Archived posting to the Leica Users Group, 2000/02/07
[Author Prev] [Author Next] [Thread Prev] [Thread Next] [Author Index] [Topic Index] [Home] [Search]B. D. Colen at bdcolen@earthlink.net wrote: > >> John - Don't dismiss the ASPH out of hand until you've shot with it. I had >> the pre-ASPH, traded up, and have never looked back. The ASPH is one amazing >> lens. John Brownlow wrote: >Yeah, don't get me wrong... if I could have 'em *both*!! My point is just >that the particular image quality of the non-ASPH lens is not available >elsewhere. (snip) What both B.D. and John have said make sense. The bottom line is one of utilisation and function. 30 years ago, if you needed a Leica 35mm lens with f1.4 aperture, you only had the 35 Summilux (non-ASPH). Today we have the ASPH version in addition to the older lens. Yes, there are two ASPH versions except that one is prohibitively costly. Currently, it would make sense for anyone who needs to make a living from photography to try and use the ASPH version. However, if one is at liberty to play around with various optics and choose those which can produce the effects that one desires in one's artistic pursuits, then the 35 summilux would come in handy at times. To be honest, having so many choices, I am sometimes hard pressed to pick up the right 35mm lens that I think will fulfill what I intend to achieve. Yet in spite of all that are said about each of them, from a serious amateur's point of view, I think the choice does not really matter that much. They are all great optics to use and enjoy. Dan K.