[Leica] Paeon to the ASPH

[Mike Johnston <michaeljohnston@ameritech.net>]

Just to weigh in on this, I think the only controversial aspect of the
35mm Summilux ASPH is its borderline-absurd price, which keeps it out of
a great many camera bags. In every other respect it seems to be a very
nice lens. The only one I've actually shot with is a Type 1 Aspherical,
but I found it to be superb--extraordinarily sharp but with very nice
subjective characteristics. Bokeh is a complex subject, because it
varies with focus distance, aperture, film, and subject matter--but in
at least one respect, the Type 1 Aspherical was remarkable, because it
rendered very beautiful, old-fashioned-looking bokeh of very distant
objects when focused close and at maximum aperture, which is a very
severe test of bokeh for almost all lenses (including the pre-ASPH
Summicron, which doesn't pass the same test terribly well).

As far as being big and heavy, anyone should actually handle a current
APSH Summilux and make up their own minds before accepting such a
judgement. When Neils Thorsen showed me the then-new M-grip at PhotoPlus
(then called VISCOMM) two years ago, it was on an M6 with what I thought
was the most recent 28mm. After getting oriented, I realized the lens
was actually a Summilux ASPH 35mm. Sure it's a bit bigger compared to
the f/2 lenses, but we live in an era when photographers actually use
things like the Canon 28-70mm f/2.8 as "normal" lenses. By any rational
standard, even the ASPH Summilux lens is verging on tiny. Heft it in one
hand and heft any metal-barreled f/1.4 SLR lens in the other. It is
certainly dwarfed by such things as the Zeiss 35mm f/1.4 SLR lens, and I
feel sure it is a good deal lighter than an earlier "compact" 35/1.4,
the AIS Nikkor. When you guys are all at the Leica booth on Friday, get
one of the Leica guys to get out the 35mm f/1.4 R lens and compare it
directly in size and weight to the ASPH.

As for people who may have been disappointed by its performance, I
suppose you could list among the lens's shortcomings, "it is not magic."
Because it's just a lens, and, to paraphrase the NRA, lenses do not
shoot pictures, photographers do. I'm reminded of a funny rejoinder in
the old _Car & Driver_ magazine from eons ago. A columnist had written
that a certain car had "blown the doors off" of a certain BMW, and an
agitated owner of the same model of BMW had written in to the magazine
citing the specifications for both cars, which showed that the BMW was
faster and better in every respect. Having cited chapter and verse, he
asked, "Now, tell me, at what point did the BMW get its doors blown
off?" And "Ed." retorted, "At the point it realized it was being driven
by an inferior driver."

This is not meant to be a personal slur against the individual who
posted the negative comments about the ASPH. I don't argue with that
person either. If the shoe fits, _de gustibus_, etc., and if a lens
doesn't work well for any individual, then it is not a good lens for
that person, regardless of price and reputation; end of discussion.

- --Mike