Hi All:

Just a quick question. I'm looking to get into the M system after falling in love with a rented M6 last weekend. I plan to buy the M6 classic (don't really use flash, .72 seems fine for me) and a 35mm f2 lens. I see plenty of non-ASPH versions for sale out there ... would I be missing out if I didn't fork over the extra money for the Aspherical version?

Thanks and happy holidays.

Rob

-- Rob Tourtelot (rob@pumpaudio.com), December 20, 2001

Answers

Not really, There is cost calculation (i.e. if they were near the same price I would probably go for the aspheric) but if the price difference is significant for you, I do not feel you would be missing anything in your images. I have used both and have the immediate pre- aspheric. It, along with a black M6 "classic" 0.72 is my favorite and usual combination. The preasph is a bit smaller than the aspheric.

Robert

-- Robert Ardinger (rardinger@kc.rr.com), December 20, 2001.

I had an early '50s Elmar f/3.5, an older Summicron pre-ASPH (mid-'70s vintage) and now have the current ASPH model. All three lenses produce excellent results and have beautiful imaging character. The ASPH goes beyond the other two in edge to edge sharpness, contrast etc ... I'd say it was the finest 35mm lens I've ever used without hesitation. But you can't go wrong with any of them.

-- Godfrey (ramarren@bayarea.net), December 20, 2001.

Thanks for the advice as well as the quick response.

-- Rob Tourtelot (rob@pumpaudio.com), December 20, 2001.

I traded in a non-ASPH Summicron when the ASPH model came out a few years ago (as did a lot of other people, which explains the glut of them on the market). The ASPH is sharper when shot wide open, but when both lenses are stopped down beyond f/4 or so, it's hard to pick 'em apart. The ASPH seems to control flare better, too, especially when there's a light source in the picture. Both are excellent lenses, and you won't go wrong saving a few bucks by picking up the older version.

-- Chuck Albertson (chucko@siteconnect.com), December 20, 2001.

Here are the answers from a similar question a month ago:

http://www.greenspun.com/bboard/q-and-a-fet ch-msg.tcl?msg_id=0072ob

-- Chris Chen (furcafe@cris.com), December 20, 2001.

& from back in February:

http://www.greenspun.com/bboard/q-and-a-fe tch-msg.tcl?msg_id=004X5S

-- Chris Chen (furcafe@cris.com), December 20, 2001.

1) There are 4 different pre-ASPH versions, and they are all different. The last version came in about 1980. I have version 4 and all my comments are based on that version.

2) The ASPH is sharper IN THE CORNERS at f/2-f/5.6 and has less light fall-off. I have never seen a picture that demonstrates the ASPH is sharper in the CENTER at f/2.

3) The pre-ASPH definitely has more vignetting, coma(*) and corner softness than the ASPH at wider apertures.

4) The ASPH is noticeably thicker and heavier than the 4th version pre- ASPH - but still fairly compact.

5) You can probably get great pictures with any of the 5 designs - Bruce Davidson, Mary Ellen Mark, Jill Freedman and Phillip Jones Griffith all worked with even earlier versions than mine.

(*) Coma - Fairy lights or other pinpoint highlights take on UFO or butterfly shapes when in focus near the corners of the frame with the pre-ASPH - really noticeable this time of year. 8^)

Both the f/2 and f/1.4 35mm ASPH designs do a lot to correct this.

-- Andy Piper (apidens@denver.infi.net), December 20, 2001.

Rob:

Allow me to make one other suggestion. If you go with the ASPH, I would recommend the black model instead of the chrome. The chrome model is very heavy and IMO doesn't feel as well-balanced on the camera. Otherwise it's a great lens, as are the pre-ASPH versions.

Dennis

-- Dennis Couvillion (couvilaw@aol.com), December 21, 2001.

I'm actually leaning toward the ASPH after reading all of your comments as well as the two links posted by Chris Chen. Thanks very much all around for your collective expertise! I'm glad I found this forum before making any purchases.

Happy holidays ...

Rob

-- Rob Tourtelot (rob@pumpaudio.com), December 21, 2001.