sepiareverb
genius and moron
Which Summilux did I use?
Some explanation of your vote could be fun.
Some explanation of your vote could be fun.
Meleica
Well-known
Given its lack of crispness, I'd say pre-asph....
Dan
Dan
Avotius
Some guy
I almost want to say that too but the higher contrast of the image makes me want to say ASPH....yeah I will say ASPH.
helen.HH
To Light & Love ...
I'll say pre asph 
cause its NOT crisp enough for ASPH...
cause its NOT crisp enough for ASPH...
Last edited:
mgd711
Medium Format Baby!!
Far from an expert in these matters but I'd have to go with the pre-Asph for the same reason's already given above.
Damaso
Photojournalist
Not a great photo for this kind of test but methinks it was the pre-asph since it seems less crisp.
jja
Well-known
Even the asph. can produce less than crisp images (I know about this!), so that is not necessarily a give away. Contrast can also be added in development or PP, right? Based on what seems edge-to-edge evenness in the level of sharpness, I'll guess Asph.
Albee
Newbie
I'll guess pre asph... because the rendering...
but given the question, I would say ASPH
but given the question, I would say ASPH
Ronald M
Veteran
It is soft as a baby bottom. But considering the straight lines appear straight, that leaves the original 1959 version or an ASPH. Pre ASPH is out.
You will not separate these on a monitor anyway so all guesses are just that.
You will not separate these on a monitor anyway so all guesses are just that.
J J Kapsberger
Well-known
You've all been fooled. I happen to know that this was taken with the post-Asph Summilux.
ferider
Veteran
Rob-F
Likes Leicas
OK I'll guess it is the very first Summilux: the one in chrome, with the very pretty crosshatched grip section at the base. It's the soft look, just like everyone else said.
MikeL
Go Fish
Same here. Less funk than I'd expect that close and at that aperture.
Honus
carpe diem
I'll say a mis-focused asph with the contrast punched up in post.
JPSuisse
Well-known
I'm guessing ASPH, because there is little vignetting and the distrortion seems rather low.
JP
JP
ferider
Veteran
In the end, Bob might tell us it was shot with the 50/2.8 Elmar-M ...
MikeL
Go Fish
In the end, Bob might tell us it was shot with the 50/2.8 Elmar-M ...
I was thinking Summar......
maddoc
... likes film again.
Judging from the corner sharpness and no visible distortion, I would say the ASPH. On the other hand, since this can be easily corrected in PS .... so my vote goes for the pre-ASPH with a little tweaked contrast.
thomasw_
Well-known
I vote ASPH.
sepiareverb
genius and moron
It's the Summilux ASPH at 1.4
The ends of the gates are all different distances from the film plane, thus the many OOF ends. But the ASPH allows for an even rendition across the whole image- so the two ends seen at the bottom are crisp, as is the one along the right side nearer the top. For all the times one hears how clinical the ASPH is the above image surely puts this to rest for me.
Here's one that really drove home why I prefer the ASPH when in town:
The ASPH would have given me detail in the curtain out to the corners, the pre-ASPH could not. And here no real wacky bokeh to enjoy.
The ends of the gates are all different distances from the film plane, thus the many OOF ends. But the ASPH allows for an even rendition across the whole image- so the two ends seen at the bottom are crisp, as is the one along the right side nearer the top. For all the times one hears how clinical the ASPH is the above image surely puts this to rest for me.
Here's one that really drove home why I prefer the ASPH when in town:
The ASPH would have given me detail in the curtain out to the corners, the pre-ASPH could not. And here no real wacky bokeh to enjoy.
Last edited: