off. That is why I keep my old pre asph 35 lux because it is small, inexpensive compared to the asp lux so I live with the flare. There are some old pre computer designs that have not been significantly improved by being re computed using a PC. Nobody did say that the asph is not technically a better lens, it had better be at the price they want for one. Your reasons for getting rid of the old pre asph are just as valid as the reasons for some of us to keep using them.

Bob
 
Nikon Bob -- absolutely. And I know optical designers at Zeiss who use a mix of old and new lenses for different effects.

Cheers,

Roger
 
nikon_junkie

Be sure and let us know how you make out with that pre asph 35 Lux.

Bob
 
snaggs said:
if you want artistic looks, buy a holga or lomo, and any of numerous lenses designed before computers and hence inherently faulty in some respects.

You cant buy old Leica lenses and pretend your getting the same performance as the asph models due to the name on the lens, Leica is not immune to progress.

Daniel.
Click to expand...

I don't pretend I'm getting the same performance as the new models would offer. Neither do I pretend that I like the results of the old models better.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top Bottom