• Log in with Facebook Log in with Twitter
Photo
- - - - -

Next PZ lens test report: Leica Summicron-M 35mm f/2 ASPH


  • Please log in to reply
6 replies to this topic

#1 mst

mst

    Advanced Member

  • Moderators
  • 1,977 posts
  • LocationWesterwald, Germany

Posted 07 August 2013 - 03:26 PM

It's said to be Leica's most popular lens. Quite nice, even though it's not without flaws.

 

http://www.photozone...summicron35asph

 

-- Markus


Editor
photozone.de

#2 borisbg

borisbg

    Advanced Member

  • Members
  • PipPipPip
  • 444 posts
  • LocationLos Angeles

Posted 07 August 2013 - 06:12 PM

Markus, thank you for this review. It is nice to see how the top-shelf of gear is doing... I don't know whether is the material used or overall design, or both but their lenses look beautiful.



#3 dave9t5

dave9t5

    Advanced Member

  • Members
  • PipPipPip
  • 380 posts
  • LocationToronto, Canada or Taichung, Taiwan

Posted 07 August 2013 - 08:33 PM

What exactly is the difference between the black anodized and black paint versions?  I'm very familiar with the 2 finishing processes, so that is not my question.  It's why do they offer two different finishing processes?  Are there any other differences between those lenses (besides the hoods)?



#4 mst

mst

    Advanced Member

  • Moderators
  • 1,977 posts
  • LocationWesterwald, Germany

Posted 07 August 2013 - 10:30 PM

The black paint version is a limited edition, which was introduced in 2000 to match the Leica M6 black paint, also called the "Millenium Edition". Leica often builds limited editions of their lenses (and cameras), which usually sell soon and normally become collectors items.

It's not that obvious in the images, but the black paint lens has a glossy finish, while the regular anodized version has a somewhat "silky" surface. Additionally, the black paint lens features red markings, while the anodized lens shows the normal yellow/orange markings.

Optically, the lenses are identical. The main difference is that the anodized version is made of aluminum, while the black paint version (and also the silver chrome version) is made of brass. That's why those two versions are quite heavy (for such a small lens).

-- Markus
Editor
photozone.de

#5 dave9t5

dave9t5

    Advanced Member

  • Members
  • PipPipPip
  • 380 posts
  • LocationToronto, Canada or Taichung, Taiwan

Posted 07 August 2013 - 11:35 PM

Ah, they are made of brass that's a key point...and limited edition.  I guess the idea is that the brass lenses are more prone to showing wear (brassing, of course) so you really can't use them lest you devalue them.  

 

Brass itself is not particularly more expensive than aluminium to manufacture.   It does have about 4x the density of aluminum, so it's kind of a silly retro choice these days for a portable system (the original point of the M system if I'm not mistaken).  I guess it helps to leave them at home on the shelf collecting value.

 

When you say they are optically identical, does that mean besides the same optics that you tested them both and found no meaningful difference?

 

 

The black paint version is a limited edition, which was introduced in 2000 to match the Leica M6 black paint, also called the "Millenium Edition". Leica often builds limited editions of their lenses (and cameras), which usually sell soon and normally become collectors items.

It's not that obvious in the images, but the black paint lens has a glossy finish, while the regular anodized version has a somewhat "silky" surface. Additionally, the black paint lens features red markings, while the anodized lens shows the normal yellow/orange markings.

Optically, the lenses are identical. The main difference is that the anodized version is made of aluminum, while the black paint version (and also the silver chrome version) is made of brass. That's why those two versions are quite heavy (for such a small lens).

-- Markus



#6 mst

mst

    Advanced Member

  • Moderators
  • 1,977 posts
  • LocationWesterwald, Germany

Posted 07 August 2013 - 11:52 PM

When you say they are optically identical, does that mean besides the same optics that you tested them both and found no meaningful difference?

Exactly.

-- Markus
Editor
photozone.de

#7 dave9t5

dave9t5

    Advanced Member

  • Members
  • PipPipPip
  • 380 posts
  • LocationToronto, Canada or Taichung, Taiwan

Posted 08 August 2013 - 04:00 AM

These M-mount tests are oddly interesting.  I have no bias towards Leica M either way...it makes little logical or rational sense and is ripe for mocking, but make no doubt that if a body+lens somehow made into my clutches, it would not leave them easily.

 

Reviewing these tests, I feel most like the esteemed Raleigh St. Clair observing the fascinating Dudley Heinsbergen ...pure observational glee.

 

My goodness! How interesting, how bizarrre!

 

 

 

 

 






0 user(s) are reading this topic

0 members, 0 guests, 0 anonymous users



© by photozone.de