Ororaro
Well-known
There are 2 lenses that I believe wrap up and define what is the elusive "Leica look": The Summilux 35 pre-asph and the Summarit 5cm (clean sample, of course!) and as a third I would place the 21 super-angulon f3.4. This is only my opinion based on long searches and, obviously, shooting experience. Let's not forget that I am not an expert and I don't want to be one.
Some respected RFF members do all what they can to discredit this lens in favor of the newer Zeiss or ASPH offerings. They say it's not sharp, shows light falloff and it flares. My personal thinking is those are part of its qualities and undeniable charm. One doesn't shoot the 35 summilux pre-asph for sharpness per se. One shoots it for its overall very unique rendition.
I know, I know,. I probably sound ultra biased. But believe me, I am not! As a matter of fact, this is the lens I used the least during my trip (about 3 roll total, only!) but my best shots are with this lens. I constantly underestimated its qualities in favor of either the Noctilux or the 21 Super angulon... A mistake.
Some respected RFF members do all what they can to discredit this lens in favor of the newer Zeiss or ASPH offerings. They say it's not sharp, shows light falloff and it flares. My personal thinking is those are part of its qualities and undeniable charm. One doesn't shoot the 35 summilux pre-asph for sharpness per se. One shoots it for its overall very unique rendition.
I know, I know,. I probably sound ultra biased. But believe me, I am not! As a matter of fact, this is the lens I used the least during my trip (about 3 roll total, only!) but my best shots are with this lens. I constantly underestimated its qualities in favor of either the Noctilux or the 21 Super angulon... A mistake.
maddoc
... likes film again.
My two favorite lenses, the 35mm pre-ASPH Summilux and 21 SA-M... 
(coupled with an M4-P)
(coupled with an M4-P)
N
Nikon Bob
Guest
I have not had any problems regarding sharpness when using this lens. OTH I rarely shot wide open.
Bob
Bob
Last edited by a moderator:
tajart
ancien
Gabriel M.A.
My Red Dot Glows For You
I've been trying to get different sorts of shots, but I've noticed something. I think the lens has fog/haze. My shots don't look nearly as crisp as the others posted here
I'm beginning to suspect this lens is prone to haze. I cleaned the outer elements last night, and see an improvement, but I flashed light through it, and I see a faint film on a few surfaces. I see the same thing on my Summarit now, so that's got to be it.
Anybody know how to open this lens? I really really like it, otherwise...
I'm beginning to suspect this lens is prone to haze. I cleaned the outer elements last night, and see an improvement, but I flashed light through it, and I see a faint film on a few surfaces. I see the same thing on my Summarit now, so that's got to be it.
Anybody know how to open this lens? I really really like it, otherwise...
Ororaro
Well-known
Oh yes Gabriel! Have your lens cleaned and love it forever. Definitely a great performer and the Classic Leica.
Tom A
RFF Sponsor
I, for one, will not berate the S-lux 35 pre-asph. I have one and I like it. So, it might not have the sharpness of the Asph 1.4, but it doesn not have the flare problem either. Mine is usually on a M2 as a low light lens. I haven't come as far as a friend in Paris though. He uses the 35f2 IV generation during the day and at 6 pm he changes to the pre-asph S-lux! He is a Magnum member since the early 70's and knows his bl/w and his 35's.
It is small and compact, it handles well and its only real competition is the Nokton 40/1,4, but that lens is bigger.
The combination of a 35/1,4, a 21/3,4 and the S-cron or S-lux and a M2 will do very well, even compared to the newest glass. Particularly if you are a bl/w shooter. The contrast is manageble and you can do 16x20" prints without problems.
The filter size is bit of a hassle, but as I rarely use them, it is not critical.
It is small and compact, it handles well and its only real competition is the Nokton 40/1,4, but that lens is bigger.
The combination of a 35/1,4, a 21/3,4 and the S-cron or S-lux and a M2 will do very well, even compared to the newest glass. Particularly if you are a bl/w shooter. The contrast is manageble and you can do 16x20" prints without problems.
The filter size is bit of a hassle, but as I rarely use them, it is not critical.
hans voralberg
Mentor
Is the Summarit NB refers to LTM ?
ferider
Mentor
Exists in both mounts, HV.
Nice photos, Ned, as usual.
Roland.
Nice photos, Ned, as usual.
Roland.
maddoc
... likes film again.
Sounds like my set up ...Tom A said:
(except the M2) Now, just the Noctilux is missing and I am done for a while ... 
dcsang
Canadian & Not A Dentist
I had been considering a move to the 35 cron ASPH but now... hmm....
Dave
Dave
ywenz
Mentor
the examples here are further prove to me that good photography sells equipment. There's no doubt in my mind that these scenes would looks just as good having been shot with another lens with the same specs.
maddoc
... likes film again.
ywenz said:
For sure good photography helps selling equipment (GAS attack ....) but also this lens (Summilux 35mm pre-ASPH) has something that can't be seen in photos, its size and handling. There is no other 35mm f/1.4 available in this size.
ywenz
Mentor
maddoc said:
Notice how I only said the "image" will look just as good
dcsang
Canadian & Not A Dentist
And you also said "if it were shot with another lens with the same specs" -ywenz said:
I guess I'd like to find an ASPH 35mm f1.4 lens that's the same size as the Lux and that can fit my M-mount rangefinder
Cuz it sure would be "cheaper" than the Leica.
Dave
Ororaro
Well-known
ywenz said:
The 35 pre-asph, just as the Summarit and the noctilux, has its very own unique look. A scene remains the same scene, no matter which lens, I agree. But each lens renders it differently.
N
Nikon Bob
Guest
ywenz said:
You are absolutely correct, any other lens would be as good. The point is that this lens has a rep for being worse than the other lenses. I think most users of the pre asp lux 35 just want to show that it is not all that bad and most likely pretty useful. Why would that generate GAS.
Bob
tajart
ancien
i know they are different lenses, but i'm curious if anyone has compared the 35 lux with the nokton 40/1.4 - in terms of image making, physical objectness, and handling? just curious
ERV
Well-known
Ororaro
Well-known
Nikon Bob said:
Now you got me thinking!
I never cheap out on lenses but I'm not rich. I'd rather eat ramen for 3 straight months and only drink water if it would allow me to save and own the best. I cheap out on jeans, T-shirts, but never on suits, ties and shoes. I may cheap out on camera bodies, but never on leneses. As a matter of fact, I own what I arguably consider the best Nikon and Leica have to offer, thanks to Ramen and Rice.
Considering all the above, why would I try convincing myself about this lens? Trust me, I love hunting lenses and in this case, my 35mm hunt is looooong over.