Archived posting to the Leica Users Group, 2001/03/21
[Author Prev] [Author Next] [Thread Prev] [Thread Next] [Author Index] [Topic Index] [Home] [Search]> Based on Steve's comments and my own observations regarding the spherical > and aspherical 35 Summicrons, I would be interested in learning the number > of diaphragm blades in the spherical and aspherical 35 Summiluxes. I have > neither lens, can anybody out there help? > > Buzz Buzz, Just counted, looks like 10 blades. Steve Annapolis > > -----Original Message----- > From: Steve LeHuray [mailto:icommag@toad.net] > Sent: Wednesday, March 21, 2001 8:32 AM > To: leica-users@mejac.palo-alto.ca.us > Subject: Re: [Leica] Re: 35mm M Summicron ASPH lens-flare > > >> John... >> >> There are some very good reasons, in addition to savings, for buying >> the pre-aspheric 35 Summicron. I own and use both the aspherical (second >> version) and spherical (vintage '86) lenses. I use the spherical > expression >> more often. This is because I value small, light equipment and an M6 with >> the spherical will easily slip into a jacket pocket. I do not want to >> ignite a bokeh war, but I like the over-all look of the spherical better > for >> many pictures...perhaps this is because the spherical has a dozen > diaphragm >> blades and the aspherical two fewer, but the images are different to my > eye. >> Who knows? Even at f2.0, the spherical is very sharp...sharper at least >> than my shaky hands deserve. Don't get me wrong, the aspherical is a fine >> lens...certainly snappier than the spherical at f2.0. Flare? Flare is so >> rarely an issue that I don't worry about it unless I WANT to use flare as > an >> element of the photograph. >> >> Nota bene, I am not a collector, just the father of two who will let >> my kids fight this battle for many years after I am gone. My son and >> daughter will be posting their opinions on the two lenses in about twenty >> years. >> >> Buzz Hausner > > I am right there with you Buss. My poison of choice in a 35 is the pre-asph > Summilux 1.4. It is a tiny little thing which I like and to my eye it seems > to do very well wide open plus it has a smoother look at all apertures > compared to the asph version. > > Steve > Annapolis >