Leica 35mm Summilux-M 1.4 lens

[ken_wayne1]

<p>Forgive my ignorance but I know very little about Leica. I'm a Hasselblad guy. Could someone please explain to me why a 35mm Summilux-M Aspherical f/1.4 recently sold for $9,230 on eBay? The serial number on the front of the lens was 3460689.</p>

<p>I don't understand the differences between the 35mm Aspherical lenses so if someone could help me on this I'd be very grateful. I may have an opportunity to buy one and before I do I need to know how to tell any differences and what makes one more expensive than the others?</p>

<p>Thanks in advance!</p>

[michael_dimarzio]

<p>The "Aspherical" lenses were the first produced and had two hand ground polished aspherical elements. It's reported that Leica lost money on each it sold but made it up on volume.</p>

<p>The next was "ASPH" with a single pressed ASPH element. Less expensive to manufacture, due to focus issues on digital, it;s being replaced by a lens with a floating element.</p>

<p>Due to dimensional differences, the older one will be called the "Fat ASPH", the new lens the "Skinny ASPH".</p>

[ken_wayne1]

<p>thanks Michael. The best way to tell the difference between the more expensive lens and the other is because the older one with two aspherical lenses as "fatter" than the newer one?</p>

<p>Any other traits that separate these two? Do you know the serial number block that the older one supposedly fell into?</p>

<p>thanks!</p>

[leicaglow]

<p>Ken, That s/n makes it the famous "Aspherical" version of the lens with the two hand-polished elements. As mentioned, it supposedly cost more to make than what they sold for. It is claimed they are produce more contrast than any other version, and some think it is the best 35mm f/1.4 ever made, though I think the regular version is pretty good. I think it is the rarity of the lens, and the "legendary" status of the lens. But yeah, I didn't know they were going for that much money. That's crazy. I would think it would be collectors buying the lens for that much money.</p>

[michael_dimarzio]

<p>Ken, sorry that my attempt at humor caused you confusion, the fat and skinny lenses are really the two latest that each contain a single aspherical element.</p>

<p>The first "Aspherical" only about 4000 were made. The filter ring is marked "Aspherical" which since I've never seen one would be the easiest way to identify it. The 2nd version (jokingly referred to by me as a fat ASPH) was superseded by the current (skinny ASPH, joke) that uses floating elements to minimize back focus seen on digital cameras. A (very) little Leica humor there, I know now you didn't get it being a 'Blad guy.</p>

<p>Here is a decent link to look at some of the differences and some theads about them over at the L-Camera Forum. http://www.l-camera-forum.com/leica-wiki.en/index.php/35mm_f/1.4_Aspherical_Summilux-M</p>

<p>Now, if you need a camera to back up your 500, an MP with the ver. 2 35/1.4 ASPH lens is the perfect choice!</p>

[jo_l_cahane]

<p>In fact the aspherical lens (the first one) is thinner that the later ones.<br>

Probably also a little better design and it is the one i use regularly (i bought it new in its time)</p>

[ken_wayne1]

<p>Thanks for the insights you guys. So let me be sure I can understand this correctly. The biggest difference to the eye for knowing which one is which is that the most valuable one will have the word "ASPHERICAL" written out completely on the front ring.....correct? </p>

<p>Also, if I have one with serial number 3911xxx it would make it which version and how much value difference?</p>

[jo_l_cahane]

<p>Yes, aspherical is written only on the first ones.<br>

Mine is 3461xxx<br>

I also own the second iteration and its serial is closer to the number you give, 3921xxx<br>

The second one is a few millimeters taller and much less expensive.</p>

[Troll]

<p>Note that the significant advantage of these lenses is when used wide-open, or nearly so. Stopped down a little there's virtually nothing to choose between them and much older (coated) designs. </p>

[Troll]

<p>Note that the significant advantage of these lenses is when used wide-open, or nearly so. Stopped down a little there's virtually nothing to choose between them and much older (coated) designs. </p>