Archived posting to the Leica Users Group, 1996/03/12
[Author Prev] [Author Next] [Thread Prev] [Thread Next] [Author Index] [Topic Index] [Home] [Search]On Tue, 12 Mar 1996, Laurent Saminadayar wrote: > Hi there ! > I'm looking for a serious comparison between 35 mm f/2 and 35 mm f/1.4 Asph. > By serious, I mean a comparison of the optical performance of the two > lenses at all apertures (I want to buy one, but I'm hesitating between > them). Also, which one is the more compact (this point is quite important > for me). Does anybody know the size of the two lenses, the diameter of > the filter and so on... The compacity of the 35 f/2 is veru appreciable. > What about the 35 f/1.4 Asph. ? > Best regards. > Laurent SAMINADAYAR > 7, Rue Decres > 75014 PARIS-FRANCE > Phone : +33 1 40 44 86 17 > E.Mail : saminad@amoco.saclay.cea.fr I cannot tell you much about the difference in optical performance - although you might want to have a close look at Wolfgang Sachse's posting of Bob Neumann's test results. However, I can tell you that there is a very large differnce in size between the 35 Summicron and the 35 Summilux ASPH - the latter is about twice the size of the former. The Summicron weighs in at around 150g, the Summilux ASPH at around 300g, and the Summilux ASPH is about twice as long as the Summilux and a little bit wider. If you really need a compact 35/1.4 lens, you might want to have a look at the now discontinued non-aspherical Summilux: it it is supposed to be a very nice lens, although most people who wrote to me earlier about the lens said that if you could do without an f1.4 lens, the Summicron is nicer. Hope this helps Gary