RE: [Leica] Older 35 Summicron better bokeh?

[Buzz Hausner <Buzz@marianmanor.org>]

I noticed different bokeh between the pre-aspheric and aspheric f2/35.  The
pre-aspheric version has two more diaphragm blades than the aspheric, which
may account for some of the difference.  That said, I don't prefer the bokeh
of one over the other.  I do prefer the size of the older version and,
rarely shooting wide open, I tend to use the older version more.  I retain
both lenses so that my two kids can fight over them some day.

	Buzz Hausner


> I went to my local dealer, compared the ASPH and non-ASPH 35 Summicron
> chrome
> versions and bought the non-ASPH.  I didn't base my decision on wide open
> sharpness or bokeh but rather how well it fit in my coat pocket while
> mounted on
> the M2 even with the hood on.
> 
> 
> D Khong wrote:
> 
> > >Can you elaborate on the differences in the bokeh between the two
> versions?
> > >I have heard that the asph has (god forbid) Nikon-like harshness.  How
> about
> > >that Leica 3-D effect?  I would hesitate to give up "Leica"
> characteristics
> > >for wide open corner sharpness.  Thanks, ray.
> > >
> > >
> >
> > The 3-D effect of the non-asph is superb, especially when used wide
> open.
> > It isolates the main subject well.
> >
> > Their bokeh is harder to describe.   For eg. when there are bare tree
> > branches in the background, the asph version will render them stringy
> and
> > dehydrated looking. To me, this is harsh bokeh and tends to irritate.  I
> > have also noticed that the Contax 50/1.5 Sonnar for the IIa tend to
> produce
> > a similarly harsh  bokeh.   A similar shot with the non-asph will
> produce a
> > pastel-like pleasing looking background.
> >
> > Dan K.