CV 35/1.4 SC v. pre-ASPH Summilux

[merciful]

My 35/1.4 SC broke, and has gone back to Cameraquest for warranty replacement (as we all know, Stephen is a good guy to deal with). While it's away, I got an insane deal locally on a black paint M4 and '66 35 'lux.

My (exceptionally subjective and limited) review is that the 'lux is waaaaaaaaay nicer. It's definitely softer at 1.4 and 2, but is always more pleasing to me, and even shot wide-open into the sun exhibits virtually no chromatic aberration (while the 35/1.4) did (really badly). I just shot chrome on a car into the setting sun, and the results were veiled and soft (both of which I'm fine with) but not purple and jagged (which I'm not).

I'm going to test the replacement when it finally worms its way through the postal system, but my feeling now is that I'm going to be selling the Nokton, not the 'lux (as I originally expected). A bit of a financial kick in the nuts, but whaddya gonna do?

[ferider]

Would be interested if you see the same CA with the 35/1.4 MC. My SC version has some veiling flare sounding similar to what you describe. My MC copy does not.

That being said the Summilux is a great lens. For all practical purposes a Summicron with an extra, "artsy" stop

[merciful]

Yeah, I was just wondering the same thing. The only other thing that is at issue is the minimum focus distance.

Now, most everything I shoot ends up B&W and I can fix the CA, but...

[ItsReallyDarren]

I feel I'm in a similar situation. I've already accepted that I'm going to end up with a Lux at some point but picked up the CV35/1.4 as a placeholder until I've got the bucks to upgrade.

[merciful]

I'm already rationalising with, "oh, hey, it's only about $600 difference: sell a print and it's more than covered.". That sort of thought pattern rarely changes once it's begun.

[SolaresLarrave]

Hey, Andrew... I may be interested in buying your lens... Just let me know.

[stupid leica]

i honestly am shocked that anybody can value the look from the 35 'lux pre-asph as desirable.

[sebastel]

Originally Posted by stupid leica

i honestly am shocked that anybody can value the look from the 35 'lux pre-asph as desirable.

then, young padavan, to learn a lot you need.

[ampguy]

The 35 lux pre asph is definitely a gem. I am not sure if it is the glass, or the design, but it has never been copied yet, that I have seen. Everyone trying to make a small 35/1.4 might improve in one area or another, but has also failed in the areas that count, to me.

[Erik van Straten]

There really is a lot of difference between the first Summilux 35mm f/1.4 and the second. The second begins at nr. 2166701. The first is much superior, the second is just a cheapened version of the first.
The first type is chrome (or black paint on brass) with a stainless steel mounting ring for the shade, Ollux or 12522H. There are M2 and M3 versions. The M3 version has goggles to adapt the viewfinder for 35mm.
The first version is optically much superior to the second version. The second version is really a cheapened version with an aluminium mount and cheaper glass elements. I own both types and I can confirm that the first version is the best.

Erik.

Leica M3, Summilux 35mm f1.4 v1 @ f/1.4, Tmax400, silver-gelatine print.

[merciful]

Quoting from the Cameraquest article on M lenses "van Hasbroeck, however, states that it was recomputed in 1966 from # 2166702 onwards with noticeably improved performance."

[merciful]

Shot yesterday with the 'lux; today the CV arrived. Initial comparisons (none head-to-head, yet) indicate that the 'lux is just a far, far nicer lens for me.

[dcsang]

Originally Posted by merciful

Shot yesterday with the 'lux; today the CV arrived. Initial comparisons (none head-to-head, yet) indicate that the 'lux is just a far, far nicer lens for me.

It's a different look wide open all together - stopped down they look "somewhat similar". I only have the MC and will do some scans shortly of what I noted b/w my pre-ASPH lux and the CV 1.4

Cheers,
Dave

[shadowfox]

Originally Posted by merciful

Shot yesterday with the 'lux; today the CV arrived. Initial comparisons (none head-to-head, yet) indicate that the 'lux is just a far, far nicer lens for me.

Maaan, thanks a lot!

I was so smitten with the look of the old Summilux 35 on my M4-P. Plus the "glow" in photos I've seen from it.

I was about to cave in to the idea of getting the CV Nokton as substitute, but this thread pushed me out of it.

My right brain thanks you, the one on the left hates you now.

[merciful]

Both at 2.8. The lens really gets absurdly sharp there.

[ferider]

Hmm. Veiling flare in your second one - some of this I've seen with the SC version. Here is my Nokton MC:



Modern and boring wide open for some maybe .... but very reliable, IMO.

And a recent color shot:



Roland.

[merciful]

Veiling flare, absolutely. I'd be very unhappy if I didn't get it when shooting into a strong light source.

I like your colour shot, particularly (but of course I'd add contrast).