The GetDPI Photography Forum

Great to see you here. Join our insightful photographic forum today and start tapping into a huge wealth of photographic knowledge. Completing our simple registration process will allow you to gain access to exclusive content, add your own topics and posts, share your work and connect with other members through your own private inbox! And don’t forget to say hi!

The Three 35 mm f/1.4 Summilux Asph lenses (AA, FLE, Asph)...

segedi

Member
Ashwin - if you ever find yourself in Calgary, I have a ZM Biogon f/2, Summarit and MS Optical STP you can test.
 

John Black

Active member
Thanks Ashwin. The AA is pretty much up there with mermaids and unicorns, so this three-way comparison is a quite unique occurrence!

In terms of pure lens testing, black & white hides too many sins such as color fringing in the bokeh and chromatic aberration at the edges / wide apertures. I think B&W is a far more forgiving medium (for testing purposes).

If you ever decide to test the 35's again, another interesting comparison would be their T-stop. I would expect the FLE to perform the best since it's the newest. Some flare testing could also be interesting. I've noticed some internal reflections with my FLE. I don't have the pre FLE anymore, so I haven't been able to see if it would have done better or not.
 

seakayaker

Active member
By the way, if anyone wishes to let me borrow some other 35's, I'd love to do some sort of 35 mm lens blowout test on the M9 and MM down the road, in various lightings and backgrounds...could be fun!
Ashwin, I have Ernst Leitz GmbH Wetzlar ~ Summaron 3.5cm f3.5 (1953) that I can let borrow for the lens blowout test.

. . . . . late afternoon shot from this past August.



of course this was with the M6TTL and Ilford Pan-F Plus 50.


I think it would look quite nice on the MM!
 

Hosermage

Active member
a bit late, but as I was looking, I was hoping #2 was not the AA, because I don't like any onion rings. As for other 35's, I would love to see the Voigtlander 35 f/1.2 added to the mix because I really liked its rendering while I had it, but never did got a chance to use it on the M9.
 

iiiNelson

Well-known member
Ihave a 35/1.2 Nokton II and a 35 Summicron ASPH... They're outta the country with me right now but perhaps when I'm back we can arrange something.
 

D&A

Well-known member
Very interesting - I have to say that I found the FLE rendering of highlights surprising vs the ASPH which seemed less 'digital' or distorted. Just goes to show what works best for certain types of situations and why people end up with multiple 35's & 50's.
Unfortunately I wasn't able to get back to this thread again in time to post my guesses before Ashwin reveled the order. One aspect that didn't surprise me was the pleasing bokeh of pic #2 (the ASPH) vs. the FLE. Having compared the two extensively (in color) when the FLE was first released, it was evident the two lenses performed quite differently, each having characteristics that might appeal to one group or another. Personally I found the ASPH to have smoother more desirable bokeh and a lovely more gentle rendering albeit with more field curvature, giving rise to soft edges and corners unless stopped down. It's also not quite as sharp as the FLE and of course samples have varying degrees of focus shift, often dependent on what f-stop was picked to have the lens optimized to. I personally found f2 or f2.4 to be ideal as a good compromise for optimization when having the ASPH adjusted specifically for focus shift.

I've shot with the original AA for a brief time, primarily on film and a few images with the M8, but unfortunately not at the same time as the ASPH version in order to make a direct comparison between the two. I've often wondered what a good comparison would look like, AA vs. the ASPH on a M9.

I agree with those that suggested that a comparison of all three shot in color would yield many additional differences, both strengths and weaknesses and as I mentioned in my original post in this thread, a look at the full rez MM file would delineate other marked differences between all three lenses.

The VC 35mm f1.2 II like many other 35mm would be interesting to throw into the mix. The VC 35mm f1.2 in my opinion has many of the desirable characteristics found in the 35mm f1.4 ASPH, especially when shot at f1.4 & f2. Thanks again Ashwin!

Dave (D&A)
 
Last edited:
V

Vivek

Guest
I think you should have told Ed to stand still, so the lighting on the second shot was the same on the other two.
Vivek- I learned something about Onion Rings I was not previously aware of.
. . . . and they all look fine to me!

Time For Bed
Thanks, Jono. I agree that because of the size they do not distract. Upclose, under different lights, it could be a different story.

BTW, (AFAIK) the 35/1.4 FLE and the 35/1.4 ASPH use a molded aspherical element (not ground out, which may be the case in AA) which makes the process less expensive.
 
Thanks for this Ashwin, and I look forward to more testing. I liked #2 the best (though as Jono pointed out the lighting gives it some advantage). I was pleased it was the pre-FLE as this is one of my favorite lenses and is my most used. (My only other 35 is the version IV summicron).Focus shift on my copy is so minimal that I've never had it diminish any image after 7 years of regular use. It has enough pop wide open and has a smoothness in transitions and in bokeh that I find very appealing. best....Peter
 

ramosa

Member
cool, ashwin. i was one who butchered the test, perhaps because i was doing it with a child on my lap (ha). in retrospect, i guess i would have thought the asph and AA would be more similar, but (to my eye) the FLE and asph seem more similar (at least in OOF).
 

cam

Active member
Ashwin,

net time i'm in the states (late january/february), i'll bring you my 35 Summilux pre-asph to add to the mix.

i also have an old v.1 8-element Cron, but i gather you want to keep this all in the (Lux) family.

