Aspherical vs ASPH

[Mark_Bishop@ipc.co.uk (Mark Bishop)]

Michael Reichmann wrote:
>Recently I've been thinking about upgrading to the ASPH.  I'm a little
>confused though as to what the differences are between the current ASPH and
>the no longer available Aspherical.  Even my recent books, such as Lager,
>Volume II - Lenses, doesn't mention the ASPH.

>The Aspherical is almost mythical in its reputed capabilities.  My question
>is, how does the current ASPH compare?  I don't think I want to spring for
>an Asperical, even if one were available at the moment, but the ASPH is on
>the border of affordability.

My understanding is that there have been two 35mm Summilux-M lenses with
aspheric optical surfaces - the 'double aspheric' of 1990 and the 'single
aspheric' of 1994. Aspheric versus ASPH. is the difference in the markings.

I do not have any experience of the 1990 lens, but I do own the 1994 model,
bought new six months ago with an M6. Perhaps I am missing something but to me
this lens more than delivers on Leica's bold claims. At full aperture it is  *
very* sharp, free from distortion and possesses that classic Leica tonality. 

The other day I took a handheld half-height portrait of my girlfriend reading a
newspaper, by the light of a single halogen lamp, at an exposure of 1/15sec f/
1.4 on Agfa Scala 200 mono slide film. The slide is so sharp that, where the
newspaper falls in the plane of correct focus, it is possible to read not only
the headlines but the body type - even into the corner of the frame. And this at
a focus of about five feet.

Someone in the group mentioned the possibility of coma aberration, and someone
else lens flare. I have not noticed the former optical phenomenon from my lens.
There have been half-a-dozen cases of flare, but only on occasions when the
direct sun has been in the photograph (one situation where the WYSYWIG
properties of an SLR can be beneficial).

There is only one reason why I would be tempted to seek out a mint example of
the 1990 Aspheric, and that has to do with handling rather than optical quality.
The 1994 ASPH. does not have a knurled focus ring; there is only the thumb/
finger lever. I would find a conventional focus ring (as fitted to the 1990
lens) easier to use, especially in vertical shots. I have tried contacting Leica
in the UK and Germany to see if it is possible to get my lens converted, and
have been told that it is not.

My advice to Mr Reichmann is to go ahead and buy the ASPH if he finds he is
happy with the way it handles.


Mark