Lloyd
Active member
I have (and LOVE) a 35 Summicron version IV; the so-called "Bokeh King". It certainly produces a lovely bokeh, but then so do a number of other lenses I own (e.g., my 50 Summicron, my Nocti, my CV 50/1.5 Nokton, my 28 'Cron, just to name a few, as do as a number of Nikon lenses I use regularly).
So, for the sake of a closer comparison, I shot the 35 'cron, pre ASPH, v.IV against the 35 'cron ASPH. Nothing special about the shots, but the conditions were the same: Tripod mounted M8; self-timer; both have a Leica UV/IR filter attached. Both shot wide open. (I should note that the 35 ASPH lens is not coded, and it shows.)
There are, to my eyes at least, some clear differences... and more than just the bokeh. The ASPH lens seems to control flare better, as there are ghost spots on the lower portion of the shot with the pre-ASPH, but none with the newer lens. Also, there is a slight difference in perspective; the pre-ASPH being just a bit wider. (This difference may be accounted for by the fact that the ASPH lens is about .5cm longer. It also weighs 120 grams more than the weight of the pre-ASPH.)
Here are the resulting images:
35 Cron pre-ASPH version IV:
35 Cron ASPH:
Here, for comparison, are a couple of crops from the upper left corner at 100%.
35 'cron ASPH:
35 'cron pre-ASPH v.IV:
(I noted a bit more noise in the ASPH shot, which may result from the vignetting from the uncoded lens.)
And a couple of crops from the upper right corner at 100%.
35 'cron ASPH:
35 'cron pre-ASPH v.IV:
I know it's all a matter of taste, and as I said, I love me pre-ASPH 35 'cron, but here there is a decided difference. The ASPH looks to be smoother; less busy looking. Both work, just different. Which is the "Bokeh King"? Your call.
So, for the sake of a closer comparison, I shot the 35 'cron, pre ASPH, v.IV against the 35 'cron ASPH. Nothing special about the shots, but the conditions were the same: Tripod mounted M8; self-timer; both have a Leica UV/IR filter attached. Both shot wide open. (I should note that the 35 ASPH lens is not coded, and it shows.)
There are, to my eyes at least, some clear differences... and more than just the bokeh. The ASPH lens seems to control flare better, as there are ghost spots on the lower portion of the shot with the pre-ASPH, but none with the newer lens. Also, there is a slight difference in perspective; the pre-ASPH being just a bit wider. (This difference may be accounted for by the fact that the ASPH lens is about .5cm longer. It also weighs 120 grams more than the weight of the pre-ASPH.)
Here are the resulting images:
35 Cron pre-ASPH version IV:
35 Cron ASPH:
Here, for comparison, are a couple of crops from the upper left corner at 100%.
35 'cron ASPH:
35 'cron pre-ASPH v.IV:
(I noted a bit more noise in the ASPH shot, which may result from the vignetting from the uncoded lens.)
And a couple of crops from the upper right corner at 100%.
35 'cron ASPH:
35 'cron pre-ASPH v.IV:
I know it's all a matter of taste, and as I said, I love me pre-ASPH 35 'cron, but here there is a decided difference. The ASPH looks to be smoother; less busy looking. Both work, just different. Which is the "Bokeh King"? Your call.