35 Lux "Aspherical" VS. "Asph" -handling

greenspun.com : LUSENET : Leica Photography : One Thread

Well I did it. I traded my 35 Lux Aspherical (8/10) - 1st edition for: 1: new 2nd edition 35 Lux Asph 2: new 90 Summicron Apo 3: 1.25x magnifier 4: Leica E55 UV Filter I think I did pretty well.

I would like to leave my comments on the differences between the two in construction, handling and design. The performance differences have been documented a fair bit and I thought I'd let you all know of the other differences to consider.

1. Construction I bought the silver model which weighs 415g. The current black weighs 250g, whereas the first edition weighs 310g. The weight difference is noticeable for me but nothing to worry about as I like the hefty feel. In the field so far I haven't felt much difference when shooting.

The latest edition is slightly longer by about 4mm. This is because the aperture indexes are on a separate ring to the grippy ring you twist to change aperture. On the original version, the indexes are written on the ring you turn to change aperture. Changing aperture feels more solid on the latest version. This could also be because of the years of use it has been through compared to my brand newy.

Another noticeable difference is that the focusing ring with the focusing tab is indented more on the original verison, thus potentially increasing the chances of dust creeping in. the later version's body is more streamline in design. Secondly the section with the focusing tab attached has a grippy ring, for those who don't want to use the focusing tab. The latest edition only has the focusing tab.

Other than that, both lenses feel equal in quality of matrials and construction, regardless of what people say about the different manufacturing methods of today compared to back then (1990-1994). They are equal in my opinion. The only difference in terms of construction is that the original verison has two hand grinded and polished Aspherical surfaces that were manufactured by hand in a labour intensive process that was not financially viable to leica past 2000 units. Rumours also suggest that this target may not have been reached. The latest edition was manufactured by a process called "blanken-presse" technology where the one aspherical element is moulded and polished mainly by machine.

Unlike the latest edition, the original was only manufactured in black.

2. Handling Handling between the two is really not much different. The only change for me was the weight. Otherwise, the lens took no time to adjust. The lens hood being so close to the aperure indexes makes it a little difficult to read the aperture, especially when changing, though I always keep the aperture at f/1.4 and count my way through so that I don't have to look. This is the same on both models.

3. Design. The easiest way to distinuish which one is which is to look at the identification on the fron of the lens ring. The original states the word "Aspherical", whereas the later states "Asph". Both have the same amount of elements (9), though I don't know for sure whether the arrangement of the design is identical. If they are the same, I would say that resistence to flare and distortion would result with similar performance and effect. For Leica to achieve the same quality in the later version as the original, the newer design process must be better. For you could say that it only takes one aspherical element to match two on the original version. Tests by experts such as Erwin Puts and Brian Bower have suggested such. My evaluation will come later, though I will not compare side by side results as I no longer have the original lens.

Lastly, I will talk about the lens hoods and caps. The original version had a thicker and stonger lens hood. It attaches by two clips that directly clip onto the front of the lens. The lens cap is also thick and clips onto the front of the lens hood. Whereas the current model comes with two. One attches to the lens if you don't require the hood, and one is a thin piece of plastic that slides over the hood. The later not being my favourite. Finally the hood on the later model twists on to the front of the lens and is slightly shorter and thinner in comparison. But it feels just as strong. Viewfinder blackout from the use of the hood is similar in both, maybe slightly more with the newer version as it is a slightly longer lens. Both have a cut out on the left side of the hood, allowing the user to 1. Tell if the lens cap is on, and 2. Allow better view from the obstructed bottom right corner of the frame.

I am by no means an expert in this area as I am still relatively new to Leica, but I hope this helps some of you out there. I just hope that the quality will be similar if not equal to the original verison I had. If anyone is interested I can post some observations of performance differences at a later date. Below is the link to the picture of my original lens: http://www.photo.net/photodb/photo?photo_id=605159&size=lg Below is a link to picures taken with this lens. Mainly the Indonesian ones. http://www.photo.net/photodb/user?user_id=427015

-- Kristian (leicashot@hotmail.com), February 28, 2002

Answers

Yours may well be one of if not the only hands-on comparisons to be made. Given its collectible status and inflated value, it is doubtful that many of the ASPHERICAL's will ever be actually used.

-- Jay (infinitydt@aol.com), February 28, 2002.

"I think I did pretty well" - understatement of the year - I can't imagine you'll be disaappointed by this exchange - the 35 + 90 you now have are truly wonderful lenses. The 90saa at 2.0 is wonderful - just keep it steady and you'll be thrilled (and, hey, with the magnifier you might even get shots in focus!)

-- Steve Jones (stephenjjones@btopenworld.com), March 01, 2002.

"Thrilled" is the understatement of the year!!!! See my new post!

-- Kristian (leicashot@hotmail.com), March 01, 2002.

Moderation questions? read the FAQ