35mm summilux pre-asph
- Thread starter gazkw
- Start date
artspraken
New Member
I succumbed to an attack of GAS, and ordered a used/mint copy from ebay.
It was a difficult decision choosing between 35 lux pre-asph (coma/flare king) and 35 cron (bokeh king). Both lenses are quite similar stopped down, but main difference lies at f2.0. In the end I chose the former because I prefer the softer classic look. I suppose the problemmatic f1.4 also embodies a certain sense of mystery (and fun). In RFF forums, the 35 lux has the biggest dedicated thread compared to other lenses (lol, maybe coz its one of the oldest lenses)
I also ordered a 12526 "darth vadar" hood to help with flare. Some modding will be needed. I did not get the 12504 hood because I read that it does not help with the flare as well as the 12526.
Share more with you guys when I receive the new gear.
It was a difficult decision choosing between 35 lux pre-asph (coma/flare king) and 35 cron (bokeh king). Both lenses are quite similar stopped down, but main difference lies at f2.0. In the end I chose the former because I prefer the softer classic look. I suppose the problemmatic f1.4 also embodies a certain sense of mystery (and fun). In RFF forums, the 35 lux has the biggest dedicated thread compared to other lenses (lol, maybe coz its one of the oldest lenses)
I also ordered a 12526 "darth vadar" hood to help with flare. Some modding will be needed. I did not get the 12504 hood because I read that it does not help with the flare as well as the 12526.
Share more with you guys when I receive the new gear.
Last edited:
The Dry Box
Senior Member
I atm own a 35 lux. Almost trade it for a cron, but I realize the quirky part of the lens is only at f/1.4 under difficult lights.
My version is at the 28xxxxx mark, and it flares something like this:
I was advised to use the lens between wide and 2.0 and dodge the negs if necessary. If you own a digital body like an epl1 and use zoom preview while while you switch between 1.4 to the next step, the difference is very obvious.
I don't think the original hood helps at all, but it does protect the lens front element a bit, hence I always leave it on as a guard especially at crowded places. Else, I'll take it off. I don't use a filter.
My copy is not as sharp as the other samples I have seen, it's optically inferior to the nokton 35/1.4 I used to own, but this lens has a drawing that I now adore.
Wide open it has a character of it's own. At f2.0 it's a pretty sharp lens and contrast improve slightly. By 2.8 - 5.6, this lens is sharp enough, and contrast improves dramatically.
It's the most interesting lens I have used so far. It's somewhat like a flawed Sonnar, in a good way for some.
My version is at the 28xxxxx mark, and it flares something like this:
I was advised to use the lens between wide and 2.0 and dodge the negs if necessary. If you own a digital body like an epl1 and use zoom preview while while you switch between 1.4 to the next step, the difference is very obvious.
I don't think the original hood helps at all, but it does protect the lens front element a bit, hence I always leave it on as a guard especially at crowded places. Else, I'll take it off. I don't use a filter.
My copy is not as sharp as the other samples I have seen, it's optically inferior to the nokton 35/1.4 I used to own, but this lens has a drawing that I now adore.
Wide open it has a character of it's own. At f2.0 it's a pretty sharp lens and contrast improve slightly. By 2.8 - 5.6, this lens is sharp enough, and contrast improves dramatically.
It's the most interesting lens I have used so far. It's somewhat like a flawed Sonnar, in a good way for some.
Last edited:
artspraken
New Member
I dun think that is flare. It appears to be coma.
Coma is the "glow" effect, that appears to be hazy blur at edges. People who like it call it the "leica glow".
Flare is not the same as coma. Flare is the ray of light can be seen in the picture itself.
Example of flare here:
http://www.rangefinderforum.com/forums/attachment.php?attachmentid=51485&d=1194408647
Coma is the "glow" effect, that appears to be hazy blur at edges. People who like it call it the "leica glow".
Flare is not the same as coma. Flare is the ray of light can be seen in the picture itself.
Example of flare here:
http://www.rangefinderforum.com/forums/attachment.php?attachmentid=51485&d=1194408647
Last edited:
artspraken
New Member
The world authority on Leica (lol), Mr Ken Rockwell has review of F1.4 here
http://www.kenrockwell.com/leica/35mm-f14.htm
Example of flare with this lens. Thats the ray of light appearing in the image.
