Re: [Leica] Summilux 35mm

["Steve LeHuray" <icommag@toad.net>]

Dan K
I tried to reply to your private e-mail but it bounced back twice. Thank you
for your inspirational comments about the 35mm 'lux. I have wanted this lens
for a long time and now I expect it will become a very active role in my
Leica kit. Also I paid $1695 for the lens from LeCamera in New Jersey which
is a very good and active Leica dealer.
Steve
Annapolis

- ----------
>From: D Khong <dkhong@pacific.net.sg>
>To: leica-users@mejac.palo-alto.ca.us, LEICA USERS
<leica-users@mejac.palo-alto.ca.us>
>Subject: Re: [Leica] Summilux 35mm
>Date: Mon, Dec 20, 1999, 6:10 PM
>

>Steve LeHuray wrote:
>>Last Friday I bought a new pre-ASPH Summilux 35mm 1.4 from a Leica dealer. I
>>know that Leica discontinued this model in 1995 when they came out with the
>>ASPH version but it was a new lens with Passport and I had wanted this lens
>>for awhile. I thought that I would end up with a used one but there does not
>>seem to many of them advertised for sale. When I got home I looked in
>>Sartorius' Leica Lens Guide and checked the serial #3537736 on the tables at
>>the back of the book. And to my surprise it was listed as being made in
>>1990. So here are my questions: How does a lens sit on a dealers shelf for
>>10 years? Was this lens not very much in demand because of its high price?
>>And is this a problem for dealers having expensive inventory that does not
>>sell? Now I don't really care that I bought a new lens in 1999 made in 1990
>>because Leica lenses are not like cars that have annual changes. From
>>everything that I have heard this is a great lens and am expecting to take
>>some good photos with it. But I am wondering about this situation and if
>>anybody has any comment on it and does anybody know how many of these lens
>>were made?
>>
>>Steve
>>Annapolis
>>
>
>What you have is a unique piece of optic capable of some interesting results.
>These are my impressions.
>
>At f1.4, the picture was soft, lacking in contrast, "not that sharp", and
>has that ethereal look which reminds me of the shots which were taken
>decades back when uncoated lenses were used. And don't I just love that
>corner vignetting which I think can be an artform in itself.
>
>At f2, the attributes are not as pronounced as at f1.4.  Corner vignetting
>is just about discernable.  
>
>>From about f2.8/f4 onwards, I could hardly tell the difference between the
>pictures taken with this lens and my Summicron used at the same aperture.
>In short, this has a unique personality when used at large apertures.  
>
>The new kid (ASPH version) in the block has certainly lots to offer. I now
>own both.  However, depending on your style of photography, this old dog
>(non-ASPH version) cannot be replaced either.  Imagine one can either crank
>this lens wide open to create the mystic moods when the need arises or stop
>down to bring out pictorial sharpness and contrast when the situation
>demands it.  One can say that it is capable of Dual Roles.   
>
>There are very few advertised for sale partly because they are slowly but
>surely gaining a collectible status. If it is sitting on the shelf all this
>while, then it has not been noticed before. My impression is that they are
>fast disappearing from dealers' shelves. Many users are reluctant to part
>with theirs because they like the look this lens produces.
>
>Your serial number #3537736 also means that your lens is multicoated.  Well
>done on a great purchase. As I recall, all the lenses under #32xxxxx were
>not multicoated. How much did you pay for it?  You may email me privately.
>
>Dan K.
>
>
>
>----------------------------------------------------------------------------
>      
>     Children should be children....and let them enjoy their childhood.
>       Record their smiles and expressions on B&W photography........ 
>             .... for you will see them that way only once.
>============================================================================
>  
>