(still sighing about the AA which has been on my lust list forever)
 

ashwinrao1

Active member
Thanks, Cam. It'd be great to meet you. I am waiting on a 8 element 'cron (very much excited to use that lens on the M monochrom). It'd be fantastic to put up the Lux lenses against each other and to test out the 'crons on the MM and M9 or M to see how these lenses render and resolve.....The AA is a very cool lens. I wish I had one, but feel extravagent for having the 2 others (FLE, ASPH). The AA is truly more of a collector but has its own look. All the asph lenses seem to be of higher contrast (both micro and macro)...
 

ashwinrao1

Active member
Gosh, me too. It's onther lens I have never tried on the MM. So far, my fav 50 on the MM has been the 50 mm Rigid Summicron (V2), followed closely by the C-Sonnar 50 for more character ;)....

I did not like the 50 lux pre-asph (v2, E43), as I couldn't reliably acheive focus, and for some reason, bokeh looked a bit wonky to me... The 50 lux v1 is a bit harder to get in nice condition, but I bet it'd be great...
 

cam

Active member
Ashwin, the 8-element Cron is magic on the Monochrom! i think you'll be really very happy :p

interesting about the 50 Luxes... i have a cusp v.2 (old styling, in-between glass supposedly, c.1962) and v.3 (the close-focusing one). i've been away from my lenses so there's a lot of testing for me to do... and, i'm afraid, old habits die hard -- the sun goes down and i pull out my 1975 E58 Nocti (which has the distinction of looking astonishing on any camera i've tried it on, film or digital, crop or full frame).

i'm honestly excited to try the 35 pre-asph, though, as it was one of my favourite lenses on the Epson and the M3 and was a good enough specimen that Steve (from Steve's camera) would have bought it off me if i'd been interested. i didn't feel the love on the M8 or the M9, but i have a feeling it will sing on the Monochrom.

that's the reason the AA was always on my list -- i felt it had the magic feel of the pre-asph with the close focusing (an important issue with tiny tables in europe) of the Asph.

as far as 50's, i will have to pull out my old C-Sonnar... unfortunately, i had it fine-tuned to my Epson and it hasn't played nice with anything else :(

regardless, i'll be in touch. i'm not good at tests like you, but it's always lovely to have someone show the true grit of a lens like you do!
 

JoelM

Well-known member
I have a Summilux circa 1976 you can borrow whenever you want. I'll just ship it up to you.

Cheers,

Joel
 

Maggie O

Active member
Gosh, me too. It's onther lens I have never tried on the MM. So far, my fav 50 on the MM has been the 50 mm Rigid Summicron (V2), followed closely by the C-Sonnar 50 for more character ;)....

I did not like the 50 lux pre-asph (v2, E43), as I couldn't reliably acheive focus, and for some reason, bokeh looked a bit wonky to me... The 50 lux v1 is a bit harder to get in nice condition, but I bet it'd be great...
Well, if you and your MM are anywhere near Lincoln, NE (maybe the Huskers need a new physician?) you're more than welcome to borrow the ol' 'Lux and/or my 1951 Summaron 35/3.5.
 

IWC Doppel

New member
Interseting, I have done the same and owned the aspherical, ASPH and borrowed an FLE from a close friend. I was surprised the order was FLE,ASPH, AA it looked to me AA, ASPH, FLE but only one shot and I have hundreds.

For me the FLE is wonderfully sharp but has a very fast transition from in to out of focus and often (not always) some confusion to the bokeh, a little broken/harsh. Also I found this a little flatter in it's presentation. This was my least favourite.

The ASPH was my second favourite, a superb lens, combining modern sharpness with a stunning bokeh that is soft, classic and very appealing. This lens for me paints in a way I really like.

Then the ASPHERICAL, very interesting and for me amazing. This lens has a depth and weight that is special. The tones for B&W are sublime and colours rich but cool, less 'pink' of modern glass and with slightly warmer classic tones. The bokeh is looser and less tidy than the APSH, but is has movement and interest. the sharpness is every bit as good as the FLE and I simply love it. The Vignetting is quite high. But this lens is everything I look for, it has a magic to the image depth, the in focus has the ability to look like you have stopped time and the bokeh compliments this with some movement and character with a superb transition from in to out of focus.

I ended up keeping the aspherical, I just couldn't sell it. I bought it at a price I knew I could sell on and not lose. But I just couldn't part with it......

If I only had one lens, this would be it. Leica make some special glass, this for me is the pinnacle of 35's.
 

cam

Active member
Then the ASPHERICAL, very interesting and for me amazing. This lens has a depth and weight that is special. The tones for B&W are sublime and colours rich but cool, less 'pink' of modern glass and with slightly warmer classic tones. The bokeh is looser and less tidy than the APSH, but is has movement and interest. the sharpness is every bit as good as the FLE and I simply love it. The Vignetting is quite high. But this lens is everything I look for, it has a magic to the image depth, the in focus has the ability to look like you have stopped time and the bokeh compliments this with some movement and character with a superb transition from in to out of focus.

I ended up keeping the aspherical, I just couldn't sell it. I bought it at a price I knew I could sell on and not lose. But I just couldn't part with it......

If I only had one lens, this would be it. Leica make some special glass, this for me is the pinnacle of 35's.
argh, shush!

i am still beating myself up for not holding out until an AA came up when they were still, cough, affordable... and now i know that i will never get one because the collectors have put them out of my reach :(

the pre-asph Lux, though, used to be my favourite lenses but i started neglecting it when i became obsessed with getting the .7m close-focusing... i'm really looking forward to playing with it again, though, as i have many of the same feelings about it you have about the AA.
 
Top