The pre-aspherical 35mm lux - is it a very good lens or a dog? I enjoy shooting wide open in low light and I like the size; but is the summilux up to it at f1.4? How does it compare to the pre-aspherical cron at other apertures? I know the aspherical is better, but at some price.

Any bad things to look for and a price guide?

Thanks,

-- Robert Clark (robertclark@vsnl.net), May 08, 2002

Answers

Robert, the 35 Pre-ASPH Lux is definitely soft wide open. If shooting wide open is your goal, you need the ASPH. The 35 Summicron is excellent wide open, like any Summicron. But, of course, it doesn't open to f/1.4!

But the 35 Pre-Lux becomes a different animal stopped down. I can't give an aperture-by-aperture comparison, but at middle apertures, say 2.8, 4, 5.6, it lacks for nothing.

-- Bob Fleischman (RFXMAIL@prodigy.net), May 08, 2002.

Hi.. I own these fabulous lenses. I have some photos I took with them at

http://www.leica-gallery.net/gregchoong/folder-2419.html

The 35mm 'lux ASPH lens won me a photo contest in Leica M User Group recently and I love this lens wide open at f/1.4.

Greg

-- Greg (greg_choong@yahoo.com), May 08, 2002.

Put simply, there is no other 35mm lens on the planet that is as sharp as the Summilux 35 Asph!

The Nikon AF 28mm f/1.4 and Canon 35mm f/1.4 and Zeiss 35/1.4 are close. The Nikon AIS 35mm f/1.4 is soft wide open but get really good by f/2.8.

But like Greg said, the 35 Lux Apsh wins competitions, well it did for me too. But seriously, as long as you have the right technique and skill there is no limitation using the Asph.

But if price is an issue, I'd prefer the 4th generation cron instead of the Pre Summilux, even though i like the f/1.4.

-- Kristian (leicashot@hotmail.com), May 08, 2002.

Robert, pre-ASPH 'lux suffers (would I call it this way since many love the coma effect) the 'softness' wide open. You need to control the position of your subject carefully. This photo taken wide open demonstrates the effect. Many regarded kit as a plus rather than a flaw? Other than f/1.4, you can hardly tell the difference between the lenses(you can if you look real hard) stopping down. Hope it helps.

Greg

-- Greg (greg_choong@yahoo.com), May 08, 2002.

Is the pre-ASPH 35/1.4 "up to it." I suppose it depends on what you are shooting. But this question always drives me nuts because the answer always seems to be the "Summicron pre-ASPH 35/2.0 is so MUCH better." Well yeah of course, it is f2.0. If you shoot the f1.4 lens at f2.0 you have the same result. What is always overlooked here is that the Summicron 35/2.0 4th version is the SAME formula as the 1961 Summilux. So it took the Summicron 35/2.0 about 30 years to catch up to the Summilux. Anyway, for me the small size of the pre-ASPH 35/1.4, the Leica "glow", plus shooting that lens at f1.4 with very good results means for me I have no plans on "upgrading" to the 35/1.4 ASPH.

-- Steve LeHuray (steve@icommag.com), May 09, 2002.

Thanks for sticking to the main point of my question Steve. Perhaps I should have been a little clearer in asking for some objective evaluation of the PRE- Aspheric 35mm lux. I have read Erwin P's comparison of the other three 35's and have no idea how the Pre-A lux fits in to this. Is it close, or is there an appreciable drop in quality. I have read somewhere that people always found them a little disappointing, but I find all this too vague.I don't expect or want MTF tests, just some intelligent and objective comparison.

Interesting to see the incredible abberation and coma in the photo as well - very useful.

I am sure the aspherics are better, they ought to be at the price and I appreciate that people are very happy with them, but the fact that they 'blow everything else away'does'nt help me to decide whether the pre-a lux would do for me or not.

Is it true that the lux and the cron have the same optical formula?

-- Robert Clark (robertclark@vsnl.net), May 09, 2002.

I own a pre-ASPH Lux and my only complaint (frequently overlooked) is the one-meter minimum focus. The chron and ASPH Lux minimum focus is .7 meter. It's a consideration if you like to work at close distances. John Fulton Fort Worth

-- John R. Fulton Jr. (JRFjr@compuserve.com), May 09, 2002.

i have a black 35mm sumilux asph for sale. it is in like new condition, hardly ever used it. i want $1500 for it. anyone interested?

-- stefan randlkofer (geesbert@yahoo.com), May 09, 2002.

Greg: great examples! They show the lens's flaws, but also that the flaws aren't alway critical to the overall picture quality, in the right hands.

Robert: See Greg's examples.

Steve: I'm not sure the pre-ASPH 'cron v.4 is precisely the same formula as the pre-ASPH 'lux. They both are 6-element double-gausses with a 7th element added in the middle to correct curvature of field - but then so is the Zeiss 35 Planar for the G2. Unless they also share the same glass types and the exact same curvatures and thicknesses, they are very similar, but not the same, design.

BUT, some users say the pre-ASPH 'lux is essentially a pre-ASPH 'cron (in terms of performance) with an 'emergency-use-only" extra aperture.

I call it a Beagle - a dog with some very loveable qualities. 8^)

Prices seem to run about the same as a pre-ASPH 'cron - $650-$900 depending on cosmetics.

-- Andy Piper (apidens@denver.infi.net), May 09, 2002.

Andy--Pretty sure I read that in Erwin's book and also in the Leica Lens Guide.In any case it is not the dud at f1.4 that many people make it out to be. In real world photography I find it to be the equal, at f2.8, of the 28/2.0 ASPH. And I know two top Leica photographers, Ted Grant and Tina Manley, who swear by it and use it regularily. Unfortunately there are too many people who have to justify their latest expenditures$$$ by claiming that the new 'whatever' is 'soooo' much better, when in fact the improvement is minor. The old 35/1.4 is NOT a perfect lens in ALL circumstances, but, I have many 8x10's shot at f1.4 that says it is not as bad as current wisdom by some say it is.Most of those people have never even used the lens.

-- Steve LeHuray (steve@icommag.com), May 09, 2002.

Thanks for some very useful replies.

-- Robert Clark (robertclark@vsnl.net), May 09, 2002.

Hi Robert,

I bought my first M6 mainly to use it with that lens. After a period where I was realy impressed by its possibilities, I get more and more disapointed by its flare (even at medium aperture). Also, I found the 1m minimum focussing distance too limiting. After a bit more than a year I sold it for the just-released Summicron Asph. I could not afford the new Summilux ASPH second edition and, anyway, I thought it was a bit too big for me (maybe a mistake ?). In a way, I miss the very small size of the old 35mm Summilux combined with the f:1.4 apperture, but now I have no fear of shooting in difficult lighting conditions and I have very few bad surprises when the slides or the negatives come back from the lab. Regards.

-- Alain Maestrini (alain.maestrini@att.net), May 10, 2002.