Example of coma with this lens. Coma is the blur blur "glow"
http://www.kenrockwell.com/leica/35mm-f14.htm
Example of flare with this lens. Thats the ray of light appearing in the image.
Example of coma with this lens. Coma is the blur blur "glow"
Last edited:
picture doesn't look bad... in fact the leica glow is desirable in many circumstances.
artspraken
New Member
I plan to use the 35 lux "leica glow" on a wedding shoot in december.
you can see the "glow", particularly on the bicycle rims here
http://forums.dpreview.com/forums/read.asp?forum=1038&message=34887000
you can see the "glow", particularly on the bicycle rims here
http://forums.dpreview.com/forums/read.asp?forum=1038&message=34887000
Last edited:
hookonclassic
Senior Member
Oh yes...this is a nice Leica lens with "Leica Glow" shot wide open...very compact even with the 12504 hood (S7 filter) on...German made rare...don't think optic difference...still hunting for a chrome one...a minty black anodized version with hood should fetch around 2.4K...
Another lens that shows such glow wide open is the 75mm Summilux...
In fact, light coma at night shot appears in many other lenses beside this lens when you shoot wide open...
http://www.clubsnap.com/forums/showthread.php?t=622759&highlight=hookonclassic
Another lens that shows such glow wide open is the 75mm Summilux...
In fact, light coma at night shot appears in many other lenses beside this lens when you shoot wide open...
http://www.clubsnap.com/forums/showthread.php?t=622759&highlight=hookonclassic
hard to resist the "glow"... its as good as watermarking "this is a leica picture" :thumbsup:
Slighlty Hazy lenses also give that glow
artspraken
New Member
Ya basically i had to choose between this 35 lux pre-asph and bokeh king. On hindsight maybe i should also consider nokton 35mm f1.2
The Dry Box
Senior Member
I stand corrected. =)
I don't think the "glow" is bad, just that it's not for everyone. It should be pleasing with careful lighting in environmental portraits.
I don't think the "glow" is bad, just that it's not for everyone. It should be pleasing with careful lighting in environmental portraits.
artspraken
New Member
That is a good example of unpleasant glow ie coma.
For me, the "glow" works well with B&W pictures.
"Glow" with color works depending on context. For portraits, it can be good since it obscures skin flaws of the model. For other types (eg. landscapes) I am not so sure how "glow" will be good, coz the glow reduces detail in distance objects.
For my friend's wedding in december, I hope the "glow" helps to give a more misty romantic look.
Don't forget there is the flexibility of reducing "glow" by stopping down to F2.0, and by F2.8 there should be no "glow" at all. For me, this flexibility makes the lens a better deal compared to bokeh king, which is roughly same price. That was partly what swung my decision in favour of the lux. Although admittedly, bokeh king fans will argue that at F2.0, bokeh king is alot sharper than the lux. The similarity between this lux and bokeh king happens only at F2.8 where both are equally sharp (at which point bokeh king has an advantage in shutter speed). I admit this is true, if only to give a balanced view. This is probably why bokeh king and this lux are 2 equally viable alternatives for people looking for cheap leica 35mm. Depends what your priorities are.
Nokton 35mm F1.2 is also very interesting alternative. From what I read, it is a sharp at all apertures with little to no glow. That sounds like a good complement to the lux if in future I still cannot save enough $$$ for the ASPH and I need to be sharp wide open.
ps: "bokeh king" means 35mm Summicron version IV
For me, the "glow" works well with B&W pictures.
"Glow" with color works depending on context. For portraits, it can be good since it obscures skin flaws of the model. For other types (eg. landscapes) I am not so sure how "glow" will be good, coz the glow reduces detail in distance objects.
For my friend's wedding in december, I hope the "glow" helps to give a more misty romantic look.
