M9 with 35 Cron or 35 Cron ASPH?

ChristianD

Member
Local time
3:45 PM
Joined
Nov 12, 2006
Messages
29
I was considering picking up a 35 summicon for my M9 and have an offer from someone with a used 35mm Cron ASPH for the same price as someone else that's selling a 35mm v4 (pre-asph) Cron.

If you were to pair one with your M9, which would it be and why?
 
test charts would say ASPH, and from my personal preference ASPH as well.
Bokeh quality of the ASPH is better than the v4 in my opinion, by a tiny bit where it doesn't matter at all. If you have a choice of the same price go for the ASPH, higher resale value as well.
 
I'd choose the ASPH version because I think the newer lens pairs better overall with the digital Leicas. I own both 35's and after using them for a year, did a sampling of all my images shot with them. In nearly every case, I preferred the look of shots taken with ASPH on the M8. Its enhanced macro and micro contrast are well matched with the sensor. It was also noticeable in prints that I'd made from images shot with both.
 
I've never owned a 35/2 pre-ASPH. Came back to the ASPH with the M9 since the distortion is so easily corrected over film.

L2001057.jpg
 
I might be in the absolute minority, but the 35 asph was the only leica lens I didn't like,
sold mine 2 weeks after buying it new. lacking character, too clinical dslr look to me. neither was is esp. sharp wideopen.
v4 is the real king of 35's imo.
 
I might be in the absolute minority, but the 35 asph was the only leica lens I didn't like,
sold mine 2 weeks after buying it new. lacking character, too clinical dslr look to me. neither was is esp. sharp wideopen.
v4 is the real king of 35's imo.

I think you're right. You are in the absolute minority. :D

Either lens will give you excellent image quality assuming both are in good condition. Check the physical condition of both lenses carefully - check for play in the focus and aperture rings, and smooth focus travel. Check for haze and coating damage too. The V4 is legendary, but of course is older than the ASPH, so mmay exhibit more wear.

I have the ASPH and I'm perfectly happy with it, but I've never shot with the V4. I've stopped obsessing over image characteristics. I suspect that >95% of the people who might view your images (even here) could not tell the difference between two similar photos made with these two lenses.

On the M9, even without 6-bit coding on the lens, you can create a user profile setting for each different lens (up to four profiles) that manually sets the lens ID for the image EXIF. That takes care of lens corrections (which are usually pretty minor adjustments anyway). I don't have coding on any of my four lenses, but with my user profiles I just have to remember to select the right profile when I switch lenses.
 
I like my 35 asph. It is an amazing lens.

The answer is easy. Go for the asph, and if you don't like it after using couple of weeks, you can sell it and buy a 35 v4 again.

But if you go for the V4 now, you might not go back to a 35 asph unless you add more money.
 
Either will be great. I've owned both, although I'm using a V1 summicron now instead. The asph is flawless, although I do understand the comment about it being clinical like a DSLR lens. The IV is wonderful and characterful.

If I had to choose one, I would struggle.
 
I have owned and used both and currently have version 4. I prefer the size and handling of the smaller lens (ver. 4) and find that wide-open it does what I need it to do. I was actually surprised when I got it, how good it is at f2.

Both are fine lenses.
 
I own both.
I tought v4 was simply stunning... until I did try the ASPH.

the only big advantages over the asph are size and weight.

M9 + cron asph = perfect.

and it has character too.
torinoHCB-2.jpg


torinoHCB-3.jpg
 
I owned both. Sold the Asph. Wasn't impressed enough to put up with the added size and weight. Wish I'd kept it though, but only so I could sell it at today's bloated price.
 
Back
Top