Archived posting to the Leica Users Group, 2003/04/28

[Author Prev] [Author Next] [Thread Prev] [Thread Next] [Author Index] [Topic Index] [Home] [Search]

Subject: Re: [Leica] 35 Lux ASPH
From: Alastair Firkin <firkin@ncable.net.au>
Date: Mon, 28 Apr 2003 22:26:39 +1000

G'day Henning,
Thank you for the balanced and reasoned comments. I started this 
thread, when I was surprised by flare in a shot I was not expecting it 
in. The comments (badmouthing in your terms) were several peoples 
experience, most of whom spoke with their feet and moved away from the 
TE. To be honest, I think the criticism has been "asked" for, rather 
than any "campaign", and that is what this resource is all about. Most 
people who use the TE seem to suffer more flare with it than other 
lenses -- to this end, and with Leica's attention to detail, I find it 
odd that there is NO hood supplied. I've not bought a Leica lens 
without a hood, and even on the 35 lux I remember their advise was to 
use the hood at all times. When I bought my TE I remember reading that 
the lens was quite deeply recessed and therefore did not require a 
hood. OK, I trusted Leica. I have now shot maybe 3 rolls with the lens 
and was surprised to see flare in all three. When it happened on a roll 
I was taking "with care" (ie more attention to detail than a snap shot) 
I became concerned. It seems I need a hood, it seems I have been spoilt 
by the other Leica lenses which are very flare resistant. Leica's claim 
that the TE lacks for none of the optical excellence of its other 
lenses may not be quite true however !!!! This is not really 
badmouthing the lens, it has been a balance between useful comments of 
those who use and enjoy the lens and those who found it did not meet 
their requirements. I suppose its now up to me to decide from these 
comments whether to buy a hood, learn its limitations and accept its 
real benefits, or to join those who would rather carry 3 lenses.

Hope you are well. Hard to believe it is 2 years since we were in 
Canada. Now we are off again, this time to San Diego, New Mexico and 
Arizona, where the R8, XPan and M6 with 35 summilux will be given a 
good working over ;-)

Cheers
On Monday, Apr 28, 2003, at 16:14 Australia/Melbourne, Henning Wulff 
wrote:
> I have the 21, 35/1.4, T.E (1st) and 90 ASPH lenses. Although the TE 
> produces more flare than the other three, those 3 are, along with the 
> Noct, the most flare resistant lenses I have (among about 75 in 
> various formats). All are significantly more flare resistant than the 
> lenses they replaced.
>
> The 90 AA is by far the most flare resistant lens between 85 and 105mm 
> that I have ever used. It is truly amazing. My 35/1.4 exhibits very 
> slight flare at times, but a tiny fraction of the flare that all 
> examples of the 50 Summicron, from the early collapsible through the 
> DR to the 80's 'M' version (I haven't used one newer than about 1990) 
> exhibit regularly.
>
> The TE might not be the equal of these three, but it is also 
> significantly better than any Leica lens from the 50's or 60's or even 
> 70's I have used, and even at 28, its poorest focal length, it is 
> better in all respects except distortion than the second version of 
> the 28/2.8, which is the last I used extensively. As regards 
> distortion, the TE at 28 is about the equal of the previous non-ASPH 
> 21/2.8. Neither are the best in class, but certainly nowhere near as 
> bad as most prime SLR lenses, let alone zooms.
>
> I find this badmouthing of the TE's performance astounding, based on 
> my admittedly single sample. I've shot probably 120 rolls of 100ISO 
> slide film through it, as well as about 25 rolls of B&W.
>
> I should note that some individual lenses from Leitz have been shown 
> to have elevated flare levels due to improper edge blackening, which 
> Leitz has repaired.
>
> On the bokeh issue; part of what produces 'good' bokeh is the 
> remaining uncorrected spherical aberration. Unfortunately, part of 
> what causes the soft corners in lenses such as the 4th generation 35/2 
> is the remaining uncorrected spherical aberration. At present levels 
> of lens design, we can't have it both ways.
>
> -- 
>    *            Henning J. Wulff
>   /|\      Wulff Photography & Design
>  /###\   mailto:henningw@archiphoto.com
>  |[ ]|     http://www.archiphoto.com
> --
> To unsubscribe, see http://mejac.palo-alto.ca.us/leica-users/unsub.html
>
>
Alastair

- --
To unsubscribe, see http://mejac.palo-alto.ca.us/leica-users/unsub.html

Replies: Reply from Henning Wulff <henningw@archiphoto.com> (Re: [Leica] 35 Lux ASPH)