Don't forget there is the flexibility of reducing "glow" by stopping down to F2.0, and by F2.8 there should be no "glow" at all. For me, this flexibility makes the lens a better deal compared to bokeh king, which is roughly same price. That was partly what swung my decision in favour of the lux. Although admittedly, bokeh king fans will argue that at F2.0, bokeh king is alot sharper than the lux. The similarity between this lux and bokeh king happens only at F2.8 where both are equally sharp (at which point bokeh king has an advantage in shutter speed). I admit this is true, if only to give a balanced view. This is probably why bokeh king and this lux are 2 equally viable alternatives for people looking for cheap leica 35mm. Depends what your priorities are.
Nokton 35mm F1.2 is also very interesting alternative. From what I read, it is a sharp at all apertures with little to no glow. That sounds like a good complement to the lux if in future I still cannot save enough $$$ for the ASPH and I need to be sharp wide open.
ps: "bokeh king" means 35mm Summicron version IV
Last edited:
artspraken
New Member
Got some very good samples and discussions on 35 lux pre-asph here.
Seems like the 35 lux very good to take picture of cats....Pity I got no cat (or dog).
http://hklfc.com/forum/?o=topic&act=show&id=39255&page=1
My GAS is feeling unbearable...
Seems like the 35 lux very good to take picture of cats....Pity I got no cat (or dog).
http://hklfc.com/forum/?o=topic&act=show&id=39255&page=1
My GAS is feeling unbearable...
artspraken
New Member
ok. I received the 12526 Hood, so now I gotta figure out a way to mod it to hold an E39 filter in place...
12526 Hood is for Summicron, not Summilux. But coz its square it is suppose to be better for flare prevention than the 12504 Hood.
I am starting to think of using blu tac to hold the filter...
12526 Hood is for Summicron, not Summilux. But coz its square it is suppose to be better for flare prevention than the 12504 Hood.
I am starting to think of using blu tac to hold the filter...
Last edited:
gommy
Senior Member
With the filter, the vignetting may return. You must sit filter as "deep" as possible or just use glass alone from a bigger diameter filter.
artspraken
New Member
I thought I would contribute to show lens performance across the main apertures. Shows (i) the glow at difference apertures; (ii) bokeh; and (iii) vignetting (actually not really much vignetting, my problem was caused by wearing wrong hood, now fixed and you can see results below). The variation in image character reveals this to be quite a sophisticated lens. Need to remember somewhat the different performances across apertures and tailor to your needs.
Glow is strongest at F1.4
No glow from F2.8 onwards
Very sharp lens from F4 onwards
F1.4 Bokeh is creamy and swirly...me like!!! The "glow" is very obvious. Vignetting is negligible.
F2.0 Noticeable reduction in "glow", but you can discern it from the lotus candle. image sharper. The bokeh is still magic. At this aperture, the lux begins to exhibits the characteristics of the Summicron IV "bokeh King"
F2.8 At this aperture, the lux is most similar to Summicron IV "bokeh king" at F2.0, but due to difference in one stop, the bokeh king (F2.0) has faster shutter speed.
F4 Background beginning to emerge. Sharpness grows more incisive.
F5.6 At this aperture, sharpess grows intense and background crystallises on the journey to F8.
Sorry I did not take pics at F8. Its supposed to be sharpest at F8. But heck, I am not really a sharpness fan at F8. sharpness only matters when wide open anyway hehehe
Glow is strongest at F1.4
No glow from F2.8 onwards
Very sharp lens from F4 onwards
F1.4 Bokeh is creamy and swirly...me like!!! The "glow" is very obvious. Vignetting is negligible.
F2.0 Noticeable reduction in "glow", but you can discern it from the lotus candle. image sharper. The bokeh is still magic. At this aperture, the lux begins to exhibits the characteristics of the Summicron IV "bokeh King"
F2.8 At this aperture, the lux is most similar to Summicron IV "bokeh king" at F2.0, but due to difference in one stop, the bokeh king (F2.0) has faster shutter speed.
F4 Background beginning to emerge. Sharpness grows more incisive.
F5.6 At this aperture, sharpess grows intense and background crystallises on the journey to F8.
Sorry I did not take pics at F8. Its supposed to be sharpest at F8. But heck, I am not really a sharpness fan at F8. sharpness only matters when wide open anyway hehehe
Last edited:
artspraken
New Member
From F2.8 onwards, there is zero "glow".
Surprising good for colors
Surprising good for colors
Last edited: