35mm-m,summicron v4, asph, summilux..which one?

[michael_bialecki]

Hello everybody, sorry if this issue has been discussed before, but I am looking for a 35mm lens for my

m6ttl, and I have heard so much praise for the summicron v4, and after seeing some recent postings, I

would like to ask those that have used the 35mm summicron v4, 35mm summicron asph, and 35mm

summilux (not asph)...Which one do you guys prefer, and why.. I am curious to hear what you guys have

to say about these lenses and the differences that they have..Perhaps even see some photos.. I located a

35mm summicron v4 (made in Germany) at a shop close to my house , it is in mint condition, just like the

one Jeff is selling now, and it is about the same price....I am thinking about picking it up, but I would like

to hear what experienced users have to say...how is the bokeh, sharpness on the summilux (not asph)

compared to the v4, and the summicon asph....Here is a photo that was taken with my 28mm elmarit v3 in

Pakistan in a MSF tent after the earthquake, it was shot at 2.8....Thanks for your replies, and once again,

sorry if this issue has been discussed before...Michael Bialecki<div></div>

[jerry_lehrer]

Michael,-- I have used them all. No question for me that the v4 Summicron is far and away superior, not to mention smaller and lighter. The Summilux is definately softer at large openings.

[steve_barrett]

Nice photo, Michael.

[ilan_g]

I can't offer comparisons, but I own the 35 Summicron ASPH and I think it's a good lens (although not perfect: I don't like the bokeh in the corners...).<p>

As for samples, most of the series on my website were shot with this lens only, for example

<a href="http://www.murblanc.org/eglise/">http://www.murblanc.org/eglise/</a> as well as "danse", "la ruée vers l'art", "(dans) la rue" and "lieux de passage" (the other series have shots from other (non leica) lenses in them).

[paul_chan4]

Michael, my concern is not being able to be in physical attendance at such places to capture those emotion-evoking shots and help out the unfortunate people. Many of us have the 35mm in whatever version but never the occasion to make these images. So go out and use whatever gear you have with a helping hand in such dire circumstances and leave aside the bokeh, tonality and gradation issues at the back of your mind. For a change the personal experience of being there would surely bring an urgent sense of humility in all of us.

[paul_neuthaler]

Nice shot, Michael. Stick with the 28 & save your money!

[35mmdelux]

great foto Michael. I own all three, and IMO all are great. Some say the 35mm Lux pre-asph is soft and prone to flare. I haven't experienced this yet, but there it is. What I like about the 35mm Lux Asph is the accessibility of the aperture wheel. Sure the lens is a bit larger than the 35mm V4 but with the aperture wheel out in the open I can move it much faster and makes a big difference to me. (Don't forget the 35mm Cron Asph.) The Lux Asph is supposedly well corrected for flaring and one has the extra stop in reserve. Thro in some 400 iso film and there is almost no place one can't go. Best of luck and keep up the good work - Paul

[vivek iyer]

What Paul said! Why do you need any more lenses, Michael?!

[piotr_panne]

Stick with the lightest weight mikey; you\'ll really appreciate it for next month\'s mating season of the Three Legged Jageryak on the High Plains of Boonazoonapeckasmakastan.

[paul_neuthaler]

Vivek, I always admire your perception & intelligence!

[lutz]

Very good available light portrait-within-a-context shot. What others have been asking, seriously reproposed: What are you looking for in a 35 that the 28 doesn't give you? Which are your other lenses? Have a website? Cheers.

[Rob F.]

Michael: Actually the most versatile & best all-round is the one you left out: the 35 Summilux ASPH. The pre-ASPH Lux is well-built, tiny, and compact. However the performance wide-open is very low in contrast, making the picture look unsharp, as well as making the colors look washed out. Yes, it is flare-prone. It's because the large front element picks up more stray light than the smaller-diameter Summicron does. Stopped down, it is a fine lens. But it is no better than the 35 version IV. The optical formulas for the two are rather similar, in fact. I would get it over the Summilux pre-ASPH. The 35mm Summilux ASPH is the one that has it all, with no weaknesses. It's my go-everywhere do-everything 35.

 

I own the three lenses I just discussed, so I'm writing from experience, not repeating what others say.

 

I have tried out the Summicron ASPH. A fine lens, but at f/4 and smaller I couldn't tell the difference between it and my Version I, or Pre-ASPH Summilux. That was with Velvia 50, and the camera on a tripod. At wider apertures I'd have seen the difference, but I only had the lens for the afternoon.

 

If you only need f/2, go for the version IV. It's just as compact as the pre-ASPH Lux. If you need f/1.4, go for the ASPH Lux.

[uk]

Yes Michael.

 

If you have another lens declare it now ! Don't sneak up on us in a weeks time and ask for

our advice an a 21mm, or a 75mm. Let's have all your problems at once. :-)

 

Any 35mm will suffice, but the more money, the more street cred you get.

[graham_morriss2]

Nice photograph Michael.

[john_graham3]

I have trouble wrapping my mind around the concept that a guy who makes images like that in exotic places would need to solicit the opinion of a bunch of mostly amateurs some of whom it seems like have more lenses than photos. FWIW I have the so-called pre-ASPH, aka v4. I got it for $700 2 yrs ago when a mint ASPH version was in the $1300 range. Lately the ASPH seems to be in the $1500 range but my version is going for $1100 or so (looking at KEH and ebay). Today I think I would stretch and get the ASPH. But I'd still never come close to capturing an image like that.

[wai_leong_lee]

A waste of time asking such a question. Every lens will have its supporters. You'll get a multitude of opinions. How will you even make a decision?

 

You know the score already. One is the bokeh king and very tiny. The other is the best 35/2 ever made but no bokeh king. The third has 1.4 but a little soft. Inevitably you can't have everything, and you have to decide what's best for you: smooth bokeh, biting sharpness or one more stop.

 

Who can answer that except you?

[35mmdelux]

what Gary Rowlands said.

[james_cooke]

"You'll get a multitude of opinions. How will you even make a decision?"

 

Ah but the truth of the matter is that no matter what your decision they are all good lenses. Not a dud amongst them. So you cant go wrong really.

[uk]

Michael,

 

as an example, I've recently started shooting weddings and English churches are

notoriously dim, flash is not allowed and the subjects are not still. Consequently, I found

myself too often shooting handheld at 1/8th second and suffering anxiety knowing that

the shot is wasted and shooting more to try and recover. The solution for me is to use

faster film and I've exchanged a Summicron Asph for a Summilux. Thereby gaining two

stops and maybe a unusual bokeh.

 

I presume that having put yourself on the front line you certainly don't want to be losing

shots, but ease of focus and light weight may your critical factors. From what you've

shown, your future images will be great. What are your critical features ?

 

Seen the work of Simon www.simon-larbalestier.co.uk ?

[g-man1]

I like the summicron asph. In your work with MSF (congratulations on your Nobel Peace Prize), I think you'd like lots of depth of field (hence less bokeh anyways) and people would be more interested in looking at the subject, rather than the oof acreas. The summciron asph would give you good contrast and resolution.<div></div>

[stephen_jones4]

If you take photographs with people in the foreground, before the point of focus, I've found that their faces are adversely affected by the weird bokeh on the 35summicron asph (at least on my one). I have managed to spoil a few pictures like this. Maybe that doesn't matter too much, but all things being equal, I'd choose the pre-asph if I had my time again.

[rgh]

One thing nice about your choice of Leica or non-Leica lenses for your camera is that they

all have a quality and 'look'. You really can't go wrong, but you can pick one that

compliments your style and gives you something different than your other lenses.

 

Some question you may ask yourself to decide:

 

What do you need a 35mm for; angle of view, speed, compact all-around lens, optical

correction, its look... ?

 

Would a very compact lens be an advantage?

 

Does 'the best' modern performance matter, or are you happy with a 'classic' look?

 

Will you be using the lens at its maximum aperture a great majority of the time or more in

the f4-f8 range?

 

Does filter size matter?

 

Do you need a lens that focuses in the .7- 1 meter range? - a small area but can make the

difference depending on you, and the older Summilux close focuses to about 1 meter

 

Will you be using it mostly with B&W or color film ( and if color what type, negative of

positive )?

 

And I guess the most important question [again in a different way]- will any of these

excellent lenses have more of an impact in your photography than the others?

 

Best,

[vincenzo_maielli]

Hi, Michael. Your picture it's simply wonderful. I vote for last Summicron Asph 35 mm f/ 2, probably the best 35 mm ever made.

ciao

[simon larbalestier]

Micheal

great shot very moving i'd second the 35/1.4 pre ASPH and i shoot quite often at 1.4

certainly never more than F4 and i like the look it gives in B/W.<div></div>