I know that the new asp M lenses is better than the pre-asp lenses in term of sharpness. I would like to know if there is any difference in the tonal characteristics between the pre-asp lenses and the asp lenses in black and white photography? And which would you prefer specifically for B&W photography? Thanks Edward Yu

-- Edward Yu (fallot@ms2.hinet.net), April 19, 2002

Answers

I am asking the same question too in color slide. As I was shooting with a 35mm/f2 asph along side with a friend with the pre-asph 35/f2. We use the same film, same lab, the subject was a colorful folk event. I had better details and clearty,but his color saturation is better. Another incident was shooting side by side with the old Summaron 35mm/f3.5. Clearity and sharpness,the asph is much better. but it lacks the Leica Look, it is hard to describe in words, I just called it "the meat". The image is more pleasent, the color is bit softer but beautifully rendered. I feel that the image from the asph version is more towards the Nikon line. Now I am doing a shoot out with both lenses on the same body and try to find out more.

-- chi chiung (chic@intergate.bc.ca), April 19, 2002.

Chi, I agree the new Asph does seem to have less 'meat' but has amazing clarity. I have the Asph 35mm and went from an old style 35mm 'lux. That had great colour rendition and a wonderful 'roundness', but awful flare. I used a pre Asph 'cron for a few weeks, and thought the Asperical version must be 'better', so got that. But 'better' is subjective, and I'm not sure the ultimate sharpness and lack of distortion make up for the slightly muted colour depth (its difficult to explain it) and the 'round and full' quality of the previous lens.

-- Steve Barnett (barnet@globalnet.co.uk), April 19, 2002.

I've noticed this also.

The APO or ASPH lenses I've tried (21/24/90) all make the highlights a little too hot compared with the lenses one generation back. Some folks have used the word 'clinical' when discussing these lenses, and I think they're referencing the same phenomenon. And yes these were B&W images for the most part (Pan F).

Example - photographing a person with a bright highlight on the forehead, the APO/ASPHs tend to blow out that highlight to undifferentiated white just a little faster than the previous lenses.

In addition, the newer lenses have a very slight magenta shift in color compared to the previous - which gives them that 'Nikon/Zeiss' look. The 1975-1990 lenses (on average) tend to run faintly yellow/green/cyan by comparison, while the pre-1970 lenses are either slightly cooler (blue) or noticeably yellow/orange if the balsam cement between elements (or something) has started to age (something I've seen in both DR 50 'crons and the one 1960 Elmarit 90 I've tried).

The changes in the newer lenses seem to reflect modern concepts in lens and 'image' design - MTF is more important than resolution per se, so bump up the contrast to improve apparent sharpness - as well, no doubt, as improving sharpness itself esp. at wide apertures and near the corners.

This comes, IMHO, from the fact that color negative film is now driving the market (at least until digital kills it). CN film is low-contrast and its dye clouds put a limit on raw resolution. High-MTF, high- contrast lenses will produce images with more 'pop' and more APPARENT sharpness on CN. The older lenses' "low contrast" resolution tends to get lost in the dye clouds and not look as impressive.

An imperfect analogy - it's something like the precise clinical sound of a CD recording compared to the richer but slightly more blurred sound of a vinyl/audio tube recording.

I prefer the look from the lenses 1 step back, for both B&W and color slde work. But that's just taste.

-- Andy Piper (apidens@denver.infi.net), April 19, 2002.

I've owned the 35mm pre asph 4th and really liked its rendition/bokeh at wide open or close in b+w...less so stopped down.Less so in color prints as it is cooler rather than warm in rendition.I like the 35mm1.4 asph for color more than B+W as it is warmer but it is so sharp in b+W that your eyeballs hurt.I am getting used to this but is this degree of sharpness really necessary with the sacrifice of roundess,bokeh,and rendition?We are all learning here.This opinion is from a guy that loves the rendition of the noctilux, so take it from there.

-- Emile de Leon (knightpeople@msn.com), April 19, 2002.